Curse

Tender Wolf · Jul 02, 2009, 05:23 PM // 17:23

^^^ I hope not, because we don't want this to be a WOW clone. Yes there will be similiarities (open world, different races, etc.) but I think that would take away from the game to be honest. I love being able to just go out and do what I need to do without having to have 100 cooking experience or whatever. Besides, that's just adding more grind, something ANet needs to strongly look away from. Guild Wars prided itself on being non grind based. GWEN is nothing but grind.

Hopefully the Guild Wars 2 leveling system won't be a grind, but as easy to gain levels and experience as it is now. Or at least like it was in Prophecies when apparantly being level 20 meant something (I didn't play until a month or so before Nightfall came out so I don't know about that). Although I like the fast leveling up method of Factions and Nightfall; I'd much rather have that than being a level 10 in the Shiverpeaks.

Mordakai · Jul 02, 2009, 05:40 PM // 17:40

As to leveling, it all depends on how high the level cap is (or if there is one).

But I agree, it should be relatively easy to gain levels and not require too much time to be able to enjoy the games "main" area (whatever level that may be).

I don't know how it will work, to be honest, it's the biggest part of GW2 that I'm concerned about. I don't have a lot of time to play, and one of my problems with Warhammer was soon after launch, the beginning areas were empty, so all those "public quests" were useless. Great idea... as long as there are people playing.

Gigashadow · Jul 02, 2009, 05:53 PM // 17:53

The game should be fun from level 1. There is no reason I should have to kill 10 rats and collect 10 bear asses until my character gets to the interesting stuff in the mid-game, I am so sick of every single MMO doing that. If GW2 really does have no level cap, or an unattainably high one, it may convince players to just stop running to "the end" and enjoy leveling -- provided interesting content actually exists.

Mordakai · Jul 02, 2009, 07:20 PM // 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

The game should be fun from level 1. There is no reason I should have to kill 10 rats and collect 10 bear asses until my character gets to the interesting stuff in the mid-game, I am so sick of every single MMO doing that. If GW2 really does have no level cap, or an unattainably high one, it may convince players to just stop running to "the end" and enjoy leveling -- provided interesting content actually exists.

I also would be happy if I had never had to "collect 10 of _____" again in my whole virtual life.

Number 1 reason I quit WoW.

I some ways, GWEN gives me hope that will not be the case (none of the main quests had you collect stuff).

On the other hand, GWEN is all grind for any "special" items.

Angel Killuminati · Jul 02, 2009, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

If GW2 really does have no level cap, or an unattainably high one, it may convince players to just stop running to "the end" and enjoy leveling -- provided interesting content actually exists.

I agree. I remember playing Final Fantasy games, and you could zoom through the game at a fairly lowish level until you met some hard foes, then you'd be stuck for a good amount of time. This forced you to level up then return when stronger. Once you played through the game, I often played it again, but took time to actually make my character strong from the very start.

I don't see how GW2 could implement this though, with Guilds and pugs, you'll always have people there to help you, so perhaps leveling won't be such a burden, regardless of no cap.

The Great Al · Jul 02, 2009, 08:20 PM // 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Made In Ascalon

If they actually implement racial bonuses in GW2, they had better be next to irrelevant in actual gameplay. I don't want it to turn out the way WoW has, where 90% of all top horde players are undead.

So what should be irrelevant in actual gameplay? In GW1, almost everything is. The level progression is a joke, I've had GW since the very beginning, and have been at the same level since the first month or two. My character can't get stronger, my weapons can't get better. How is this game even an RPG?

I don't think ensuring an entirely even playing field is necessarily a good thing. I think a level 100 should be more powerful than a 99, who should be more powerful than a 98, etc. Anet can make this work by implementing anti-grind techniques. For example:

1. not having repeatable quests
2. not gaining experience for killing a certain type of monster more than a certain amount of times.

This way, characters can have a natural progression through the game. When they're halfway through the campaign, they should be roughly halfway to the level cap. The number of hours that you play will influence how strong your character is, but you will also have to be further along in the game.

