586 replies to this topic

[Krazzar]

Crosier, on 13 July 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:

In my opinion, GW2 should expand in breath, not height. More classes, more skills, more content, extended personal story, more variety -- but no increased level cap or more powerful gear.

It's not a matter of one or the other, especially when one structures and reinforces the other.

[ShadowFlux]

Phys, on 13 July 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

So you are worried about structured pvp, ok lets say they keep structured pvp at cap 80 and dont allow any new classes there. Do you really think thats what people want? People like to play with thier toys, im pretty sure people will actually have an outcry for any new classes and skills to be available to sPVP

Er ... what? Ofc new weapons/skills/traits/professions will be available in sPvP - see reference to looking forward to changes, and why there is no need to up the level cap.

Phys, on 13 July 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

As for WvWvW its about progression, and not extremely balanced on individual player level, and PVE works levels in fine.

And adding to the level cap adds to this experience in any way shape or form ... how?

Phys, on 13 July 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

Thing with power creep, in a GW2 world, is only a danger without levels. With levels, downscaling can solve power creep issues. The only real power creep issue from leveling is trait points, but they could solve that by making you not get get trait points after 80, and only unlocking new trait lines, then the overall power would be the same post 80.

And again ... this is in support of / in defence of upping the level cap ... how? By making it even more trivial and pointless? Yaaaaaay ....

[Phys]

ShadowFlux, on 13 July 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

Er ... what? Ofc new weapons/skills/traits/professions will be available in sPvP - see reference to looking forward to changes, and why there is no need to up the level cap.



And adding to the level cap adds to this experience in any way shape or form ... how?



And again ... this is in support of / in defence of upping the level cap ... how? By making it even more trivial and pointless? Yaaaaaay ....

maybe im mistaken but i thought you said you disagreed with new levels because it will unbalance Spvp, i guarantee the thing that will unbalance pvp most is new skills, new jobs, new traits. Levels and gear is extremely easy to balance by comparrison.

As far as WvWvW is a progressive system the whole idea of it is to take what you have built up overtime and by doing various content and have that represented in a lareg scale pve fight. People want new shiny toys even if the unbalance things.

They could keep leveling out of it, but if they do add new skills, abilities and traits, they are going to want them to come through the effort of playing the game, they wont give them out for free. The advantage of using experience to gate this, is that it is available to people for doing anything they enjoy doing. crafting, WvWvW, story, dynamic events, dungeons etc.  If they dont use experience, then they will have to decide where to put it, and then people who want the new cool stuff from the expansion will have to do whatever is the thing that they tie it to, whether it be story, killing monsters in a new zone, karma, or whatever.

So heres the short version

New Skills, abilities, traits, new job etc unbalance the game more than levels and gear

An Expansion has to give you reasons to actually play whatever content (monsters dungeons, crafting, exploration, dynamic events, story) they add to the game, as well as older content

Which amounts to some sort of progression system tied to obtaining the new toys

What is more effecient than experince for this purpose?


i mean really how do you propose they encourage playing the game with an expansion if you do not have to do extra work to achieve things?  What, in gw2 is a more accurate guage of you playing the game than exp? which is a universal reward for almost everything of value you do?

Edited by Phys, 13 July 2012 - 10:44 PM.

[Reiden221]

They could just add separate leveling systems for any additional expansions.  DAoC did this quite a bit, they had your normal Character level, then they had Realm Ranks, the Trials of Atlantis expansion added Master Levels and then Darkness Rising expansion added Champion Levels.

If done correctly this can allow both horizontal and vertical progression while not having to much effect on your existing content.

just a thought, was woken up at 4am and can't get back to sleep

[Filthyn]

No, no and again: DO not raise the level cap.

There is absolutely no reason why people should level up more than necessarily. Imo, GW2 has the platform to expand within so many other areas /map/skills/races etc.

