Why I don't like levels in general? It's because they imply an urge on us, that at the max lv the real game 'starts'' and so we all rush to this max lvl. Besides that it's the most basic advancement method, yet so outdated nowdays. I'm tired of this concept.
Agree "the game begins at endgame.." is such a horrible concept and you cannot avoid it in a level-based game. All the devs in the world can keep pontificating "it is not the goal, it is the journey" and similar crap for the next ten years but they can't change the basic mammalian psychology - if there is a power-progression as the central system of the game then players will attempt to climb that ladder as fast as possible, especially if there is a level of competition involved (and there usually is).
In fact I find this quite hypocritical. First they give us a carrot to chase and then they act surprised that we tend to run after it as fast as we can.
IMO the game should begin at the beginning, at the moment you log in with your new character. As long as there is an "endgame" the rest of the game is nigh useless. Just witness all the desolate "leveling" areas level-based mmos are full off. What a horrible waste of content. It is nigh stupidity to have your content designed in such a way that 80% of the game area and content is "consumed" by players in a month or two, while the rest of the playing time (measured in years) is spent in a relatively tiny max-level endgame area. Just look at WoW for example. Who the f*** cares for Azeroth anymore? If WoW was a level-less game with a relatively mild progression you'd have all that content still available for you to peruse. Just imagine level-less WoW with a lateral GW-style progression. Just imagine how much more variety of content a long-term player woud have each time he logged in.
Leveling treadmill games are bad ecomonmy for the devs, first and foremost. Their longevity is completely dependent on devs constantly churning out new content for the players to burn through while the "old" content, which could still provide a lot of entertainment to the players, gets artificially obsolete by a single outdated mechanic that has become nothing but a pointless tradition inherited from a fundamentally different single-player genre. (not even a genre but a whole different medium - single player and multi player games are fundamentally different in their cores. We're talking about a difference such as exists between film and television - they're both sound and vision but they have fundamental differences which go beyond mere genre)
Look at another example - EVE online. In that game the whole game map and attendant content is constantly used by players of all levels of advancement. That's economy and an example of game design that is true to what is the core of multiplayer persistent medium.
Since when was max level the "real" game? i play through all levels and enjoy every content i go through. Why cant other people enjoy low and mid level as much as high level? is it because of the look of the armour or what is it?
I think the "sidekick" system is out. I haven't heard about in any recent interviews. I think it went the way of companion npcs.
As far as event scaling, I got this from the last blog entry at the Arenet website:
Does event scaling adapt to group size only or will it also adapt to character levels?
Eric: Event scaling only adapts to group size, not to character level. If you have a group of players participating in an event and they are a bit higher in level than the event calls for, they will find it easier than a similarly sized group of lower level players.
Without knowing the number of levels and the difference in power between the lowest and the highest, no one can really say how much level differences could cause problems. But it is fun to speculate.
I think the "sidekick" system is out. I haven't heard about in any recent interviews. I think it went the way of companion npcs.
As far as event scaling, I got this from the last blog entry at the Arenet website:
Does event scaling adapt to group size only or will it also adapt to character levels?
Eric: Event scaling only adapts to group size, not to character level. If you have a group of players participating in an event and they are a bit higher in level than the event calls for, they will find it easier than a similarly sized group of lower level players.
Without knowing the number of levels and the difference in power between the lowest and the highest, no one can really say how much level differences could cause problems. But it is fun to speculate.
Read whats been posted before. The side-kick system is in just check their updated faq's and the dev response to high levels doing low level events.
I compleatly agree with what areanet is doing here and for one main reason, it down right works. It gets everyone involved, weather they just started or they have been playing for years. It adds a competition thats easy to addapt to, and you can jump right in and play with the best. With out a system like this the pvp, is lopsided in the guildwars world. Why hasnt any one mentioned the guildwars holiday events where this all takes place. That stuff is so great, and there are hordes of people thriving on it. It all works and is easy to get into.
