What's the point of extended leveling for PvE
#1
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:02 AM
1. Everyone will be evenly level in PvP so levels don't matter here.
2. There will be about a bazillion levels for PvE.
GW had it right after Proph. You do a few key quests, you move on to the next mission, and repeat until the last mission,
So why screw around with a system that's working?
Is it to keep people from finishing the game in one or two days? Who cares if someone blows through the game in a day? I don't, I plod along at my own pace and am happy with it. So why force me to plod along even more because Mr. QQ had to run through the game at full speed and then cried that the game was over? To me the problem is Mr. QQ. GW works for most people so this doesn't seem to be enough to change things.
Some people propose that desipte there being half a million levels the levels don't really matter because the game is still at the same pace as the old ones.
Well if that's the case why bother taking the time and resources to add the extra levelsand balance not only them but the mobs for that area as well? In GW after a point you only had to balance the mobs against one level of player: level 20. So with factions and NF it was pretty easy to make sure the game was properly balance for the level that everyone was at.
You could say it was because there are grindaholics and they need their grind. GW1 was supposed to be the ungrind-game (which Anet forgot). It worked perfectly well without grind. You quested, you did missions, and you moved on until the end without having to worry about your level. Yet despite being good enough to sell millions of games, Anet wanted to make the game worse.
Can anyone help me understand why?
#2
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:04 AM
#3
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:06 AM
#4
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:08 AM
Following that, the only information we had on leveling was from early 07, the planingstage in which they spoke of possibly unlimeted levels with a low attribute cap or no levels at all.
But yeah. after having played 3 chapters/expansions with max level characters, I see no reason for levels at all.
Just make some attribute quests early on in the tut and let that be it.
Edited by Lihinel, 29 August 2009 - 12:12 AM.
#5
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:11 AM
#6
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:16 AM
Quote
#7
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:17 AM
#8
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:17 AM
This will lead to levels being ust showing off how much you grinded.
#9
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:20 AM
It would be completly stupid to set a non cosmetic high level cap when the whole world is open and every quest is public, as it would completly destroy replayability of all non max level public quests/events and therefore reduce the avaible endgame content drasticly.
#10
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:28 AM
This placed emphasis on the skill>time and allowed one to enjoy the highest level content if they could run certain builds.
Either they raise the level cap and raise the progression speed to accordingly, or raise it and force us to have level grind. The former makes raising the cap pointless except to make idiot players feel leet, cause "OMG NUB IM 20 LEVELS HIGHER THAN YOU." The latter would completely contradict skill>time.
So either way, its pretty unnecessary and so they must be going the WoWay.
#11
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:41 AM
also Arenanet have said they are raising the level cap but not to the point that required grinding.
so you wont be forced to plod along at all, just do what you do now for longer.
#12
Posted 29 August 2009 - 12:55 AM
#13
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:00 AM
I pwnd U said:
I definitely hope that the level cap doesn't affect missions and so forth. What I mean by that is I can move through the storyline effectively without having to kill 50 charr shaman babies on the side.
#14
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:01 AM
Your character should not grow more powerful just because you play more. Level is a quantative way of showing progression, but it is not an accurate indicator of skill, which it is almost ALWAYS used as when there is a large grind process.
Id rather not be told I can't raid or w/e WoW like features will be in GW2, because I haven't hit "max level" even if that level doesn't actually function for anything other than vanity. If it is more important than vanity, then it will be even worse. GLF lv 40,50,(whatever max level is) Norn Warrior ONLY! And the group discrimination just got worse.
Edited by Shoyon456, 29 August 2009 - 01:04 AM.
#15
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:09 AM
And seriously, I see the end game argument touted out every time an MMO comes out. A true end game is that there is an end, not some never ending pile of tiers and dungeons to continually conquer. The term itself is an oxymoron.
#16
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:13 AM
The challenge I see that is that you can play less of the game (runners, etc.) to get to the end boss/final event much faster. And, even after you beat the game, there's still stuff to do. So when does it end?
I personally disliked the lack of progression past level 20, which in my first time, I hit in Prophecies somewhere in Maguuma Jungle. It was quite anti-climactic.
Do I want to have to go another 50 levels after reaching the end of GW2? No. I think that it's better than "peaking" too soon, though, but I'll live with whatever they give me. Especially since those extra levels are likely to mean nothing but some bright pixels on my monitor.
#17
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:15 AM
#18
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:23 AM
In the case of no level system, GW2 will be basically the same as GW1 without the numbers.
In the case of infinite (or high) levels, GW2 will be basically the same as GW1 with the numbers.