[ashleigh mcmahon]

I don't really see the need to raise the level cap since current level 80 content can be added to/adjusted anyway and I believe the scale at which you level in GW2 is supposed to be a none grind and fast. I think raising the level cap even higher could potentially deter would be players from the game, if they don't understand that leveling isn't as hard as other mmorpgs.

I would see reason to raise the level cap, such as maybe unlocking new selectable utility skills at higher levels, however I do not believe it to be neccesary although it would give people who have been level 80 for awhile something to aim for  - regardless of the fact it may only take a short while playing to reach the new cap.

[Lethality]

Again, they've already stated they WILL do this in expansions. Read the first post in the thread.

It doesn't make sense not to, as they've clearly established level-based progression in GW2, where as it was not in GW1. Not raising the cap would change the game.

[Ushgar]

I don't really care so much as to whether or not they should raise the level cap (I would usually lean to yes, though). So long as they make their decision for the cap to work, I will play it.

In other games I found an increased level cap somewhat fun to step away from end-game activities for a short while and enjoy the questing sequence again. Yet I haven't played enough games where the cap wasn't increased to say much about it. Overall I will most likely continue to play GW2 regardless of whether the cap is increased or not.

[Shizu]

Threads like this are one of the main reason behind the huge collection of terrible mainstream mmorpgs we got in the last years.
"Everyone does it, so it must be good and everyone else in the future should be doing the same".


Ten extra levels to grind do not equate to 'new content'. It's the opposite, actually. Publishers hide their inability to provide new, interesting content with a higher level cap. Usually with a copious use of copy/paste and reskins from previous areas.

There's a metric *ton of ways to provide new content: new areas, new quest-chains, new pvp objectives, new classes, incentives to roll a different character.
A higher level cap is possibly the least interesting option to introduce something new: if the game was bad, it remains bad, but the players are distracted for a while, until they reach the new cap and start asking from more.

If the game is good in the first place (and by good I mean it has a challenging and longevous end-game), it doesn't need a higher level cap.
If the players are happy with a game, they don't need an arbitrary, pointless new grind to stay interested.

If leveling to the new cap is the sole goal for adding new quests and content, the game is failing.

Edited by Shizu, 29 July 2012 - 02:02 PM.

[viespea]

Levels means nothing, personally , they can cap it or not, its just a PvE number.

[Glov]

I really don't see why the should add more levels.

If they REALLY want to add new stuff, then by all means, add new races and new lvling zones, along with new content, obviously.

I simply don't have to courage to write "Hell, make new classes". I remember VERY well how long it took ANet to "fit" the new classes into PvP.

[Primal Zed]

Shizu, on 29 July 2012 - 02:01 PM, said:

Threads like this are one of the main reason behind the huge collection of terrible mainstream mmorpgs we got in the last years.
"Everyone does it, so it must be good and everyone else in the future should be doing the same".


Ten extra levels to grind do not equate to 'new content'. It's the opposite, actually. Publishers hide their inability to provide new, interesting content with a higher level cap. Usually with a copious use of copy/paste and reskins from previous areas.

There's a metric *ton of ways to provide new content: new areas, new quest-chains, new pvp objectives, new classes, incentives to roll a different character.
A higher level cap is possibly the least interesting option to introduce something new: if the game was bad, it remains bad, but the players are distracted for a while, until they reach the new cap and start asking from more.

If the game is good in the first place (and by good I mean it has a challenging and longevous end-game), it doesn't need a higher level cap.
If the players are happy with a game, they don't need an arbitrary, pointless new grind to stay interested.

If leveling to the new cap is the sole goal for adding new quests and content, the game is failing.

No one's saying that levels are in GW2 just because every one else does it.  No one is saying that levels equal content.

The point is that levels provide a structure to the content that is added.  It's the same reason this game has levels to begin with: it's a way to guide players through the content available in order to create narrative and progression.

The game is already built around leveling through the content.  They didn't change to this from the GW1 system on a whim, it's because leveling is an excellent way to structure an otherwise open-world game.  Why would that not continue in the expansion?