The op sounds woried that areanet is taking one aspect of the game in the wrong direction and thats compleatly fine. Everyone has there own opionion and having this type of pvp in the main part of the game may well be not as good as some might think it out to be, for me though I know it will be a compleate sucess. Some of the best times Iv had in any mmorpgs is guildwars holiday events with there implimentation of the forced level cap. Its easy to get into and no mater how much some people have played, they wont be way over powering the rest of the playerbase. ITs everyones skill level that determines victory or not.
Im not sure where this thread has gone, I couldnt really read it well, it went from dicussing certain aspects of guildwars like stats and then it jumps around to other things. The op does give quite a bit of reason behind his assesment of why he thinks this is so. So its defently something to look into. Even so I dont think its right. You know how guild wars is though, they can change stuff around very quickly for the playerbase if something isnt working right, so its not like will get stuck with something everyone hates and have to live with it.
Im fairly certain most of the critisim is coming from people here that havent touched guildwars in a long long time. Iv played it alot and not just when it first came out, but like this year. There holiday events still bring lots of players and there new pvp system is really fantastic. I think you will have to give it a go for yourself before you can come to such rash conclusions about how areanet is handling there pvp. They know what works and what dosnt. Guildwars has some of the best pvp there is hands down and not alot of people reconignize it because its simply guildwars.
All in all I think areanet is making some brave decesions on where they want to take there new game to, and I think if they push the bar a bit, and keep doing what there doing in the end everyone is going to be happy with the final results.
Since when was max level the "real" game? i play through all levels and enjoy every content i go through. Why cant other people enjoy low and mid level as much as high level? is it because of the look of the armour or what is it?
Well the main point is that with leveling as we know it know, your character progresses through the game linearly and the content that he passed through is effectively closed off to him. This is a huge waste, imo. The point I'm trying to make is that the game content should open and STAY OPENED as you progress. Leveling renders old content obsolete. For example, there is a particular dungeon at lower levels I find particularly enjoyable and yet I cannot enjoy it because my level is too high and there is simply no point going there.
Imo this does not mesh well with subscription-based games, or any game that does not rely on box sale model. The classic single player computer games would offer you a set number of "hours of content" that you'd get for your box sale. In fact the shorter this playing time, the better it is or the industry because they get the opportunity to sell you a new box that much sooner. This is the real reason why today's console games get shorter and shorter amount of playing time with each new season..
However, this model is POISON for games that rely on players playing indefinitely, or as long as possible, since the revenue comes from subscriptions rather than selling boxes. Leveling and linear content progression that is implied with that system is fundamentally opposed to the financial model that MMOs rely on. In short - levels are a good way of forcing players to stop playing at one point (they "finished the game") so they can go out and buy another box... on the other hand if you're trying to keep players subscribing as long as possible then levels are probably the worst game system you can implement, and the only way to circumvent this is by slowing down this progression towards the end as much as possible.. hence the blight know as "the grind".
I read something like this in the interwiev " If a high level character goes into a low level event,that player will own those enemies pretty hard".
In real Life explanation: If im 30 years old(probably alot of muscles) i can probably kill a brown bear with a sword or two,a 10 year old against a brown bear wouldnt have a chance he would die and be bitten and scratch to death. A 10 year old could probably kill a fish,cat or dog(small or medium sized) and a 30 years old would kill that cat or dog like it was an ant.
Im not saying i would kill animals.Cause i love animals,so no need to say that i hate animals please. This was just an example how the difference is.
OFF TOPIC: So a game were you start as young and then grow older,maybe max 40 that game would be pretty awesome. A 25 years old could totally kill a 40 year old,but if they had same training and the 40 years old is mostly sure more experienced the 40 year old would win.
ArenaNet told us that the event system works just like in reality.
Plinplonk: Levels are good to give a good feeling about who is most powerful,just like in reality. We want to feel heroic and like gods and if we get the sidekick system we can play any content whenever we want. It solved it all.
i like levels. i can cap a toon out and in alot of cases quit bothering with them and move to the next alt.
if there were no levels, where would I stop playing?
everyone plays differently, and i feel too many people seek their 'perfect MMO' for an excuse to live inside it and do nothing else, which is why they cry so badly when the next MMO they look toward doesnt live up to their standard....
people cry that MMO's have been ruined by the casual players, and to that alll I can say is, "It's just a video game, if it isn't doing what you like, do soemthing else."
but instead they make post after post, crying how ********** company raped and murdered their entire family.
