Curse

draxynnic · Jul 09, 2009, 02:26 AM // 02:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalendraf

D2 and GW both are similar in the fact that they have levels and also feature some skills that advance. In D2 skill points were closely tied to level. In GW, the power of certail skills advance with reputation or faction. In D2 skill points were primarily gained by leveling. In order to improve skills, a player had to continually level-up, which promoted grind. I think the GW method works better by offering players a chance to improve skills gradually by working on a wide range of pursuits (quests, bounties, etc) which are not connected to character level.

It's curious that you say that, since I've always thought that one of the real problems with the title advancement system is that it forces you to do certain things to advance, which increases the 'grind factor', when a more general XP-based system (with rewards at a similar level to the titles - ie, a small increase on top of an already viable character) could allow you to really do anything you wanted while advancing. The problem with Diablo, on the other hand, was that because of the 'you must be this tall to enter' style of play, there typically was only a couple of areas you could grind through to level.

Personally, I'd be quite happy with no advancement system - or, at least, no advancement system beyond a 'tutorial phase' (in a GW-like system, the tutorial phase could be implemented by a limited skill selection with characters that otherwise have level 20 stats - the important thing is to not overwhelm a new player with choices early on). If you have to have one, keeping it subtle means that more of the world is available at once, rather than having areas a character is too weak to go to on one hand, and areas that a character is too strong to bother with on the other.

Stuff like vanity items and such... yes, you can grind for them, but the big difference between them and traditional grinding is that you are in no way disadvantaged by not doing so if you don't want those rewards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuntMaster Avatar

How does a game world get harder over time if your character doesn't?

I'd say it's actually easier to increase the real difficulty in a game with no mechanical advancement. With mechanical advancement, any challenge that's placed below the maximum achievable limit can, in a pinch, be overcome by grinding to a higher level until you can kerbstomp it with no skill whatsoever. Without mechanical advancement, any increase in difficulty actually does have to be matched by the player's ability.

DreamWind · Jul 09, 2009, 02:58 AM // 02:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by wetsparks

You seem to think the original GW was a "smart" game and that it has been "dumbed down" since. It wasn't, it hasn't to much. Build Wars was till there, it is still here now, there are just more skills and ANet are busy building a game they hope is better and more manageable than this one.

It has been dumbed down. Almost anybody can see this, especially those who play at higher levels.

As for this article, its a bit hilarious in that they recognize the problem, intentionally tried to avoid it, and in the end conceded to it. I'm pretty sure this has already been said somewhere though.

Ensign · Jul 09, 2009, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

I'd say it's actually easier to increase the real difficulty in a game with no mechanical advancement. With mechanical advancement, any challenge that's placed below the maximum achievable limit can, in a pinch, be overcome by grinding to a higher level until you can kerbstomp it with no skill whatsoever. Without mechanical advancement, any increase in difficulty actually does have to be matched by the player's ability.

It's actually pretty much impossible to increase the difficulty in a game with significant mechanical advancement, unless that advancement is incredibly linear. If you give your players choice, then it becomes impossible to make harder as a game progresses. Essentially, you have to balance your 'more difficult' for a weak player making marginal decisions in order to avoid alienating your player base. But while a typical progression arc gets harder, for a player doing a good job managing the advancement, the game actually gets easier as you level up, because you're gaining power faster than balanced for - by necessity. In most RPGs, the most difficult stage is usually about 1/4 of the way in, right after the developers take off the 'easy mode' introduction and introduce the rest of the game - before you've had a chance to develop your character a lot. By the end of the game, you're usually walking over everything in your path without having to think very much, thanks to the ability to maximize your character's mechanics.

