Curse

Zahr Dalsk · Jul 16, 2008, 06:03 PM // 18:03

I understand why ArenaNet is making the game more like World of Warcraft; they want to draw in the WoW players (even though most WoW players either don't care about Guild Wars or hate Guild Wars for being different), but Guild Wars was never meant for that kind of player, it was meant to be a game that you could play without grinding, that you could play to play, with friends. I wonder if ArenaNet plans to tell us what their new developer vision is and where they decided to abandon the original Guild Wars philosophy.

Personally I feel that the high level cap/removed level cap is another symptom of the death of Guild Wars, right up there with multiple races and persistent areas.

Jetdoc · Jul 16, 2008, 06:41 PM // 18:41

I would actually like a much higher level cap, but with very minimal benefits for each level obtained past a certain point (e.g. add one health for each level obtained above the equivalent of level 20, possibly add one point to base damage for every ten levels obtained above level 20, etc.).

That way people that are into developing their characters get the satisfaction of doing so, but those that reach that "plateau" (e.g. level 20) really won't have any sort of material disadvantage by not "grinding" to those higher levels.

BlackSephir · Jul 16, 2008, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Low (20) level cap is good. Unlimted or high level cap creates elitism. Granted, even if you don't gain any benefits past level x, we will still get "looking for lvl 34636+ to do the mission".
Sure, there may be no difference between level 1000 and 20 but hey, tell that to GW players, especially PUG tards.

Alex the Great · Jul 16, 2008, 07:00 PM // 19:00

i would love achieving max level in GW2 to take about 3 times as long as it did in NF, or twice as long as in proph (factions takes 5 hours, no challenge at all).

the actually number means nothing, just how long it takes to get there

munky · Jul 16, 2008, 07:47 PM // 19:47

a level cap of 20 worked for gw1. but for gw2 the game might be set up in a way that 100 levels works. with fun content all the way trough not just grind killing. most of the people that want level 20 or low level cap are the people who think the only way to have fun in an online game is to get to max level in a week or less, then go trough fun content. would it not just be better if while leveling you went trough a bunch of fun content? a higher level cap allows for more said content. with all the systems there talking about a higher level cap would not even be that bad. (i.e the if a higher level and a lower level are in the same party, the lower level can fight at a higher level )

Thizzle · Jul 16, 2008, 07:57 PM // 19:57

Everyone is complaining about the level cap being to high and making people not want to focus on other characters. That's already happened with Eye of The North. I don't even bother with other characters because I don't want to have to raise there reputation points again and going through Eye of The North just puts me to sleep.

Stockholm · Jul 16, 2008, 08:01 PM // 20:01

It is my understanding that the level will be adjusted according to the players in a group when you enter a PvP area or the "big world" so levels will not really matter like in GW1

Quaker · Jul 16, 2008, 08:02 PM // 20:02

All this talk about levels amuses me - especially when people try to compare WoW to GW.

It amuses me because some people seem to have the idea that "levels" are some sort of universal unit of measurement like "hours" or "kilometers". So they think that WoW must be better than GW because WoW has more levels - or that GW2 is better/worse than WoW because it has more/less levels.

But, levels are not fixed units. They are whatever the game writers want them to be. Let me put it this way. As you play through GW you get to a point where you get maxed out at level 20. Let's say, at this point you have AL 80 armor and do 80 HP damage per attack (just examples, not necessarily actual figures). Well, what difference would it make if they called it level 60 and at that point you have AL80 armor and do 80HP damage? (other than that you'd get many smaller increases in your "level" as you level-up.)

Also, what difference does it make if you are a level 20 facing level 24 monsters, or level 60 facing level 72 monsters? And what difference would it make in GW2 if you went to "level 80" but it only took you 2 days to do it (like it now does for level 20)

In the long run, the number of levels is merely the number of steps it takes to get to the "max" level, which is just an arbitrary armor/HP/damage level anyway.

Personally, I would like GW2 to have more "levels" because I'd prefer that leveling up take a bit longer. (Actually, it wasn't too bad in Prophecies, but leveling was way too short in later campaigns/expansions.)

In short, what's important is how long it takes to get to any particular level, what stats you have at that level, and what the stats are of the enemies you'd face.