Mordakai · Jul 02, 2009, 08:47 PM // 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Al

So what should be irrelevant in actual gameplay? In GW1, almost everything is. The level progression is a joke, I've had GW since the very beginning, and have been at the same level since the first month or two. My character can't get stronger, my weapons can't get better. How is this game even an RPG?

First of all, leveling alone does not equal an RPG. Role-playing games are just that: games where you play roles. And there are countless RPGs of all types, some don't even have levels, or skills (although those are rare, I admit). There are even diceless RPGs! These, IMO, are true RPGs that focus on characters and story more than stats and min-maxing.

Now, computer RPGs have traditionally been ALL about numbers, since AI has not advanced yet enough to have a true interactive experience. So, the common idea of an RPG has become the "min-max" RPG. Ignore the traits you don't want, focus on the ones you do.

Even Guild Wars falls into this category, we all max out the one attribute we focus on, and minimize those we don't. We build skill bars around the most useful skills, ignoring the less useful/useless ones.

And some of us come up with backstories to explain why our characters are doing these things...

So, Guild Wars is still a RPG.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Al

I don't think ensuring an entirely even playing field is necessarily a good thing. I think a level 100 should be more powerful than a 99, who should be more powerful than a 98, etc. Anet can make this work by implementing anti-grind techniques. For example:

1. not having repeatable quests
2. not gaining experience for killing a certain type of monster more than a certain amount of times.

This way, characters can have a natural progression through the game. When they're halfway through the campaign, they should be roughly halfway to the level cap. The number of hours that you play will influence how strong your character is, but you will also have to be further along in the game.

So, here's the problem:

If the only people allowed to "succeed" are those who play the game 24/7 (no level cap, right?), then where does that leave the rest?

Will they continue to play a game dominated by a few 100+ level characters?

And if you DO have a level cap, then you have the same "problem" you dislike GW for: eventually, your character will not be able to advance. (it doesn't matter if it's level 20, or level 100, a cap is still a cap).

The Great Al · Jul 02, 2009, 10:48 PM // 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

So, here's the problem:

If the only people allowed to "succeed" are those who play the game 24/7 (no level cap, right?), then where does that leave the rest?

Will they continue to play a game dominated by a few 100+ level characters?

And if you DO have a level cap, then you have the same "problem" you dislike GW for: eventually, your character will not be able to advance. (it doesn't matter if it's level 20, or level 100, a cap is still a cap).

Again, I'm speaking strictly from a PvE perspective:

I don't really see how people would be 'dominating' the game, really. If anti-grinding methods are in place, if you are, say, 25% through the game, then you will be playing with people who are of similar level to you, give or take a few levels. Of course, there is the problem of a level 100 helping out a group of level 5s, but there is no real incentive to that, besides helping out a guildmate. Quite frankly, I always thought it'd be a good idea to scale enemies to be around or slightly above the average level of the group that you are in, but I don't know that that will ever be implemented.

Every game eventually comes to a point where you don't want to play it anymore. Level cap or not, once you've beaten a campaign, there isn't much left to do unless there are special elite areas only open to certain levels, or ultra rare weapons that have a special power up. IMO these things need to be in the game to keep it replayable and interesting. I've noticed that GW players as a whole seem to have a mentality of 'we're paying 60 bucks for a game, so we should have access to everything right off the bat'. Yes, everything should be obtainable, but there should still be ways to keep your character unique without having to actually role play or make up stories outside of the game.

As stated above, my idea for keeping players from 'dominating' the game would be to implement some sort of enemy scaling. That way, a level 100 couldn't help out a group of level 50s, without a penalty. Of course this could probably be exploited (i.e. a level 2 tagging along with a group of level 50s to lower their average level), but I'm sure a smarter system could be established that is less exploitable. This way, you can't dominate that game, because lower level groups would be less inclined to want you, so you're stuck playing with people of a similar level.

draxynnic · Jul 03, 2009, 03:51 AM // 03:51

One of the things I really like about the low level cap?