Of course, being able to grind to a higher level is actually an advantage, especially earlier in a game. You don't want players to get stuck in your game, without being able to proceed, before they get to experience and enjoy the game. Leveling up gives players the ability, as you mentioned, to just gain a level or two and make the challenges easier - it's a sort of dynamic balancing that makes the game accessible to players of all stripes. Ideally, your best players will be able to blaze through the game at lower level without sidetracking, while your more casual players will have to take the scenic route and do things at higher level - but everyone gets there eventually. After all, the 'main quest' part of the game should be accessible to everyone.

Burst Cancel · Jul 09, 2009, 04:40 AM // 04:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by wetsparks

elitist

Hey, thanks for the compliment.

Take comfort in the fact that the morons still have more market power. The world will probably never run out of games designed for those that either lack brains or refuse to use them; you guys will always have something within your ability to play.

YunSooJin · Jul 09, 2009, 05:06 AM // 05:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

So, what's the take-home here? They appear to claim that skill > time was one of their attempted "innovations", but a quick look at GW today clearly shows that even the devs don't believe their own bullshit.

What's the problem, guys? Could it be that games of skill aren't as popular with the unwashed masses as games of time investment and stupid grind rewards? Are stupid games for stupid people just better for the bottom line?

Uhh, duh? Why did GW go from 'We are a PVP game!! The second coming of Jesus Christ!' to 'Urr Hurr TITLES and PVE SKILLZ!!! hur hur HoM hur hur'

(George Carlin)
Imagine how stupid your average person is, and then realize that half of the world is stupider than that person.
(/George Carlin)

EPO Bot · Jul 09, 2009, 07:11 AM // 07:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by YunSooJin

Uhh, duh? Why did GW go from 'We are a PVP game!! The second coming of Jesus Christ!' to 'Urr Hurr TITLES and PVE SKILLZ!!! hur hur HoM hur hur'

(George Carlin)
Imagine how stupid your average person is, and then realize that half of the world is stupider than that person.
(/George Carlin)

Carlins "I am your lord and master!" -attitude blows.

Speaking of stupid: Titles mean jack in pvp.They have no influence on your ability to pvp at all. What do pvp die hards even care about titles since they never touch the part of the game in wich they are used? Do you, perhaps, want to get rid of title hunting so the pve fans need to pvp to have someyhing to do so you have more inferior creatures to dominate?

shoyon456 · Jul 09, 2009, 07:36 AM // 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Speaking of stupid: Titles mean jack in pvp.They have no influence on your ability to pvp at all. What do pvp die hards even care about titles since they never touch the part of the game in wich they are used?

I wish that were true, but every time I try to join a HA grp I get /rank'd and called a noob....

Titles don't show ability, but they may or may not show experience. I say this is because the experience is skewed and you can't measure one person's experience running a certain role/team build with another's.

Running ranger spike s drastically different from running an air spike (yeah, im oldschool and don't know anything about the meta).

Darth The Xx · Jul 09, 2009, 08:08 AM // 08:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Carlins "I am your lord and master!" -attitude blows.

Speaking of stupid: Titles mean jack in pvp.They have no influence on your ability to pvp at all. What do pvp die hards even care about titles since they never touch the part of the game in wich they are used? Do you, perhaps, want to get rid of title hunting so the pve fans need to pvp to have someyhing to do so you have more inferior creatures to dominate?

I agree completely, title don't show skill but they do show experience. That being said an experienced person isn't always a skilled person. Also, titles give you no advantage over the other team except experience, a r15 team in HA can still be beaten as easily by another r15 team, and an unranked team.

But titles do create the problem of what you are seeing now, people reside in one area of the game and want to move to another, only to find they can't because of rank reqs. The result is a shrinking player base for the area, HA,GvG whatever with no stream of new players.

Fril Estelin · Jul 09, 2009, 08:48 AM // 08:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

In most RPGs, the most difficult stage is usually about 1/4 of the way in, right after the developers take off the 'easy mode' introduction and introduce the rest of the game - before you've had a chance to develop your character a lot.

