Curse

Hyper.nl · Jan 12, 2009, 11:02 AM // 11:02

My opinion: No level cap.

I would like to see a much better, broader and deeper character development in GW2, and no level cap (or a very high cap) is a good starting point.

Bryant Again · Jan 12, 2009, 11:18 AM // 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I don't see your point here. Frankly to me the reasons people bought the game don't matter. What matters is that the game is NOT the same as release.

Good. If it wasn't, it would've most definitely not lasted this long.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I've gotten you to admit that titles have an effect...

...On a completely personal and subjective level. Because of that, I can't really show you any positive/negative effects. Neither of us can because we can only go based upon our personal observations. We don't know what sort of pedestal everyone puts titles on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Except for titles linked to attributes and character strength, but I guess we can pretend those never existed.

Or you can ignore the numerous references I've made to them in this thread.

ANet saw these as bad ideas, too, but only later (a fault I won't deny).

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

And I see your point that appearances don't change value, but my point is that appearances HAVE value...

Also on a very personal and subjective level.

Ursan was stupid not because it allowed people to reach "leet vanity status" but because it entirely disregarded everything Guild Wars: It threw out party balance, skill organization, build knowledge, and skill>time in one fell blow.

It's essentially like putting the BFG9000 at the beginning of every level of Doom. It's equivalent to the developers saying "here, don't learn how to play the game".

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Are you claiming that Anet is aware of their mistakes even though they continue to make them?

If they believed things in Guild Wars 1 were going so well, I don't think we'd have seen such a quick transition into the making of a sequel.

Does this mean the same thing that happened with GW1 won't happen with GW2? No. Does this mean it will? No. The only thing that will determine GW2's success at this point is nothing. Broken record continues...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It doesn't necessarily. The current level cap WORKS AS INTENDED though. Their idea to raise the level cap tells us that their intentions there are clearly different from the current successful formula. It tells me that their entire GAME intentions are different. It is a huge gamble to me...bigger than a lot of people are talking about.

Different level cap = entirely different game, obviously...

pumpkin pie · Jan 12, 2009, 12:34 PM // 12:34

== My Idea of Level Caps in Guild Wars 2 ==

This idea promotes players in actually playing the game instead of going for the max level then "grind" for titles and farm for "elite stuffs" in the game.

How to do that:
There has to have different one time only quests and missions, sprung up at different areas of the game world 365/24/7 at a random intervals. It will also allow for guildies/alliances to recruit players or a global announcement that xx area have xx incident, players will have to deploy themself to those location for the experience and special rewards, If players are absent during that time they don't get those experience and rewards. Therefore players have got to be in the game forever! Experience points will be added, and special rewards place in players inventory for to use later, in exchange of elite skills, weapons, armors and what nots for their characters. the rewards items are customized and non-transferables.

There will also be no level caps! Every players starts out age 17-300 (choice) with all non-elite skills already available in their "skill book/list of skills" and they grow with the game, the skills evolve with the character in "real time". For instant Player Z's meteor shower would be different from Player X's meteor shower depending on how these players use it, this might be a bit far fetch, inbalance game = bad i suppose, but, it would reflect skill >time, so how to fix that, by putting a cap on the maximum damage meteor Shower can cause. Therefore, in time, when players have throughly explore the possibility of using meteor Shower, it will be at its full potential.

This way player Z who actually play the game and understand how the skill works and how their chain effect will turns out, will have a much higher damage output if they use skill bar X compare to player X who don't play the game but slap on skill bar X which they actually never use before will probably have maybe 0 damage, like 2 persons, buys the same piano and plays Piano Concerto No. 3 by Rachmaninoff, one practices everyday and one just bought the music sheet sort of thing.

Side Notes:
Elite skills will only be available for capping when all the non-elite skills have been "level to the max" (or at one point of the character development as see fit by the development team)

Angels Sight · Jan 12, 2009, 06:36 PM // 18:36

Okay First off if Anet does infact raise the level cap it will probably be in the range of 30 or 40. Anets purpose for Guildwars a lot of people forget is for the casual gamer, that has been their attention for every game they sold. For those who may have forgotten what a casual gamer is, it is a person who can play a game and be able to put it down. Anets Attention as they have stated for Guildwars 2 has not changed.

If you want to play PvE yes there will probably be more grind from the start of GW2, because Anet now knows they have a huge fan base of players that are only PvE players.