Since when was max level the "real" game? i play through all levels and enjoy every content i go through. Why cant other people enjoy low and mid level as much as high level? is it because of the look of the armour or what is it?
Well the main point is that with leveling as we know it know, your character progresses through the game linearly and the content that he passed through is effectively closed off to him. This is a huge waste, imo. The point I'm trying to make is that the game content should open and STAY OPENED as you progress. Leveling renders old content obsolete. For example, there is a particular dungeon at lower levels I find particularly enjoyable and yet I cannot enjoy it because my level is too high and there is simply no point going there.
Imo this does not mesh well with subscription-based games, or any game that does not rely on box sale model. The classic single player computer games would offer you a set number of "hours of content" that you'd get for your box sale. In fact the shorter this playing time, the better it is or the industry because they get the opportunity to sell you a new box that much sooner. This is the real reason why today's console games get shorter and shorter amount of playing time with each new season..
However, this model is POISON for games that rely on players playing indefinitely, or as long as possible, since the revenue comes from subscriptions rather than selling boxes. Leveling and linear content progression that is implied with that system is fundamentally opposed to the financial model that MMOs rely on. In short - levels are a good way of forcing players to stop playing at one point (they "finished the game") so they can go out and buy another box... on the other hand if you're trying to keep players subscribing as long as possible then levels are probably the worst game system you can implement, and the only way to circumvent this is by slowing down this progression towards the end as much as possible.. hence the blight know as "the grind".
I completely understand what your saying heck I was one of the few people who kick up a huge fuss about it in gw2g which caused them to reply. I'm pretty certain A-net will attempt to limit the effect of leveling as much as possible. They've never really believed in it and would want players to enjoy as much of the content as possible regardless of the level.
Heck think about it they go to all the trouble to produce dynamic changing world with like 1600 events running through it yet they allow you only to enjoy the few events to enjoy as you level then force you to play endgame content. That in itself is a slap in the face to the people who actually bother creating these eventsand pretty much only allows players access to a fraction of the game. That's when I knew I smelled shit when they said mobs will only scale by number. However they also logically came to the same conclusions I did and came up with the simplest solution to prevent griefing in lower level areas as well allow high level characters to enjoy any event.
But maybe try to relax and don't go wild on speculations on what we have heard so far.
Actual i think maybe its time to give Arena net some credit for a few things.
First GW1 is one of the games where lvl is not used as a grind mecanic. it does away with lvls fast.
second so far ... and think about that.. they dare to pursue a vison for how they think a game should be played. and sacrifice alot of their most supported succeses to achive that goal. (No npc's , where is the dedicated healer, less skills as eksamples) . thats brave
I don't think they do it in vain , so far its a compagny that had proved that they knows what they are doing.
Maybe its the same with lvls,
Not to be used as a mechanic to seperate players and content, and still to be used as a way to achive something.
Maybe its not levels thats the proplem , but what a game use them for !
I really empathized with the OP about levels, and he brought up very good points that most of us are all too familiar with. Given the above underlined quote coupled with the mention of 'shadow levels' or something earlier, it makes me imagine a whole new level system, and quite possibly what they will be releasing with the personal 'quest' system.
One that finally allows you to sport the 'achievement' and status of being 'high level' but becomes almost transparent when it comes to gameplay allowing you to travel wherever you want without being limited to "your level" zones. This would be just great imo. Gives the danger of being threatened by 'low level' creatures, but with the addition of showing your 'experience' in battle that allows you to take on the super tough stuff as well.
UO,AC1&2,EQ1&2,DAOC,SB,SWG,FFXI, Horizons,EvE,E&B,AO,WoW,VG, Lineage,GW,TR,LotR,AoC,CoH,DDO a myriad of FtP...and still looking...
Hmm, I see why you're saying why they have levels at all. I guess it's just a way to cling to something familiar for people. But I see it working similarly as in GW. In GW, you had levels, but you'd reach cap soon enough. From there, what you'd aim for would be to get skills and improve your build, along with gold and elite armor and whatnot.