It sounds to me like aNet is assessing the issue with the consideration that levels are just numbers.
What they do with the status and advancing system is what's going to really matter, regardless of whether or not they include leveling.
#19
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:28 AM
While the monsters needed to increase in difficulty, the players always stayed the same. To try and counter that, they had to use things like pve skills and consumables to even the playing field.
Unfortunately those items and skills can be used in areas that weren't designed for them, and this resulted in power creep and balance issues.
There's also a sense of progression and accomplishment with gaining levels rather than simply skill points. i mean when you hit 20 XP is basically useless.
I do think its a good idea to have PvP on a fixed level.
Edited by slowerpoke, 29 August 2009 - 01:31 AM.
#20
Posted 29 August 2009 - 01:54 AM
Personally I would think they aren't balancing for higher levels either. There will still likely be a low ceiling for PVE monsters, because that makes WAY more sense than splintering the playerbase tons. Maybe it will even be like Factions and NF where you immediately train up to that ceiling in the starter area, then the whole world is basically open.
#21
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:04 AM
#22
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:11 AM
Edited by slowerpoke, 29 August 2009 - 02:16 AM.
#23
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:16 AM
#24
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:17 AM
Why must there be 10-30 "Elite" dungeons and zones explicitly for max level characters?
The only reason I want a high level cap is for more content. Everyone cry's and moans about the lack of new content in OGW atm. If there is a level 100 cap all this means is that guild wars 2 can continue at a nice pace but be 5 times longer or have 5 times as much content if you will. Why must everyone feel the need to max out their level before they enjoy high end areas?
My main character hit level 20 about 2 weeks after I purchased guild wars and I still play the character after 4 years. What is the point of having 37,000,000 experience if you max your level at 140,000 xp?
To the folks that say, "Ppl will be all... 'I AM LEVEL 1251 AND YOU ARE ONLY LEVEL 35! NOOB.'" Are you serious?!? Do these comments really hit home so easily that you become offended and bitter toward the game and its players? Are you really so easily offended by immature players? If so, I am sorry, but I hate the fact that I see no personal progression past week 2 of a game I have played for 4 years.
Now I am fine if max character power is met at say... 30 or 40, but we should at least be able to show our theoretical level past the power cap. For example, maximum attributes achieved at level 40, no more HP or MP or w/e is given to the player, but as you grow in experience your level will still raise to a maximum of 1,000. Some players will claim level segregation, but really? I think some people need to stop caring so much about what people think and enjoy the game.
#25
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:21 AM
#26
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:27 AM
A quick training and then split the PvE and PvP skill changes even. In general there is no need for high levels.
#27
Posted 29 August 2009 - 02:53 AM
#28
Posted 29 August 2009 - 03:05 AM
Shoyon456 said:
Your character should not grow more powerful just because you play more. Level is a quantative way of showing progression, but it is not an accurate indicator of skill, which it is almost ALWAYS used as when there is a large grind process.
Id rather not be told I can't raid or w/e WoW like features will be in GW2, because I haven't hit "max level" even if that level doesn't actually function for anything other than vanity. If it is more important than vanity, then it will be even worse. GLF lv 40,50,(whatever max level is) Norn Warrior ONLY! And the group discrimination just got worse.
Except skill isn't greater than time, in GW1 PvE. There was so little 'skill' involved that you couldn't set yourself apart from anyone else.
#29
Posted 29 August 2009 - 03:06 AM
I think there is a way to SHOW progression without having some numerical ranking. Why not just have titles or badges for the things you do.
Some titles or badges would come with bonuses and the more elite titles/badges would have no bonuses at all, it would merely show your progression.
For example kill 500 of Centaur and you get "Hunter" title/badge. You kill 1000 of Centaur and you get a "Slayer" title/badge along with a minor buff in a particular zone. You could also kill 5000 of those Centaur and get "Destroyer" title/badge with no bonus, just a title that shows your elitism and the titles would continue to be cosmetically added the more xp (kills) you gain.
Titles should go beyond the initial goal of receiving the bonus. The goals to meet the bonus requirements should be fairly reasonable a single player to obtain.
The biggest problem with the current title system is people are feeling the peaking point is when you max out a title. It shouldn't feel like that. The peaking point (bonus) should come right in the middle. Any other xp (kills) gain after that should go towards cosmetic titles that show off your vast experience with GW2.
Edited by Craywulf, 29 August 2009 - 03:10 AM.
#30
Posted 29 August 2009 - 03:15 AM