PvP will still have their titles, plus in Guildwars you never had to level up to play PvP in the first place. Even from when the game first came out. So, even if GW2 has a grind to level cap that is the players choice to do so.

Also for a player who;s heart is set only on PvP and still think that a level cap will add grind and make it longer for you to get an awesome custom Character in and ready for PvP status, that player needs to remeber that GuildWars is no longer a PvP game.

Yes Guildwars in the beginning was created for PvP, just look at some of the Pve missions in the first instalment clearly teaching you how to run relics, and by the time you got to Tombs Anet thought people would just play PvP, which alot of them did. Even Factions was created for PvP and some Pve content thrown in. After that is when it change Anet dicovered most of their players were on the PvE side, so Nightfall was creat and two new classes and skills for the PvP people.

Eye of the North was only for PvE it would have been bigger except hat they knew there current model of GuildWars was not going to work out for both PvP and PvE so they made a quick expansion and went off to make a better game they will suit both PvP and PvE.

So, yes there will be a level cap, and people need to get off the fact that guildwars was a PvP game yes we know but guildwars 2 is PvX
Yes they have made elite areas, yes they have made titles, yes they added a little bit of grind to the game.

DreamWind · Jan 12, 2009, 11:11 PM // 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Good. If it wasn't, it would've most definitely not lasted this long.

I beg to differ. I reckon it would have lasted at least this long, possibly longer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

...On a completely personal and subjective level. Because of that, I can't really show you any positive/negative effects. Neither of us can because we can only go based upon our personal observations. We don't know what sort of pedestal everyone puts titles on.

Then give me some positive effects from your personal observations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Or you can ignore the numerous references I've made to them in this thread.

ANet saw these as bad ideas, too, but only later (a fault I won't deny).

Then you would know that grind DOES get you things now, and the requirement for skill has gone down significantly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Ursan was stupid not because it allowed people to reach "leet vanity status" but because it entirely disregarded everything Guild Wars: It threw out party balance, skill organization, build knowledge, and skill>time in one fell blow.

It's essentially like putting the BFG9000 at the beginning of every level of Doom. It's equivalent to the developers saying "here, don't learn how to play the game".

That is all true....but it was also stupid because of what people were using it for. Nobody would have any problem with Ursan if it didn't get you anything for using it. Instead it got people things that have value which shouldn't have value for very little skill input.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

If they believed things in Guild Wars 1 were going so well, I don't think we'd have seen such a quick transition into the making of a sequel.

Uh...things in Guild Wars 1 have gone well. It was a success. The problem with the model Anet chose is that they were basically forced to come up with something new and all but abandon the previous game (which will happen). I have a feeling the model they have chosen is going to come crashing down someday...but thats another thread altogether.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Does this mean the same thing that happened with GW1 won't happen with GW2? No. Does this mean it will? No. The only thing that will determine GW2's success at this point is nothing. Broken record continues...

No...things that occur (or have occurred) in Guild Wars 1 WILL have an impact on GW2's success.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Different level cap = entirely different game, obviously...

Not necessarily...but different level cap does show that Anet wants the game to be different because small level cap was one of the biggest features of gameplay in 1.

Faulcon · Jan 13, 2009, 12:21 AM // 00:21

I think uncapped lvl would suck because if you wanted to pvp, you'd either suck, or it wouldn't be fun because you would kick ass.

I also think that lvl 20 is a tad low, because then theres not as much to shoot for after you get lvl 20. Sure theres titles and what not but I get a little dissapointed when I hit lvl 20. :\

Maybe like lvl 40 or something would work good? I think it would be fine.

Crispie · Jan 13, 2009, 02:08 AM // 02:08

I hope people know that no level cap would introduce an incredible amount of discrimination in PvE, comparable to the horrid mess Heroes Ascent has become, where rank is grinded mindlessly to somehow prove that you are better than others.

Bryant Again · Jan 13, 2009, 08:50 PM // 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I beg to differ. I reckon it would have lasted at least this long, possibly longer.

Guild Wars is dead?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Then give me some positive effects from your personal observations.

As long as you understand that personal experiences and observations are insignificant?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Then you would know that grind DOES get you things now...

Things = Subjective. Not to mention you've been able to get "things" in such a manner since the start.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

That is all true....but it was also stupid because of what people were using it for. Nobody would have any problem with Ursan if it didn't get you anything for using it.

So, are you considering the fact that it made you able to get subjective rewards quicker the problem or that it voided the list I had mentioned earlier?