[Mistah Eff]

I'd like to see it be 40 or so additional levels and a new continent or something, but to go to the next continent you have to already be level 80.

[Kichwas]

I am enough of a sucker that I will buy anyway.

But if they raise the level cap, I will start calling it 'World of Charrcraft" and referring to the company as Blizzanet... and assumed myself appropriately suckered. It will also be the moment where I go back to reviewing other MMOs to see if a better one is coming out.

WoW, GW1, and City of Heroes - the three biggest titles in the history of MMOs. Two of the three greatest MMOs ever, have never raised their cap. Only 1 of the three, WoW, has. Obviously, the level cap raising gimmick is not needed.

People still play City of Heroes, which came out in 2004 - and enjoy it quite a lot, and level alts all the time. But the level cap of 50 there has stayed there since 2004. This has not only not hurt the game, its helped it quite a lot as the company makes money hand over fist getting people to buy more alt slots and level again through the same old stuff, looking at new areas, or making RP characters which don't feel left behind by a goal line that keeps moving away...

What made GW1 such a great game was that once you hit max, your grind was DONE. From then on out, you could focus on story - and all of the old content was still good content.

What has ruined WoW is that the levels have kept on going up, making it HARDER AND HARDER for new folks to keep up. As a result, they have compensated by making leveling faster with XP-boosts... which means new toons MISS OUT on all that great story as they complete whole zones in a single 2 hour session, if not faster...

Raising the cap will mean we will need to be sped by old stuff... and while that's great if you're leveling alt number 27... it means your buddy who just joined gets ripped off.

Glov, on 29 July 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

I simply don't have to courage to write "Hell, make new classes". I remember VERY well how long it took ANet to "fit" the new classes into PvP.

You could add Dervish by making a set of scythe skills for the warrior. You could add paragon with a set of Javelin skills for Guardian. You could add Ritualist with a set of bo-staff skills for Necromancer (since I think staff is already in there, and I forget what the main dervish weapon was... but you get the idea). You could add some weapon to thief and get assassin.

No need for a new class, just expand some existing ones a tad, and balance is easier.

Of couse the problem would then be that people would too easily swap between being a master of the undead and a master of spirit guardians - two very different roles and play styles... so the idea may or may not be a good one... once we see GW2 live it'll be easier to see if this would be a problem or just a bit of added flare.

But yeah - new classes should be done with caution. Likewise new races. New levels: NO THANK YOU!!!

Edited by Kichwas, 01 August 2012 - 06:18 PM.

[SchurgeMarauder]

Kichwas, on 01 August 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

You could add Dervish by making a set of scythe skills for the warrior. You could add paragon with a set of Javelin skills for Guardian. You could add Ritualist with a set of bo-staff skills for Necromancer (since I think staff is already in there, and I forget what the main dervish weapon was... but you get the idea). You could add some weapon to thief and get assassin.

No need for a new class, just expand some existing ones a tad, and balance is easier.

Of couse the problem would then be that people would too easily swap between being a master of the undead and a master of spirit guardians - two very different roles and play styles... so the idea may or may not be a good one... once we see GW2 live it'll be easier to see if this would be a problem or just a bit of added flare.

But yeah - new classes should be done with caution. Likewise new races. New levels: NO THANK YOU!!!

I already figured that in future expansions that Arena.net would add new abilities to existing weapons that you can switch out like with utility skills. For instance, a warrior's greatsword could have a new '2' ability that you could use instead of Hundred Blades, it does instant damage but only half that of Hundred Blades (also half the cooldown), etc. You could only use this ability in the '2' slot however, so you couldn't have both Hundred Blades and the new skill (balance reasons).

EDIT: Also, who needs new races when you have Charr?

Edited by SchurgeMarauder, 01 August 2012 - 07:50 PM.

[Krazzar]

Kichwas, on 01 August 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

Spoiler

I am enough of a sucker that I will buy anyway.