Interesting point: with tomes, you can skip completely the learning curve. Similarly, for getting max armor so early in Factions, or transferring runes and max weapons between chars. So in essence, GW is a game with a good learning curve which killed itself by creating easy, fast shortcuts.

In hindsight and after discussions with many people (many PvPers), Anet would be more effective (i.e., less work for them?) at fixing uberpower by first providing a real, unavoidable learning curve (with rewards attached, a la zquests), then slowly removing the permasins and other OP.

HuntMaster Avatar · Jul 09, 2009, 09:36 AM // 09:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

I'd say it's actually easier to increase the real difficulty in a game with no mechanical advancement. With mechanical advancement, any challenge that's placed below the maximum achievable limit can, in a pinch, be overcome by grinding to a higher level until you can kerbstomp it with no skill whatsoever. Without mechanical advancement, any increase in difficulty actually does have to be matched by the player's ability.

Of course its easier to make a game harder if the character has no way of increasing its own power. But that's not really a working method for MMO/RPG type games. Thats more along the lines of adventure games like mario or conkers or action games like contra or the old GTA.

In thos games we didn't have character progression and instead were dependant on extra elements to give us a boost in power ( stars, suits, guns, faster cars and so on). But when it comes to RPG games, character progression is part of the genre. I can't even think of an rpg without character improvement. All the way back to FF1 and dragonwarior 1. Wizardry and shadowgate. The only thing we have remotely like a rpg with no character progression is first person shooters with storylines, but even then we had life extenders in some and permanent weapon upgrades.

MMO's and RPG's need character improvement to succeed IMO and whether its a level based grind, skill based grind or title based grind, its all the same in the end. People didn't want to grind to level 100 in guildwars, so instead they grind to level 1000+ for skill points. But since the max level shown is (20) it is more acceptable? Never made since to me. Atleast with other games you get to see the improvements.

Red Sonya · Jul 09, 2009, 09:50 AM // 09:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarun

For GW (especially PvP) it's running a cookie cutter build and pressing 1 2 3 and 4 on command. In WoW (especialy PvP) it takes real skill.

Exactly and why WOW is so popular and the best online mmorpg for the money. I think SINS are what really ruined the game the most in pvp arena's. They won't nerf the lil bassturds so everybody makes one and it's getting like it was in the old days with rangers you get TWO every gd battle.

Apollo Smile · Jul 09, 2009, 11:11 AM // 11:11

A game heavily dependent on what gear you are wearing does not equal skill. Whoever took the most times running raids over and over will win.

Avarre · Jul 09, 2009, 11:38 AM // 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Carlins "I am your lord and master!" -attitude blows.

Speaking of stupid: Titles mean jack in pvp.They have no influence on your ability to pvp at all. What do pvp die hards even care about titles since they never touch the part of the game in wich they are used? Do you, perhaps, want to get rid of title hunting so the pve fans need to pvp to have someyhing to do so you have more inferior creatures to dominate?

Yeah, it's definitely a PvP player conspiracy.

Rather than the obvious fact that grind is an artificial way to extend gameplay without adding anything that can be called a 'game'. And that such design is lazy. Or that titles affecting gameplay marginalizes players skill in favor of time.

Fortunately I can dominate inferiors right here, so I'll advise you to manner up.

draxynnic · Jul 09, 2009, 11:39 AM // 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuntMaster Avatar

MMO's and RPG's need character improvement to succeed IMO and whether its a level based grind, skill based grind or title based grind, its all the same in the end. People didn't want to grind to level 100 in guildwars, so instead they grind to level 1000+ for skill points. But since the max level shown is (20) it is more acceptable? Never made since to me. Atleast with other games you get to see the improvements.

The difference is that for most of your playing time, you're at the same level as everyone else. Playing longer means you have more options, but a character who's just reached level 20 and put together a single competitive build is just as well off, mechanically, as the 4-million-XP veteran who happens to be using the same build. (This is without title-based PvE skills, of course.)