Bear in mind how I've said those "things of value" are incredibly subjective and personal, so saying Ursan is a problem because it allows you to get to those faster is, in a matter of fact, a selfish and personal-based point of view.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Uh...things in Guild Wars 1 have gone well. It was a success. The problem with the model Anet chose is that they were basically forced to come up with something new and all but abandon the previous game.

Hence, GW2. Different game, different model.

Notice how I voided "which will happen"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

No...things that occur (or have occurred) in Guild Wars 1 WILL have an impact on GW2's success.

Obviously, but by how much?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Not necessarily...but different level cap does show that Anet wants the game to be different because small level cap was one of the biggest features of gameplay in 1.

20 in RPGs is actually rather standard. Granted it's not an MMO standard, but it wasn't aimed to be an MMO in the firstplace.

And it was less the fact that it was "small" rather that in later releases they voided it even more meaningless by having you level up to max in the starter isles. In such an instance it would've served the game much easier to just have no level progression.

DreamWind · Jan 14, 2009, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Guild Wars is dead?

I wouldn't say dead...but just about. There is still a community, but can we really call the game alive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

As long as you understand that personal experiences and observations are insignificant?

I don't think so. I think personal experiences and observations mean a lot...it is all we have. How else are we going to judge what is negative or positive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Things = Subjective. Not to mention you've been able to get "things" in such a manner since the start.

Yes, but not this easily and not in this abundant manner. Grind today is promoted instead of just being something that is possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Bear in mind how I've said those "things of value" are incredibly subjective and personal, so saying Ursan is a problem because it allows you to get to those faster is, in a matter of fact, a selfish and personal-based point of view.

LoL...so you are saying that the mass super farming of those "things of value" is not a problem? Meh...we have basically gotten to the point where we know I am right and you are resorting to everything being selfish and personal based point of view. We aren't even adding anything at this point...I have already described how the game has changed. EVERYTHING else is a point of view. How else do you suspect we judge?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Hence, GW2. Different game, different model.

No...different game, same model...same marketing model that is. Unless they come out with some huge announcement that we don't know about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Obviously, but by how much?

More than you think. In my case I will almost assuredly not be buying 2 (barring high recommendations). I can probably name 10-20 other players I know who won't be buying it either for those reasons. I'm sure a lot of other PvP players also feel the same way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

And it was less the fact that it was "small" rather that in later releases they voided it even more meaningless by having you level up to max in the starter isles. In such an instance it would've served the game much easier to just have no level progression.

I think that was the entire point that Anet was trying to tell us. Levels weren't supposed to be mean much of anything...it was the gameplay after the levels that counted. Now we have people who want the levels to matter...we have people who want to be level 999 and smack down a level 20 or some weak monsters. Ok thats exagerrating but my point still stands.

Bryant Again · Jan 14, 2009, 06:21 AM // 06:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I wouldn't say dead...but just about. There is still a community, but can we really call the game alive?

Can we really call this game totally dead?

It's safe to say that it's far from its peak, but we're not in any further position to claim it's lifespan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I don't think so. I think personal experiences and observations mean a lot...it is all we have. How else are we going to judge what is negative or positive?

One personal experience, and that is most certainly not enough to base anything off of.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Yes, but not this easily and not in this abundant manner. Grind today is promoted instead of just being something that is possible.

Was that the point of what I said?

Of course there's more "grind" and more of those personal and subjective things to go with it - but those things are still no less personal and subjective, save for the minuscule exceptions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

LoL...so you are saying that the mass super farming of those "things of value" is not a problem?

The question wasn't if you considered it a problem rather if you considered it the problem. If personal rewards always takes priority over, say, the gameplay then I'm sure you'd be right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

No...different game, same model...same marketing model that is.

The only way we'll know it'll end up like GW1 is when it gets there. Until then we've only got suspicion and assumption.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

More than you think. In my case I will almost assuredly not be buying 2 (barring high recommendations). I can probably name 10-20 other players I know who won't be buying it either for those reasons. I'm sure a lot of other PvP players also feel the same way.

Are you taking into account the number of people that may've actually enjoyed GW, regardless or unaware of what has happened?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I think that was the entire point that Anet was trying to tell us. Levels weren't supposed to be mean much of anything...it was the gameplay after the levels that counted. Now we have people who want the levels to matter...we have people who want to be level 999 and smack down a level 20 or some weak monsters. Ok thats exagerrating but my point still stands.