When offering to help a friend in a mission, I don't have to worry so much about relative levels. When 90% (or whatever it is) of the total content is aimed at level 20 characters, then I don't need to worry about picking the character of the right level to help a friend out. Instead, I can *gasp* play the profession that seems most useful to the mission, or simply the character I feel like playing, without feeling that I have to play X because X is the right level to gain the maximum benefit from (re)playing the mission.

Additionally, I find that my characters do improve after level 20. Reason being that I'm a bit of an experimenter - I like to try out new things rather than doing the same thing for a hundred levels. Partially this means that, yes, I do have characters of every profession that I'd be trying to level if the level cap is high (as an aside, the highest level I've ever reached with a Diablo2 character was about 40. Why? At that point, I'd finished the game and tried out every skill that character was ever going to learn. Why go through again using the same skills just with higher numbers against enemies with higher numbers when I can go to another character and try out another set of skills?). However, this also means that my characters do tend to get better, not just as I get better at playing them, but as I find new builds and skill combinations to use with them.

The Great Al · Jul 03, 2009, 04:16 AM // 04:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

One of the things I really like about the low level cap?

When offering to help a friend in a mission, I don't have to worry so much about relative levels. When 90% (or whatever it is) of the total content is aimed at level 20 characters, then I don't need to worry about picking the character of the right level to help a friend out. Instead, I can *gasp* play the profession that seems most useful to the mission, or simply the character I feel like playing, without feeling that I have to play X because X is the right level to gain the maximum benefit from (re)playing the mission.

Additionally, I find that my characters do improve after level 20. Reason being that I'm a bit of an experimenter - I like to try out new things rather than doing the same thing for a hundred levels. Partially this means that, yes, I do have characters of every profession that I'd be trying to level if the level cap is high (as an aside, the highest level I've ever reached with a Diablo2 character was about 40. Why? At that point, I'd finished the game and tried out every skill that character was ever going to learn. Why go through again using the same skills just with higher numbers against enemies with higher numbers when I can go to another character and try out another set of skills?). However, this also means that my characters do tend to get better, not just as I get better at playing them, but as I find new builds and skill combinations to use with them.

I never really found that there was that much experimentation. I primarily and almost exclusively played as an elementalist. There were definitely different builds I had for different situations, but being limited to 8 skills really took away a lot of creativity. I'd say about 90% of the time I didn't even take any skills from a second profession, because given the amount of skill points I had left to spend on it, and the limited space of the skill bar, it just wasn't worth it.

The only real creativity was probably in farming and maybe running builds.

regarding Diablo 2: With that game, there was still incentive to keep playing. There were LOADS of unique weapons (STATSwise, no one cared about looks in that game) that you had to be of higher level for, and were also really rare.

Bryant Again · Jul 03, 2009, 04:19 AM // 04:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

The game should be fun from level 1. There is no reason I should have to kill 10 rats and collect 10 bear asses until my character gets to the interesting stuff in the mid-game, I am so sick of every single MMO doing that. If GW2 really does have no level cap, or an unattainably high one, it may convince players to just stop running to "the end" and enjoy leveling -- provided interesting content actually exists.

This is kinda where I thought GW1 excelled with Proph. There isn't much of a PvE endgame as much as there is a solid playthrough. In this sense it totally doesn't feel like an MMO because you're enjoying the actual gameplay the whole time. ANet put all of their emphasis into the entire experience, not just the end of it.

Now I'm not terribly sure how GW2 is going to be, but if it's going to be a system where you don't really ever stop getting "stronger" then I'd sure hope to god that many or most of the dungeons or places you go to scale according to your character. Otherwise it's gonna get reeeeeeally boring one-shotting everything.

Also, missed this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

Restricting classes to a race is only good for lore, not gameplay. I don't think you want to shoot your gameplay in the foot by telling players they aren't allowed to have the race/profession look they want. There is almost no upside.

Fully agreed.

The Great Al · Jul 03, 2009, 04:26 AM // 04:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

This is kinda where I thought GW1 excelled with Proph. There isn't much of a PvE endgame as much as there is a solid playthrough. In this sense it totally doesn't feel like an MMO because you're enjoying the actual gameplay the whole time. ANet put all of their emphasis into the entire experience, not just the end of it.