Try keeping up with a fully geared level 80 using a level 20 character in WoW... or, conversely, try taking a fully geared level 80 character into a level 20 area in WoW and see how much fun you have.

To turn around your FPS comparison - it's like unlocking new weapons with achievements in Team Fortress 2. Your 'character' isn't weaker for not having them, but having them available gives more options. And for people (like myself) who prefer trying out new options over simply having the same options with bigger numbers (as, say, Diablo 2 offers above level 35 or so... funnily enough, I never got past around level 40 in that game without getting bored of the character and trying out a new one), trying out new options is much more interesting than a mechanical improvement that's just going to be matched by the enemies having an equal mechanical improvement.

And really, when you get down to it, do you really need levelling to have the rest of the mechanics of the game? People act like they're married together, but they really aren't. Maybe you don't have the grind rewards that the levelling treadmill provides, but hey, that's why you have a business model that doesn't require people to play like it's a second job to succeed. Heck, come to think on it, I don't think* Ocarina of Time had a character progression system apart from picking up new items and learning new skills, and it has all the other hallmarks of an RPG.

*I say this without having actually played it myself, but I know people who have.

Apollo Smile · Jul 09, 2009, 11:56 AM // 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Yeah, it's definitely a PvP player conspiracy.

Rather than the obvious fact that grind is an artificial way to extend gameplay without adding anything that can be called a 'game'. And that such design is lazy. Or that titles affecting gameplay marginalizes players skill in favor of time.

Fortunately I can dominate inferiors right here, so I'll advise you to manner up.

Because "artificially extending gameplay" gets people to stick around and pay more monthly fees... Oh wait.
Its very simple, some people some people LIKE titles and achievements in games.

Avarre · Jul 09, 2009, 01:23 PM // 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apollo Smile

Its very simple, some people some people LIKE titles and achievements in games.

That's fine.

You should not expect the existing playerbase, the playerbase that bought a game that did not have them/want them, to welcome the change, however. Especially when they have gameplay effects.

HuntMaster Avatar · Jul 09, 2009, 02:02 PM // 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

The difference is that for most of your playing time, you're at the same level as everyone else. Playing longer means you have more options, but a character who's just reached level 20 and put together a single competitive build is just as well off, mechanically, as the 4-million-XP veteran who happens to be using the same build. (This is without title-based PvE skills, of course.)

This was true back before skill tomes. Now a level 1 character can have every single skill in the game and be better than most level 20 characters.
Also if a player is on his 4th level 20 character and you are on your first, the chances are that its not equal because the more experienced player will have the upper hand in knowing the skills. We also have to consider the pvp skill unlock package. That allows pvp to be money>skill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Try keeping up with a fully geared level 80 using a level 20 character in WoW... or, conversely, try taking a fully geared level 80 character into a level 20 area in WoW and see how much fun you have.

Well the same can be said in guildwars. Try taking a character who has not aquired all the needed skills to an elite area and see how well he can stay up with a player who has the experience and the skills for those areas.

The only real difference is that by the time you get to level 80 you will be ready for those areas and be nearly equal to everyone else, the only difference will be time spent playing in those areas which translates into items and experience with the area.

Now try taking a level 20 who has earned 100-200 skill points back to pre-searing or more realistically, back to the beginner areas of the game. They will have the same amount of fun as a level 80 in a level 20 area.

The difference between level based worlds and guildwars is that in guildwars you can go to the elite areas unprepared and fail. In the level based worlds you can go to the elite areas and survive simply based on your items and knowing your own characters weaknesses and strengths. Plus level based worlds motivate players by making the later parts of the game harder and more exciting with bigger,stronger monster and items. Guildwars provides the bigger, stronger monsters but has nothing in terms of item improvement. I used victos axe for years and got kanaxai's axe because of how cool I think it looks, but it has no mechanical improvements at all. Which works for guildwars but is still a bit of a let down. You can get a weaponsmithed or collector item and never need another weapon. Thats disappointing to some.