P.s. Since levels are just arbitrary numbers, the poll is pointless.

Skitsefrenik · Jul 16, 2008, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stockholm

It is my understanding that the level will be adjusted according to the players in a group when you enter a PvP area or the "big world" so levels will not really matter like in GW1

But what about alienation in PvE? PvP is still on a playing field but nobody wants to be left out simple because they can't grind to a certain level. Ursan proves grind /= skill.

Stockholm · Jul 16, 2008, 08:16 PM // 20:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skitsefrenik

But what about alienation in PvE? PvP is still on a playing field but nobody wants to be left out simple because they can't grind to a certain level. Ursan proves grind /= skill.

I don't know yet, I have only read as much about it as anyone else can.
We don't even know what system they are going to use and allready bitching about it, no wonder they won't release any early info.

doudou_steve · Jul 16, 2008, 09:14 PM // 21:14

I don't see why we complain about gw2 when we have BARELY info of it.

I don't care about the unlimited level cap because i'm sure Anet will put a "max level" for attributes

MithranArkanere · Jul 16, 2008, 09:20 PM // 21:20

You don't know how levels will work in GW2, and since if you join in a party with a higher.level character you'll get buffed accordingly, friends with higher levels will always be good.

Remember that they are designing it so pople won't get out teams for being at low levels.

Level will mostly show time played rather than character development.

Don Doggy · Jul 16, 2008, 09:26 PM // 21:26

I want a bigger level cap I would be more than happy for a cap at level 50.

munky · Jul 16, 2008, 09:27 PM // 21:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

Personally I feel that the high level cap/removed level cap is another symptom of the death of Guild Wars, right up there with multiple races and persistent areas.

if you can not accept that after 3 years things change, then do us all a favor and just don't buy guild wars 2. that way you won't have to mess it up for other people just cuz "its not the old guild wars that was so fun 2-3 years ago", but might i suggest staying in gw1 with all the other people who will whine till it turns back to what it was at release.

multiple races are good cuz it gives leveling a new character a feeling of something beyond just leveling a new class, given they all have there own starting / small leveling area.

persistent areas are good cuz they give more of a chance for player interaction then is present in the current system.

higher level cap means that by the time you get to max level you more then likely know how to play you class well. (also due to systems the'v already talk about level really dose not matter much)

just cuz you don't like a feature of a game, plz don't think that directly means it is bad for the game. I know not everyone likes this stuff in games, but they are major selling point for most people. and without them what is the point of gw2 and not just another expansion?

I MP I · Jul 16, 2008, 10:01 PM // 22:01

I never really cared for high levels unless there are benefits for it. Still waiting on Anet for more info on GW2 about that. For now I'll vote level 20 as it seems fine in GW.

credit · Jul 16, 2008, 10:22 PM // 22:22

I would prefer to have a higher level cap, just because it is way to easy to reach maximum level currently. But, having an unlimited or insanely high level cap would lead to grind fests.

I would like a slightly higher cap, ie up to 30-40.

Diddy bow · Jul 16, 2008, 10:32 PM // 22:32

GW has thrown a few too many of its original values out the window, this is a big one id like to see stick around.

Zorrilo Gw · Jul 16, 2008, 11:30 PM // 23:30

Level # really means nothing. It all depends on the exp rewarded for kills, quests, missions. I would love to have a longer storyline, and as long as I'm near the top lvl at the end, regardless of actual #, I'm happy. Any remaining could quickly be gained in the wealth remaining content.

If there is a needlessly high or unlimited lvl cap, there damn well be better rewards for gaining lvls than skill points.

bel unbreakable · Jul 16, 2008, 11:30 PM // 23:30

i really think we need a higher lvl cap for char development i mean getting to the max lvl in about 8 hours getting through the story line in a day or 2 then its year on year farming nothing else what fun

fireflyry · Jul 17, 2008, 12:49 AM // 00:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by munky

if you can not accept that after 3 years things change, then do us all a favor and just don't buy guild wars 2.

It's about debating the pros and cons of possible new features and the effect they may have on the core GW philosophy and play style.

Your effectively saying "Just shut up and deal with it" rather than discuss it.

Ummmm....nah....