Levels meaning more of an horizontal development rather than a vertical one.
Sure, a higher level char would indeed end up de-levelling for lower level events, but he would probably have more skills and abilities than a lower level one. Same thing for higher level events.
But in the end it's all speculation. We'll have to see how A-net makes this work. I surely am curious.
Gear grinders play rush the game to get to the end game. Or believe the game starts at the cap. The rest of us play to experience the content on the way to cap, stay at cap while we're still experiencing new content and then cancel when the end game kicks in, ie grinding the same raids week after week.
Casual, read $$$, players aren't end game players, they're journey players.
I've been playing MMOs steady since UO launch day and every time I cap out and have to redo content... I cancel. Not to say I don't return for expansions, but I don't stay to rehash content. Won't do it in an RPG why an MMO.
I agree with the OP and I'm wondering how to get feedback to the GW devs, or at least Im hoping the devs want feedback since they have claimed quite a few times that they listen to their fans.
As far as feedback goes for the GW devs I think it would help immensely if they had actual official forums instead of the fanbase circle crud. How does one know which (if any) of the fan forums the GW devs read? Because I was hoping to add to a list I'm sure exists of suggestions and hopes for GW2. For example, why didn't the devs add dwarves as a playable race? There is already a lot of lore and ruins in Tyria based on the dwarves. There is a lot more to go with for dwarves than the new race, the sylvari. And as far as cliche' races go, they are adding cliche' elves, the sylvari, so why not dwarves too? I know the devs say the sylvari are not elves but let's face it, they look and sound like elves so far judging by the vids.
One of the fansites that the GW2 CM's check a lot is Guild Wars 2 Guru.
I expect GW2 also to be much more gearbased then the orriginal.
just look at WoW endgame where there is a special system to cover gearlevels and real power at level 80 since there is a huge difference between a green geared level 80 and a top knotch level 80, players have come up with a system to guess the power difference. Why? Just to be able to play with people of the intended powerlevel.
Levels are a good thing and they add to the feeling of accomplishment. Without levels an gear an MMO becomes to much like a FPS game. I'd hate to see that happen. Gear and levels are part of the drive that keep me playing and most other MMO players too.
So Arenanet is on the right track.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
jesus. unless im reading this wrong, while I am likening leveling or skill gain to character advancement / progression of avatar achievements through game-play, you are against that?
I dont mind the lvl system i just hope its not too grindy.
Agree!
Anyways, I don't think they will differ much from GW1
it have stated (something like) that it will take longer to reach max lvl than in GW1 , but still not anywhere near near the time thatt traditionel MMO's take !
And at level cap, getting the perfect armor for pvp will be the next thing to do
You know that everyone will have the same level, equipment, armor, weapons, and skills for pvp right? Unless you're talking about the world versus world realm.
And at level cap, getting the perfect armor for pvp will be the next thing to do
You know that everyone will have the same level, equipment, armor, weapons, and skills for pvp right? Unless you're talking about the world versus world realm.
Huh no, i Didn't? I was pretty sure you could get the 'epic'armor or anything on the campaign side of the game in GW1, did they change it? I mean as soon as you step into the pvp arena you just transform in some pre made character?:O
Pretty much yeah, at least in 5v5 arenas.. and imo that's not a bad thing since those arenas are supposed to be an e-sport thing where it's all about player skill rather than amount of grind you managed to put into the game.
However, in WvW it is going to be you, your level, your gear and whatever skills you managed to accumulate. WvW happens in the Mists - a persistent open parallel region where three servers fight for terrirory and bonuses for their realm. This part of the game is supposed to function like a RTS with living players as participants and will cycle different server combinations every week.
Additionally from the last info on PvP there might be a third PvP mode which is also instanced, holds more participants, has dynamic group-based goals and is hot-joinable (meaning everybody can jump in and out at any time). I'd call it battlegrounds+ or maybe mini-mists. We have no idea whether you'll join those with your PvE char, like WvW, or you'll get PvP buffed to max. We'll see.