There was progression in Proph, is it not possible some people simply wanted that progression of character and self to extend even further?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faulcon

I think uncapped lvl would suck because if you wanted to pvp, you'd either suck, or it wouldn't be fun because you would kick ass.

I also think that lvl 20 is a tad low, because then theres not as much to shoot for after you get lvl 20. Sure theres titles and what not but I get a little dissapointed when I hit lvl 20. :\

Maybe like lvl 40 or something would work good? I think it would be fine.

It's already been stated that your level rank in PvE wouldn't matter in PvP because everything is set in the latter. Save for open PvP of course, but lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crispie

I hope people know that no level cap would introduce an incredible amount of discrimination in PvE, comparable to the horrid mess Heroes Ascent has become, where rank is grinded mindlessly to somehow prove that you are better than others.

There's really little that you can do against it, and it's not a very good reason to completely void a potentially new gameplay mechanic in the MMO scape.

DreamWind · Jan 14, 2009, 08:19 PM // 20:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Can we really call this game totally dead?

No, but pretty close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

One personal experience, and that is most certainly not enough to base anything off of.

So what is?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Was that the point of what I said?

Of course there's more "grind" and more of those personal and subjective things to go with it - but those things are still no less personal and subjective, save for the minuscule exceptions.

Your point was that things are subjective, which doesn't add anything at all. I could say the entire game is subjective. I don't see your point. My point was that grinding for subjective things is now promoted (and abundant) instead of just possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The question wasn't if you considered it a problem rather if you considered it the problem. If personal rewards always takes priority over, say, the gameplay then I'm sure you'd be right.

It arguably has. The endgame is now personal rewards. And Ursan had many problems, that being one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The only way we'll know it'll end up like GW1 is when it gets there. Until then we've only got suspicion and assumption.

And Anet already telling us what the GW2 model would be...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Are you taking into account the number of people that may've actually enjoyed GW, regardless or unaware of what has happened?

Yes of course. I'm sure those people will be happy with Guild Wars 2. I'm just saying the negative effects of Guild Wars 1 will probably have more of an effect on 2 than you realize. I wouldn't be shocked at all if Guild Wars 2 didn't have anywhere near the success of 1. If it has more success then congrats to Anet...but I'm just saying I wouldn't be shocked if it doesn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

There was progression in Proph, is it not possible some people simply wanted that progression of character and self to extend even further?

Sure. The problem is that the current level cap works as intended and people want the game to be something different. The level cap is a big unique feature of Guild Wars 1. It isn't that people want the game to be better, they want it to be different altogether.

Daenara · Jan 14, 2009, 10:58 PM // 22:58

Iiiiit's the Bryant Again and Dreamwind show... *cue music and applause*

Anyway, even thought my post will get lost in the sea of too and fro posting from the aforementioned posters, I believe that a level cap of 20 is perfect, and I really hope that they don't change it. I love the fact that I can have a character ready within a night or two, and not have to grind for weeks just to access high level content.

stevedallas · Jan 15, 2009, 06:12 AM // 06:12

although i feel that there has to be a cut off point for hp, mana, etc through level progression, i would like to see no cap on the level you can earn... if a virtual level in GW1 is about 15000xp (when you gain a skill point), then I would be at 486. although any benefit beyond earning a skill point ended for me at lvl 20, i would still like to see that level number reflect the convention established for skill point progression.

kenard · Jan 15, 2009, 09:38 AM // 09:38

no level cap, or really high one please. I want to casually do damage like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z8Cn4r9IHY&NR=1

Bryant Again · Jan 15, 2009, 10:09 AM // 10:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daenara

Iiiiit's the Bryant Again and Dreamwind show... *cue music and applause*

Anyway, even thought my post will get lost in the sea of too and fro posting from the aforementioned posters, I believe that a level cap of 20 is perfect, and I really hope that they don't change it. I love the fact that I can have a character ready within a night or two, and not have to grind for weeks just to access high level content.

That won't be on your mind if it's scaled properly and, like Zweistein said earlier, they make the game start at lvl 1.

Not only that, but it's less in the cap itself and more how long it takes to max out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

No, but pretty close.

'K

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

So what is?

Based on what you just said in the previous posts and in the first passage here, not what you're thinking.