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

To turn around your FPS comparison - it's like unlocking new weapons with achievements in Team Fortress 2. Your 'character' isn't weaker for not having them, but having them available gives more options. And for people (like myself) who prefer trying out new options over simply having the same options with bigger numbers (as, say, Diablo 2 offers above level 35 or so... funnily enough, I never got past around level 40 in that game without getting bored of the character and trying out a new one), trying out new options is much more interesting than a mechanical improvement that's just going to be matched by the enemies having an equal mechanical improvement.

I'd say you are weaker by not having more weapons. If you have a machine gun and I have a sniper rifle or a missile launcher, you are probably going to die unless I make a horrible mistake or you get incredibly lucky. Weapons do make you stronger, which is why I win so much in CoD4.

But that has a lot to do with perks also.

When it comes to levels, its personal taste. I do enjoy big numbers because it usually comes with benefits. Harder monster, cooler skills, nicer loot. My record on Diablo 2 LOD is level 99 with my old zealer (1.07). Diablo doesn't run out of options at higher levels but instead hundreds of options open up. Better skills, better mercenaries, better items, harder monsters, harder bosses. Same with final fantasy (if I can use that example). It was very fun getting to level 99 and stomping the weapons. Its also a challenge to get those big numbers. Do you have the dedication to do it? Most people stop leveling in D2 LOD around 90-96. It takes real dedication to get to 99.

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

And really, when you get down to it, do you really need levelling to have the rest of the mechanics of the game? People act like they're married together, but they really aren't. Maybe you don't have the grind rewards that the levelling treadmill provides, but hey, that's why you have a business model that doesn't require people to play like it's a second job to succeed. Heck, come to think on it, I don't think* Ocarina of Time had a character progression system apart from picking up new items and learning new skills, and it has all the other hallmarks of an RPG.

Well so far I'v not found a single good rpg without a leveling system. Even guildwars has a leveling system using skill points. I'm not a big fan of zelda after majoras mask (killed it for me) and its been so long I can't really remember that series too well. But besides that single franchise, I can't think of another rpg series that does not have a level system of some kind.

Also you don't have to play a level based game like its a job, you can take your time with any game. The only reason to play for hours every day is to quickly get to the end game areas or stay up with the other players. Thats not a requirement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

*I say this without having actually played it myself, but I know people who have.

I'll take your words for it. I wouldn't be suprised if I never touched another zelda game. I'm more of a final fantasy fan myself. More characters and IMO a better game. I'd give anything to never, ever, ever hear that flute again.

IlikeGW · Jul 09, 2009, 02:29 PM // 14:29

The truth is any MMO with click the skill mechanics is going to turn into min-maxed spam build>time played>skill. This is what happens when you have the numbers out in the open and nerds play your games. Nerds are like robots and want to play like a robot.

draxynnic · Jul 09, 2009, 02:57 PM // 14:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuntMaster Avatar

This was true back before skill tomes. Now a level 1 character can have every single skill in the game and be better than most level 20 characters.

Which is essentially providing a means to skip that part of level advancement... or, more precisely, hand down achievements of an established character to a new one (because how is a new player going to get those tomes?). Seems one of the few examples of reducing the focus on level advancement in GW to me.

Quote:

Also if a player is on his 4th level 20 character and you are on your first, the chances are that its not equal because the more experienced player will have the upper hand in knowing the skills.

Which is the very definition of skill>time spent. In your paradigm, we could have two people who've spent equal amounts of time in the game, but one has spread their time around and has 4 level 20 characters, the other has concentrated it on one and has, say, a level 40 character (assuming exponential time to gain levels). The two players may be equally skilled, but I don't see the guy with four level 20s being able to beat the other guy's level 40.

Quote:

Well the same can be said in guildwars. Try taking a character who has not aquired all the needed skills to an elite area and see how well he can stay up with a player who has the experience and the skills for those areas.