Comments
Agree "the game begins at endgame.." is such a horrible concept and you cannot avoid it in a level-based game. All the devs in the world can keep pontificating "it is not the goal, it is the journey" and similar crap for the next ten years but they can't change the basic mammalian psychology - if there is a power-progression as the central system of the game then players will attempt to climb that ladder as fast as possible, especially if there is a level of competition involved (and there usually is).
In fact I find this quite hypocritical. First they give us a carrot to chase and then they act surprised that we tend to run after it as fast as we can.
IMO the game should begin at the beginning, at the moment you log in with your new character. As long as there is an "endgame" the rest of the game is nigh useless. Just witness all the desolate "leveling" areas level-based mmos are full off. What a horrible waste of content. It is nigh stupidity to have your content designed in such a way that 80% of the game area and content is "consumed" by players in a month or two, while the rest of the playing time (measured in years) is spent in a relatively tiny max-level endgame area. Just look at WoW for example. Who the f*** cares for Azeroth anymore? If WoW was a level-less game with a relatively mild progression you'd have all that content still available for you to peruse. Just imagine level-less WoW with a lateral GW-style progression. Just imagine how much more variety of content a long-term player woud have each time he logged in.
Leveling treadmill games are bad ecomonmy for the devs, first and foremost. Their longevity is completely dependent on devs constantly churning out new content for the players to burn through while the "old" content, which could still provide a lot of entertainment to the players, gets artificially obsolete by a single outdated mechanic that has become nothing but a pointless tradition inherited from a fundamentally different single-player genre. (not even a genre but a whole different medium - single player and multi player games are fundamentally different in their cores. We're talking about a difference such as exists between film and television - they're both sound and vision but they have fundamental differences which go beyond mere genre)
Look at another example - EVE online. In that game the whole game map and attendant content is constantly used by players of all levels of advancement. That's economy and an example of game design that is true to what is the core of multiplayer persistent medium.
Since when was max level the "real" game? i play through all levels and enjoy every content i go through. Why cant other people enjoy low and mid level as much as high level? is it because of the look of the armour or what is it?
I think the "sidekick" system is out. I haven't heard about in any recent interviews. I think it went the way of companion npcs.
As far as event scaling, I got this from the last blog entry at the Arenet website:
Does event scaling adapt to group size only or will it also adapt to character levels?
Eric: Event scaling only adapts to group size, not to character level. If you have a group of players participating in an event and they are a bit higher in level than the event calls for, they will find it easier than a similarly sized group of lower level players.
Without knowing the number of levels and the difference in power between the lowest and the highest, no one can really say how much level differences could cause problems. But it is fun to speculate.
I never found max level to be where the fun begins. I always found it to be where the fun ends.
Read whats been posted before. The side-kick system is in just check their updated faq's and the dev response to high levels doing low level events.
I compleatly agree with what areanet is doing here and for one main reason, it down right works. It gets everyone involved, weather they just started or they have been playing for years. It adds a competition thats easy to addapt to, and you can jump right in and play with the best. With out a system like this the pvp, is lopsided in the guildwars world. Why hasnt any one mentioned the guildwars holiday events where this all takes place. That stuff is so great, and there are hordes of people thriving on it. It all works and is easy to get into.
The op sounds woried that areanet is taking one aspect of the game in the wrong direction and thats compleatly fine. Everyone has there own opionion and having this type of pvp in the main part of the game may well be not as good as some might think it out to be, for me though I know it will be a compleate sucess. Some of the best times Iv had in any mmorpgs is guildwars holiday events with there implimentation of the forced level cap. Its easy to get into and no mater how much some people have played, they wont be way over powering the rest of the playerbase. ITs everyones skill level that determines victory or not.
Im not sure where this thread has gone, I couldnt really read it well, it went from dicussing certain aspects of guildwars like stats and then it jumps around to other things. The op does give quite a bit of reason behind his assesment of why he thinks this is so. So its defently something to look into. Even so I dont think its right. You know how guild wars is though, they can change stuff around very quickly for the playerbase if something isnt working right, so its not like will get stuck with something everyone hates and have to live with it.