But if they raise the level cap, I will start calling it 'World of Charrcraft" and referring to the company as Blizzanet... and assumed myself appropriately suckered. It will also be the moment where I go back to reviewing other MMOs to see if a better one is coming out.

WoW, GW1, and City of Heroes - the three biggest titles in the history of MMOs. Two of the three greatest MMOs ever, have never raised their cap. Only 1 of the three, WoW, has. Obviously, the level cap raising gimmick is not needed.

People still play City of Heroes, which came out in 2004 - and enjoy it quite a lot, and level alts all the time. But the level cap of 50 there has stayed there since 2004. This has not only not hurt the game, its helped it quite a lot as the company makes money hand over fist getting people to buy more alt slots and level again through the same old stuff, looking at new areas, or making RP characters which don't feel left behind by a goal line that keeps moving away...

1. What made GW1 such a great game was that once you hit max, your grind was DONE. From then on out, you could focus on story - and all of the old content was still good content.

What has ruined WoW is that the levels have kept on going up, making it HARDER AND HARDER for new folks to keep up. As a result, they have compensated by making leveling faster with XP-boosts... which means new toons MISS OUT on all that great story as they complete whole zones in a single 2 hour session, if not faster...

2. Raising the cap will mean we will need to be sped by old stuff... and while that's great if you're leveling alt number 27... it means your buddy who just joined gets ripped off.



You could add Dervish by making a set of scythe skills for the warrior. You could add paragon with a set of Javelin skills for Guardian. You could add Ritualist with a set of bo-staff skills for Necromancer (since I think staff is already in there, and I forget what the main dervish weapon was... but you get the idea). You could add some weapon to thief and get assassin.

No need for a new class, just expand some existing ones a tad, and balance is easier.

Of couse the problem would then be that people would too easily swap between being a master of the undead and a master of spirit guardians - two very different roles and play styles... so the idea may or may not be a good one... once we see GW2 live it'll be easier to see if this would be a problem or just a bit of added flare.

But yeah - new classes should be done with caution. Likewise new races. New levels: NO THANK YOU!!!

1. Titles added in every GW1 expansion pack added more "grind", aka progression. As time went on each expansion pack focused on title progression more and more.

2. The point of the game is your personal experiences, you will focus on the things you want to focus on and pick the pace you want. Expansion packs will segregate players between those that have it and those that don't regardless of level and with downscalilng you can always play with your friends without wrecking everything effortlessly.

Levels are not a replacement for other progression, they are a structure and reinforcement of all kinds of progression. The only thing levels can do on their own is gate content and the alternatives methods of gating are more restrictive than levels.

Edited by Krazzar, 01 August 2012 - 08:35 PM.

[Glov]

Kichwas, on 01 August 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

You could add Dervish by making a set of scythe skills for the warrior. You could add paragon with a set of Javelin skills for Guardian. You could add Ritualist with a set of bo-staff skills for Necromancer (since I think staff is already in there, and I forget what the main dervish weapon was... but you get the idea). You could add some weapon to thief and get assassin.

No need for a new class, just expand some existing ones a tad, and balance is easier.

Of couse the problem would then be that people would too easily swap between being a master of the undead and a master of spirit guardians - two very different roles and play styles... so the idea may or may not be a good one... once we see GW2 live it'll be easier to see if this would be a problem or just a bit of added flare.

But yeah - new classes should be done with caution. Likewise new races. New levels: NO THANK YOU!!!

Good point for Paragon/Dervish classes, but that only occurs because they are rip-offs from Warriors, ever since GW1. The enchantments from Dervishes'd have to be split into other professions, though.
Thiefs already "are" assassins.

Ritualists, on the other hand, are pretty far from our current Necromancers. We only have spirits (turrets), on engineerings, and we'd need special unstrippable buffs - not to mention the ability to deal a heckton of damage and, at the same time, the same amount of healing.