Now I'm not terribly sure how GW2 is going to be, but if it's going to be a system where you don't really ever stop getting "stronger" then I'd sure hope to god that many or most of the dungeons or places you go to scale according to your character. Otherwise it's gonna get reeeeeeally boring one-shotting everything.

I also really hope that scalable enemies are in the game. Or at least a hard mode.

Prophecies was great because there was an awesome progression. The other games could not have progression, because they were separate chapters, not expansions. I really hope that any additional addons to GW2 are true expansions.

draxynnic · Jul 03, 2009, 04:38 AM // 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Al

I never really found that there was that much experimentation. I primarily and almost exclusively played as an elementalist. There were definitely different builds I had for different situations, but being limited to 8 skills really took away a lot of creativity. I'd say about 90% of the time I didn't even take any skills from a second profession, because given the amount of skill points I had left to spend on it, and the limited space of the skill bar, it just wasn't worth it.

The only real creativity was probably in farming and maybe running builds.

Speak for yourself. Admittedly, the way the Elementalist is designed doesn't really encourage experimentation all that much - attunements provide a fairly strong incentive to stay within a single line, let alone profession - so Elementalists tend to either go with a single element, or just use Energy Storage to fuel secondary skills.

Still, that's your choice to simply go with a single character rather than all the fruits of the tree. If it's your preference to have a single character and treadmill that character through the levels... well, there are plenty of other MMOs that cater to your preferences. Can I have just one that caters to mine? Please?

Quote:

regarding Diablo 2: With that game, there was still incentive to keep playing. There were LOADS of unique weapons (STATSwise, no one cared about looks in that game) that you had to be of higher level for, and were also really rare.

Given my stated attitude towards continuing playing a treadmill of rinsing and repeating the same skills and tactics just with higher numbers on both sides, what do you think my attitude is towards continuing playing just to collect phat lewts that... wait for it... just give higher numbers? *yawn*

Shadowmere · Jul 03, 2009, 05:27 PM // 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

Given my stated attitude towards continuing playing a treadmill of rinsing and repeating the same skills and tactics just with higher numbers on both sides, what do you think my attitude is towards continuing playing just to collect phat lewts that... wait for it... just give higher numbers? *yawn*

QFT so many MMO's (and rpgs ingeneral) seem to go by this mentality, you keep getting stronger and stronger with really no limit, yes you can make bigger and bigger numbers but this really only has 2 outcomes;
1.) You get so strong that nothing in the game is a challenge to you, this means for most people the novelty of instantly killing everything wears off pretty fast.
2.) The enemies get stronger with you too, this means there's, for all intents and purposes, no difference between a fight at lvl 100 and at lvl 1. And then you're simply left with how the combat system works, is it interesting or is it just start smashing attack?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Al

I never really found that there was that much experimentation. I primarily and almost exclusively played as an elementalist. There were definitely different builds I had for different situations, but being limited to 8 skills really took away a lot of creativity. I'd say about 90% of the time I didn't even take any skills from a second profession, because given the amount of skill points I had left to spend on it, and the limited space of the skill bar, it just wasn't worth it.

imo being limited to 8 skills is what made GW combat unique and interesting when compared with most other rpgs. because you can't take every spell you have with you you're forced to think about what skills you do bring; what will be effective in this area? what do I want these skills to do? how can I make synergy among the skills on my bar to allow me to do more with my skill bar?

in short I love the system due to the fact that you're forced to think about what skills you use instead of just using more skills.

The Great Al · Jul 04, 2009, 01:30 AM // 01:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowmere

QFT so many MMO's (and rpgs ingeneral) seem to go by this mentality, you keep getting stronger and stronger with really no limit, yes you can make bigger and bigger numbers but this really only has 2 outcomes;
1.) You get so strong that nothing in the game is a challenge to you, this means for most people the novelty of instantly killing everything wears off pretty fast.
2.) The enemies get stronger with you too, this means there's, for all intents and purposes, no difference between a fight at lvl 100 and at lvl 1. And then you're simply left with how the combat system works, is it interesting or is it just start smashing attack?