Im fairly certain most of the critisim is coming from people here that havent touched guildwars in a long long time. Iv played it alot and not just when it first came out, but like this year. There holiday events still bring lots of players and there new pvp system is really fantastic. I think you will have to give it a go for yourself before you can come to such rash conclusions about how areanet is handling there pvp. They know what works and what dosnt. Guildwars has some of the best pvp there is hands down and not alot of people reconignize it because its simply guildwars.
All in all I think areanet is making some brave decesions on where they want to take there new game to, and I think if they push the bar a bit, and keep doing what there doing in the end everyone is going to be happy with the final results.
Well the main point is that with leveling as we know it know, your character progresses through the game linearly and the content that he passed through is effectively closed off to him. This is a huge waste, imo. The point I'm trying to make is that the game content should open and STAY OPENED as you progress. Leveling renders old content obsolete. For example, there is a particular dungeon at lower levels I find particularly enjoyable and yet I cannot enjoy it because my level is too high and there is simply no point going there.
Imo this does not mesh well with subscription-based games, or any game that does not rely on box sale model. The classic single player computer games would offer you a set number of "hours of content" that you'd get for your box sale. In fact the shorter this playing time, the better it is or the industry because they get the opportunity to sell you a new box that much sooner. This is the real reason why today's console games get shorter and shorter amount of playing time with each new season..
However, this model is POISON for games that rely on players playing indefinitely, or as long as possible, since the revenue comes from subscriptions rather than selling boxes. Leveling and linear content progression that is implied with that system is fundamentally opposed to the financial model that MMOs rely on. In short - levels are a good way of forcing players to stop playing at one point (they "finished the game") so they can go out and buy another box... on the other hand if you're trying to keep players subscribing as long as possible then levels are probably the worst game system you can implement, and the only way to circumvent this is by slowing down this progression towards the end as much as possible.. hence the blight know as "the grind".
I read something like this in the interwiev " If a high level character goes into a low level event,that player will own those enemies pretty hard".
In real Life explanation: If im 30 years old(probably alot of muscles) i can probably kill a brown bear with a sword or two,a 10 year old against a brown bear wouldnt have a chance he would die and be bitten and scratch to death. A 10 year old could probably kill a fish,cat or dog(small or medium sized) and a 30 years old would kill that cat or dog like it was an ant.
Im not saying i would kill animals.Cause i love animals,so no need to say that i hate animals please. This was just an example how the difference is.
OFF TOPIC: So a game were you start as young and then grow older,maybe max 40 that game would be pretty awesome. A 25 years old could totally kill a 40 year old,but if they had same training and the 40 years old is mostly sure more experienced the 40 year old would win.
ArenaNet told us that the event system works just like in reality.
Plinplonk: Levels are good to give a good feeling about who is most powerful,just like in reality. We want to feel heroic and like gods and if we get the sidekick system we can play any content whenever we want. It solved it all.
i like levels. i can cap a toon out and in alot of cases quit bothering with them and move to the next alt.
if there were no levels, where would I stop playing?
everyone plays differently, and i feel too many people seek their 'perfect MMO' for an excuse to live inside it and do nothing else, which is why they cry so badly when the next MMO they look toward doesnt live up to their standard....
people cry that MMO's have been ruined by the casual players, and to that alll I can say is, "It's just a video game, if it isn't doing what you like, do soemthing else."
but instead they make post after post, crying how ********** company raped and murdered their entire family.
I completely understand what your saying heck I was one of the few people who kick up a huge fuss about it in gw2g which caused them to reply. I'm pretty certain A-net will attempt to limit the effect of leveling as much as possible. They've never really believed in it and would want players to enjoy as much of the content as possible regardless of the level.
Heck think about it they go to all the trouble to produce dynamic changing world with like 1600 events running through it yet they allow you only to enjoy the few events to enjoy as you level then force you to play endgame content. That in itself is a slap in the face to the people who actually bother creating these eventsand pretty much only allows players access to a fraction of the game. That's when I knew I smelled shit when they said mobs will only scale by number. However they also logically came to the same conclusions I did and came up with the simplest solution to prevent griefing in lower level areas as well allow high level characters to enjoy any event.