Now putting these together so the thread doesn't get even shittier:

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Your point was that things are subjective, which doesn't add anything at all. I could say the entire game is subjective. I don't see your point. My point was that grinding for subjective things is now promoted (and abundant) instead of just possible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It arguably has. The endgame is now personal rewards. And Ursan had many problems, that being one.

Short answer - that's only if you hold things like GWAMM actually prestigious...

Long answer - Keyword in bold. I still have my skill > time, and as long as ANet maintains that they still know what takes 1st place. You are still vastly recognized for your skill in PvE. In order to still beat the game I need to configure a good bar and work with my teammates. In order to still vanquish every area I need to know my shit. Your guild hall smells of rich mahogany? Well I just killed the Lich and got a badass sword, bee-hotch!

Another keynote: Subjective. All of these titles affect you in a much more different way than I. You praised the game because the "grind", be it optional or not, didn't exist. Not because ANet never said it would, but because it simply didn't at the time. Now it exists. Is this more a problem of you or the game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

And Anet already telling us what the GW2 model would be...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Yes of course. I'm sure those people will be happy with Guild Wars 2. I'm just saying the negative effects of Guild Wars 1 will probably have more of an effect on 2 than you realize. I wouldn't be shocked at all if Guild Wars 2 didn't have anywhere near the success of 1. If it has more success then congrats to Anet...but I'm just saying I wouldn't be shocked if it doesn't.

To both: Yet again, wait and see. We have no idea what will happen until we get there.

"But I know so many people who have had such a poor experience!"
"Well I know just as many people who's experiences have been positive!"
"No u!"
"No U!"

: \

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Sure. The problem is that the current level cap works as intended and people want the game to be something different. The level cap is a big unique feature of Guild Wars 1. It isn't that people want the game to be better, they want it to be different altogether.

Because change is bad and ANet isn't allowed to try anything different. And how is a different level cap insinuating such a drastic change of the core gameplay?

To reiterate: it wasn't the cap was unique. It was the complete lack of emphasis on leveling that occurred in the later chapters.

DreamWind · Jan 15, 2009, 01:01 PM // 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Short answer - that's only if you hold things like GWAMM actually prestigious...

It is a problem that anybody thinks a title that almost certainly required an amount of grind is prestigious. Not because the people shouldn't hold it prestigious (I don't have a problem with that), but because Anet made it that way (which I have a problem with).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I still have my skill > time, and as long as ANet maintains that they still know what takes 1st place. You are still vastly recognized for your skill in PvE.

This is possibly the least accurate thing you've said in the entire thread. It is wrong on so many levels that I don't even have time to type out the essay on it right now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Another keynote: Subjective. All of these titles affect you in a much more different way than I. You praised the game because the "grind", be it optional or not, didn't exist. Not because ANet never said it would, but because it simply didn't at the time. Now it exists. Is this more a problem of you or the game?

We are not talking as much about how these things affect the people...we are talking about how they affected the game. Yes, I believe it is a problem with the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

To both: Yet again, wait and see. We have no idea what will happen until we get there.

Uh...we have what Anet has told us will happen. Unless they change their mind? I suppose knowing Anet that wouldn't be a far stretch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Because change is bad and ANet isn't allowed to try anything different.

Because making big changes to a successful formula is a great idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

And how is a different level cap insinuating such a drastic change of the core gameplay? To reiterate: it wasn't the cap was unique. It was the complete lack of emphasis on leveling that occurred in the later chapters.

It is a drastic change...because the increased level cap strongly implies that there will be a higher emphasis on leveling.

Abedeus · Jan 15, 2009, 01:10 PM // 13:10

Glad DreamWind poined this out:

Quote:

I still have my skill > time, and as long as ANet maintains that they still know what takes 1st place. You are still vastly recognized for your skill in PvE.

"Ha. Ha." times 1000.

robertjanvaneijk1988 · Jan 15, 2009, 02:23 PM // 14:23

The rumors where first that there isn't any level cap or level 100...

Bryant Again · Jan 16, 2009, 01:15 PM // 13:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It is a problem that anybody thinks a title that almost certainly required an amount of grind is prestigious.

Which goes back to the question I asked earlier: Problem of player or game?

Just another one of ANet's damned-if-you-do predicaments: implement it and bring with it some amounts of elitism and/or other related mishaps, don't implement it and sacrifice an encouraging game mechanic for others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

This is possibly the least accurate thing you've said in the entire thread. It is wrong on so many levels that I don't even have time to type out the essay on it right now.