There's a huge difference between a level 1 vs 1 fight, and a level 100 vs 100. 1 vs 1, you're pretty much standing there throwing a fireball at someone until they die. high level fights are much different, they require much more strategy both by yourself and the AI.

And maybe it's just me, but I still find this situation more rewarding than the current system of absolutely nothing changing about your character for three years, after nice progression and development during the first month.

draxynnic · Jul 05, 2009, 05:25 AM // 05:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Al

There's a huge difference between a level 1 vs 1 fight, and a level 100 vs 100. 1 vs 1, you're pretty much standing there throwing a fireball at someone until they die. high level fights are much different, they require much more strategy both by yourself and the AI.

And maybe it's just me, but I still find this situation more rewarding than the current system of absolutely nothing changing about your character for three years, after nice progression and development during the first month.

So, not only do you have to grind to be competitive, you also have to grind to do anything fun?

Plus, this sort of thing usually flattens out well before you reach the maximum level anyway. Diablo 2, for instance... you've got all the skills you're going to learn before you take down Baal the first time around. After that, it's just increasing the numbers on the skills you've already got for another 50 levels. From what I've heard, WoW is possibly worse... it's all Fireball 5 and Lightning Bolt 3 and stuff like that. *yawn*

And in Guild Wars, this is and always has been represented by collecting new skills and trying out new builds. After 4 years, and with the last major installment being around 2 years ago, I'm still finding new combinations of skills to use.

Are the numbers changing? No, but I'm better at using the numbers I've got, and that means I can defeat more dangerous opponents. To me, that's much more satisfying than grinding to make my numbers 5% better so I can face enemies who, surprise surprise, have their numbers also increased by 5%.

Plus, this way most of the game is still playable, rather than large areas of the game being designated 'less-than-max-level' content of little interest once you've levelled out of it.

shoyon456 · Jul 07, 2009, 10:53 PM // 22:53

Figured Id give this a lift. I came across some info the other day that similar professions would be put into "sections" and that you would bridge or train into the specific profession you wanted. In this way, all professions would be maintained.

Only a rumor, but it was believable. The guy made no effort to outright state he was Anet/affiliated, and in fact ignored the question. Most of his answers to other questsions were "There may or may not...." or "That is still under consideration/discussion...."

It's nice to dream...

slowerpoke · Jul 08, 2009, 03:26 AM // 03:26

I think the professions would benefit from more focus. combining some of them to give a better overall selection.

From what we currently have:

Melee

ranged
- ranger - ranged dps, traps, pets
- paragon - man with a skirt, party buffs
close combat
- warrior - high al, dps
- dervish - silly enchantment based dress wearer
- assassin - squishy high dps, teleporting

Magic

healing
- monk - healing, protection, smite
dmg
- necromancer - debuffs, corpse fiddler
- mesmer - debuffs, interruption
- elementalist - single target, aoe, dot, close and ranged
both
- ritualist - has both support and direct damage, not particularly good at either

To something like this:

Melee

light armor
- ranger - bows and spears
- assassin - stealth replaces teleportation
heavy armor, close combat
- warrior/paragon (tank) weapon/shield, protective shouts, paladin
- warrior/dervish (dps) higher dmg melee weps, less defence

Magic

healing/buffs
- monk - heal/prot
- ritualist - party wide buffs
dmg
- elementalist
- necromancer/mesmer - debuffs,corpses

these classifications are subjective

Mordakai · Jul 08, 2009, 01:47 PM // 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoyon456

Figured Id give this a lift. I came across some info the other day that similar professions would be put into "sections" and that you would bridge or train into the specific profession you wanted. In this way, all professions would be maintained.

Only a rumor, but it was believable. The guy made no effort to outright state he was Anet/affiliated, and in fact ignored the question. Most of his answers to other questsions were "There may or may not...." or "That is still under consideration/discussion...."

It's nice to dream...

I have real doubts about this "information" (no links? source?)