I really empathized with the OP about levels, and he brought up very good points that most of us are all too familiar with. Given the above underlined quote coupled with the mention of 'shadow levels' or something earlier, it makes me imagine a whole new level system, and quite possibly what they will be releasing with the personal 'quest' system.
One that finally allows you to sport the 'achievement' and status of being 'high level' but becomes almost transparent when it comes to gameplay allowing you to travel wherever you want without being limited to "your level" zones. This would be just great imo. Gives the danger of being threatened by 'low level' creatures, but with the addition of showing your 'experience' in battle that allows you to take on the super tough stuff as well.
UO,AC1&2,EQ1&2,DAOC,SB,SWG,FFXI, Horizons,EvE,E&B,AO,WoW,VG, Lineage,GW,TR,LotR,AoC,CoH,DDO a myriad of FtP...and still looking...
Hmm, I see why you're saying why they have levels at all. I guess it's just a way to cling to something familiar for people. But I see it working similarly as in GW. In GW, you had levels, but you'd reach cap soon enough. From there, what you'd aim for would be to get skills and improve your build, along with gold and elite armor and whatnot.
Levels meaning more of an horizontal development rather than a vertical one.
Sure, a higher level char would indeed end up de-levelling for lower level events, but he would probably have more skills and abilities than a lower level one. Same thing for higher level events.
But in the end it's all speculation. We'll have to see how A-net makes this work. I surely am curious.
Gear grinders play rush the game to get to the end game. Or believe the game starts at the cap. The rest of us play to experience the content on the way to cap, stay at cap while we're still experiencing new content and then cancel when the end game kicks in, ie grinding the same raids week after week.
Casual, read $$$, players aren't end game players, they're journey players.
I've been playing MMOs steady since UO launch day and every time I cap out and have to redo content... I cancel. Not to say I don't return for expansions, but I don't stay to rehash content. Won't do it in an RPG why an MMO.
One of the fansites that the GW2 CM's check a lot is Guild Wars 2 Guru.
www.guildwars2guru.com
I expect GW2 also to be much more gearbased then the orriginal.
just look at WoW endgame where there is a special system to cover gearlevels and real power at level 80 since there is a huge difference between a green geared level 80 and a top knotch level 80, players have come up with a system to guess the power difference. Why? Just to be able to play with people of the intended powerlevel.
Levels are a good thing and they add to the feeling of accomplishment. Without levels an gear an MMO becomes to much like a FPS game. I'd hate to see that happen. Gear and levels are part of the drive that keep me playing and most other MMO players too.
So Arenanet is on the right track.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
jesus. unless im reading this wrong, while I am likening leveling or skill gain to character advancement / progression of avatar achievements through game-play, you are against that?
Many still love the idea of levels because it gives them something to strive for but I would prefer not to have any levels.
I dont mind the lvl system i just hope its not too grindy.
Agree!
Anyways, I don't think they will differ much from GW1
it have stated (something like) that it will take longer to reach max lvl than in GW1 , but still not anywhere near near the time thatt traditionel MMO's take !
You know that everyone will have the same level, equipment, armor, weapons, and skills for pvp right? Unless you're talking about the world versus world realm.
Pretty much yeah, at least in 5v5 arenas.. and imo that's not a bad thing since those arenas are supposed to be an e-sport thing where it's all about player skill rather than amount of grind you managed to put into the game.
However, in WvW it is going to be you, your level, your gear and whatever skills you managed to accumulate. WvW happens in the Mists - a persistent open parallel region where three servers fight for terrirory and bonuses for their realm. This part of the game is supposed to function like a RTS with living players as participants and will cycle different server combinations every week.
Additionally from the last info on PvP there might be a third PvP mode which is also instanced, holds more participants, has dynamic group-based goals and is hot-joinable (meaning everybody can jump in and out at any time). I'd call it battlegrounds+ or maybe mini-mists. We have no idea whether you'll join those with your PvE char, like WvW, or you'll get PvP buffed to max. We'll see.