Then I guess I'll have to like totally stick to your word, ja?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

We are not talking as much about how these things affect the people...we are talking about how they affected the game. Yes, I believe it is a problem with the game.

What about for those that it doesn't affect? Not because they don't care about it, but because they don't see any harm in it?
If a person didn't care about the past "grinds", what's going to make him care about the current?
If the problem is the amount of "grind" available to do, where do you draw the line of having "too much"? And, more importantly, who draws that line?

The problem with those questions? None of us can give a solid, well-founded answer to any of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Uh...we have what Anet has told us will happen. Unless they change their mind? I suppose knowing Anet that wouldn't be a far stretch.

...

So therefore, it's totally going to end up like Guild Wars 1.

Pricing is going to be exactly the same, the amount of content is going to be exactly the same, the quality of content is going to be the same, the way in which each chapter differs/doesn't differ is going to be the same, the extension and variety of different gameplay styles found in each expansion is going to be the same, the etc.^1000.

Ungh. There was a lot of greatness that came with GW1, but there was also a lot of bad (just ask yourself, dude). Where everything is going to head all depends on your perspective/experience/POV/general philosophy.

But all we have right now is guesses, even with what little ANet has told us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

It is a drastic change...because the increased level cap strongly implies that there will be a higher emphasis on leveling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Because making big changes to a successful formula is a great idea.

Again, because ANet isn't allowed to try anything new.

There's nothing saying they can't make a new formula and be just as successful, one that could be able to mix traditional RPG aspects with the new and still be unique (how many free-to-play uncapped online-only RPGs do you run into?). The only way GW1 was unique was it's ability to create a level cap then trash it entirely through later releases. And it doesn't become meaningless in a Baldur's Gate way, it becomes meaningless in a "why do I even have to level when they max me out at the get-go" way.

Now was it done like this because ANet wanted to completely remove that progression experience, or because the players wanted to play with their "maxed out" characters?

DreamWind · Jan 17, 2009, 11:25 AM // 11:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Just another one of ANet's damned-if-you-do predicaments: implement it and bring with it some amounts of elitism and/or other related mishaps, don't implement it and sacrifice an encouraging game mechanic for others.

Or don't implement it and don't sacrifice anything...ADDING it was the sacrifice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Then I guess I'll have to like totally stick to your word, ja?

Yea...because what you said was so ridiculous it barely deserves discussion. I'm surprised you even said it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

What about for those that it doesn't affect? Not because they don't care about it, but because they don't see any harm in it?
If a person didn't care about the past "grinds", what's going to make him care about the current?
If the problem is the amount of "grind" available to do, where do you draw the line of having "too much"? And, more importantly, who draws that line?

The problem with those questions? None of us can give a solid, well-founded answer to any of them.

The problem with your theory is this falls right back in to "don't like it don't use it". And we know where that ends up. The reason it is so terrible is because we are talking about game health, not the selfish experiences of each individual.

As for who draws the line, well that would be Anet of course. The problem here is that they drew the line then blatantly stepped over it, not that they moved the line.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So therefore, it's totally going to end up like Guild Wars 1.

Ungh. There was a lot of greatness that came with GW1, but there was also a lot of bad (just ask yourself, dude). Where everything is going to head all depends on your perspective/experience/POV/general philosophy.

But all we have right now is guesses, even with what little ANet has told us.

There was some bad in GW1, but I'm betting Anet would give anything to have the same amount of success. They will obviously say they want more success, but in reality they will be happy with roughly the same amount.

And we don't have guesses...we have official word from ANet on several features of the game. I suppose it would be smart to question those things however, as we know how Anet is about keeping their word.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The only way GW1 was unique was it's ability to create a level cap then trash it entirely through later releases. And it doesn't become meaningless in a Baldur's Gate way, it becomes meaningless in a "why do I even have to level when they max me out at the get-go" way.

Now was it done like this because ANet wanted to completely remove that progression experience, or because the players wanted to play with their "maxed out" characters?

Sure Anet is allowed to try new things. The problem here is that the leveling system was a key feature in 1 that they are going to change in 2. They didn't trash it in later releases, they simply IMPROVED IT! Level is supposed to mean nothing in Guild Wars! I can pull out several official statements that say that. So yes, in reality there is not much point to levels as they don't mean anything. This isn't a flaw in the game, it is a PART of the game. By changing it in Guild Wars 2, they are making it seem like a flaw because it isn't like "those other games", when in reality it was the entire point of this game to begin with.