It only takes eight skills to make a build. This doesn't take long to get, either in PvE or, to refer back to your earlier money>skill crack, in PvP. Having the experience is an example of player skill, which I heartily approve of.

Quote:

The only real difference is that by the time you get to level 80 you will be ready for those areas and be nearly equal to everyone else, the only difference will be time spent playing in those areas which translates into items and experience with the area.

If this works at all, it only works once. If, for whatever reason, you want to bring a new character into the high-end areas... do you really gain that much in the way of skill and experience going through that levelling treadmill again? You might need a little bit of training to adjust to the new class, but not a get-a-WoW-character-to-level-80-and-collect-gear-on-top-of-that amount. Guild Wars' low level cap is easily enough to provide that refamiliarisation.

Quote:

Now try taking a level 20 who has earned 100-200 skill points back to pre-searing or more realistically, back to the beginner areas of the game. They will have the same amount of fun as a level 80 in a level 20 area.

Ah, but how much of WoW is a level 80 area? Without having played it, I'm going to make an educated guess and say "Part of Northrend".

By contrast, how much of Guild Wars is a level 20 area? Definitely all of EOTN, Nightfall once you get out of Kourna, Factions once you get out of the city, and the Southern Shiverpeaks and Ring of Fire in Prophecies. Realistically speaking, the Kourna, Kaineng, and the Crystal Desert respectively will all push you to 20 in short order and are really beginning level 20 areas as well, which can still be dangerous even to a character that's defeated the Domain of Anguish. That's, at a guess, 75% of the entire game that's fun to play in for a max-level GW character, as opposed to the cutting edge of the latest expansion in WoW? And that's without even considering Hard Mode. Yes, there are areas in Guild Wars that would be ridiculously easy for a level 20 character to be in... in NM... but your attempted analogy fails in the face of the fact that in a conventional MMO, this would be something on the order of 90% of the game.

Quote:

The difference between level based worlds and guildwars is that in guildwars you can go to the elite areas unprepared and fail. In the level based worlds you can go to the elite areas and survive simply based on your items and knowing your own characters weaknesses and strengths. Plus level based worlds motivate players by making the later parts of the game harder and more exciting with bigger,stronger monster and items. Guildwars provides the bigger, stronger monsters but has nothing in terms of item improvement. I used victos axe for years and got kanaxai's axe because of how cool I think it looks, but it has no mechanical improvements at all. Which works for guildwars but is still a bit of a let down. You can get a weaponsmithed or collector item and never need another weapon. Thats disappointing to some.

While I really don't care for bigger and better weapons.

It sounds like you like using the level and gear system as a crutch. My response to having trouble with an area? It's not to get better gear and grind a few more levels and try again. It's to rethink my tactics and just plain get better and try again - something I find much more satisfying when I eventually succeed. Maybe this makes me different from the majority ot gamers, but, well, the majority of gamers have WoW.

Besides, even that reaches a point where you're max level and can't advance any further. It just takes longer... and I've heard plenty of people playing a grinder that the game only really starts once you get there. Why not skip all that grinding and play the real game as soon as you get outside the tutorial areas? Which is, incidentally, exactly what Guild Wars does in Factions and Nightfall.

Quote:

I'd say you are weaker by not having more weapons. If you have a machine gun and I have a sniper rifle or a missile launcher, you are probably going to die unless I make a horrible mistake or you get incredibly lucky. Weapons do make you stronger, which is why I win so much in CoD4.

But that has a lot to do with perks also.

Clearly, you had no idea what I was talking about.

The TF2 system is this - each class has a set number of weapons - usually a melee weapon, a bread-and-butter weapon such as a pistol or shotgun, and the class's signature weapon. For instance, the Pyro by default has three weapons - an axe, a shotgun, and a flamethrower.

Each of these can be replaced by a weapon that fulfills a similar role, but does so in a different manner. The regular axe can be replaced by one that does less damage normally, but more to targets on fire. The shotgun can be replaced by a flare gun, which will set the target on fire. The regular flamethrower has a secondary fire function that can be used to deflect rockets, but can be replaced by a different flamethrower that lacks this feature, but which does more damage against targets that turn their back.

However, you can still only bring three weapons onto the field as a Pyro regardless of your achievements. Essentially, it's like having a skillbar of three.

Quote:

When it comes to levels, its personal taste. I do enjoy big numbers because it usually comes with benefits. Harder monster, cooler skills, nicer loot. My record on Diablo 2 LOD is level 99 with my old zealer (1.07). Diablo doesn't run out of options at higher levels but instead hundreds of options open up. Better skills, better mercenaries, better items, harder monsters, harder bosses. Same with final fantasy (if I can use that example). It was very fun getting to level 99 and stomping the weapons. Its also a challenge to get those big numbers. Do you have the dedication to do it? Most people stop leveling in D2 LOD around 90-96. It takes real dedication to get to 99.

Meh. Same gameplay, bigger numbers. *yawn*

I accept that you like that style of gameplay, but as you've probably guessed by now, I'm not such a fan of it. Different people like different things. Surprise!

At the bottom line, I'll throw you the same question I threw to someone just like you not too long ago:

There are... maybe not actually dozens, but certainly plenty of MMOs and MMO-like games out there to cater to a long levelling treadmill. There's Diablo 2, WoW, LOTRO, WarhammerOnline, CoH/V, and more besides than I care to list. Why do you want to convert one of the few games that even makes an attempt to cater for a different set of preferences when you have so many options of games that already cater to your own?

Quote:

Well so far I'v not found a single good rpg without a leveling system. Even guildwars has a leveling system using skill points. I'm not a big fan of zelda after majoras mask (killed it for me) and its been so long I can't really remember that series too well. But besides that single franchise, I can't think of another rpg series that does not have a level system of some kind.

There is a big difference between unprecedented and impossible. Just a half-dozen or so years more than a century ago, no-one had flown in a heavier-than-air vehicle either.

Besides, just because you don't like a game doesn't mean I'll agree with you.

Kalendraf · Jul 09, 2009, 03:59 PM // 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

It's curious that you say that, since I've always thought that one of the real problems with the title advancement system is that it forces you to do certain things to advance, which increases the 'grind factor', when a more general XP-based system (with rewards at a similar level to the titles - ie, a small increase on top of an already viable character) could allow you to really do anything you wanted while advancing.

It seems this needs some clarification.

For starters, consider a skill that is tied to a title. For a simple example I'm going to choose Necrosis. It's a pretty widely used skill, and advancing sunspear ranks makes it more effective. In GW, sunspear ranks are very easy to obtain, at least to around level 8. To raise it past there, a player may need to do some hard mode or books, neither of which require repetative grinding. By doing the missions in NM and HM, turning in books, and/or vanquishing sunspear areas once (which are generally ez to vanq) a player will earn more than enough sunspear points to max the title. If a player doesn't want to do that much work, they still have a quite effective Necrosis skill at SS rank 8.

This is the kind of skill advancement I prefer. The skill is good at low levels, and gets better at higher levels. And it is fairly easy to obtain higher ranks such that it does not require grind or repetitive farming. There are multiple ways to earn sunspear points via quests, missions, bounties, books and so forth. A player can choose to focus on some and not others, or do all of them.

By comparison, if a skill is tied directly to level, then the character has no choice but to gain levels to advance a skill. At higher levels, this may require significant grinding if the levels become harder and harder to achieve in the game (such as occurs in a game like D2 where each level was roughly 30% higher than the level before). In addition, there may only be a few ways to gain experience - killing monsters or doing certain quests. Thus, this method of level driven skill advancement is far more limiting and forces grind in order to improve skills.