577 replies to this topic

[Dirame]

chullster, on 18 February 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

Yes.

Leveling has always been the most boring part of GW1 and 2 and still is. No matter what they do, they cannot change the fact I don't have all my attribute points or maximum stats available before 80, so there's no point planning any build, anything looks wise or buying/crafting nice armour until you're 80, thus it's a waste of time.

Your way of thinking about the game is intriguing. Personally, I've been able to plan builds as I level. When I played my Guardian, I focused on a block-based build which allowed me to stack might while blocking and also burn while blocking and that gave me character that could face of against a champion and win. When I got to 80 I changed to a burst build.

Now I'm play my Elementalist and I'm measuring my options between staff and dual daggers. There is building as you level, it's just your opinion when it comes to that whole rigmaroo.

And also I crafted most of the weapons I used as I leveled so yea, different strokes for different folks.

[XPhiler]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

Wheerever the hell I want, that's the point

Fine. Where is this point you wanted to go and leveling prevented you from going? is it the same story like raspberry jam? IE he wanted to start out in a level 8 area instead of a level 3 area just for the sake of argument and nothing else?

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

No, I don't think so (because new ANet isn't old ANet), but I would like if it happened in that way.

Probably a mix between GW1 (for the itemization model, general setting, focus on party-oriented gameplay and many other things) and EVE (for the hugely player driven economy, and the freedom to do any stupid thing you like, anything from attacking ships in hi sec space to starting your own bank and then running away with all the money), possibly with the inclusion of a working deep world system (like the one intended for UO). And either no levels, or infinite levels that quickly approach a constant power level (as asymptote), as I described earlier in this thread. How does that sound to you?

then what exactly do you expect a lower level cap will bring to the game?

So essentially what you're saying is you dont like any game?

[raspberry jam]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

Fine. Where is this point you wanted to go and leveling prevented you from going? is it the same story like raspberry jam? IE he wanted to start out in a level 8 area instead of a level 3 area just for the sake of argument and nothing else?

I'm a girl you mongrel, and I was just exploring when some level 8 bandit ambushed me for no reason other than being there to prevent people from going that path before doing what ANet thought they should be doing before being allowed there.

[Thaddeuz]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

So essentially what you're saying is you dont like any game?

Its not because rasberry jam was explaining what would be the best MMO for her that she don't like any game. I pretty much agree with her on that, (for once ). A mix of GW1 and EVE would be awesome.

The point of having low cap level or no level at all is mainly for alts (at least for me). I liked leveling my first character and going into the story, doing some of the quest (other are just boring). But after that, i tried to found the more efficient way to level my others character as fast as i can because I only wanted to do end-game with these character. Sure i did the story line with each race, and each order and after that, its all the same.

[XPhiler]

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

I'm a girl you mongrel, and I was just exploring when some level 8 bandit ambushed me for no reason other than being there to prevent people from going that path before doing what ANet thought they should be doing before being allowed there.

apologies didnt mean to offend you.

Not really, you were not ambushed for no reason, you were ambushed because you invaded the bandits territory and you got killed because you were not ready for that encounter. The same situations exists in every single game out there. In Gw1 the same situation could happen even once you reach max level. Unless one cheated and found before hand what an encounter involved and thus prepared a counter build in advanced I am sure there were times where you lacked the correct build for a particular situation resulting in defeat. In some cases it was as simple as changing the build while in other cases you had to go buy the missing skill or capture it.

[XPhiler]

Thaddeuz, on 19 February 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Its not because rasberry jam was explaining what would be the best MMO for her that she don't like any game. I pretty much agree with her on that, (for once ). A mix of GW1 and EVE would be awesome.

The point of having low cap level or no level at all is mainly for alts (at least for me). I liked leveling my first character and going into the story, doing some of the quest (other are just boring). But after that, i tried to found the more efficient way to level my others character as fast as i can because I only wanted to do end-game with these character. Sure i did the story line with each race, and each order and after that, its all the same.

I agree a mix of gw1 and eve would be awesome  I would also add Gw2 dynamic Events and a mini game system for crafting like vanguard and eq2 use and a diplomacy system like vanguard has for evolving dialog with npcs and more stuff... But the question was not what does a perfect MMO look like, the question was which was her favorite MMO to compare what elements make this MMO interesting and Gw2 boring.

if you did each story of each race / each order / each path it would mean you level 6 characters to max level. If you want to level more then 6 characters fine you'll have to repeat a one of those 6 paths lvl 30+ and You'll have to repeat content 100% granted but seriously lets be objective here no game can do unlimited unique story for alts. As for endgame content, what end game content specifically are you after?

[Minion]

Krazzar, on 19 February 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

I was wondering when you would run out of original thoughts and have to defer to personal attacks. I was expecting at least a couple more posts. Oh well. If you were wondering, yes, the game still is interesting after 7 level 80s worth of playing, although playing with friends from time to time doesn't hurt.

It's a shame you lack basic comprehension skills, because it is plain to see I was not targeting the dementia tag at you or anyone in particular, merely the theoretical person who enjoys exploring the same zone time and time again. It's not my fault if you attribute this to yourself. If you did, it's more of a masochistic attack... Can't help you there.

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

a relatively new player should not be artificially restricted from taking on any challenge that the player can handle.

A thousand times this. This is what I was trying to say, but you made the point better. Well said.

[Volkon]

Serris, on 18 February 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

as the title asks, do you think the maximum level cap should have been level 20 in guildwars 2?
you'd get to level 20 at the same rate you get to level 20 now. only all maps past level 20 are scaled to fit for level 20s.

i think it would have made a lot of sense, and given a greater sense of "endgame is what you do while you're levelling". it would also fix looting, since you'd have almost a whole world to explore and do DEs in, instead of now orr and dragons.

what are your thoughts?

No, but mainly because the whole game is balanced around 80. The number of skill points, the zones and progression, it all ties to 80 quite well. Sure, they could have done it all differently balanced around 20 no doubt, but this is working fine. Of course there's the old GW1 nostalgia, but this isn't broken, no need to speculate on them fixing it.

[XPhiler]

Minion, on 19 February 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

A thousand times this. This is what I was trying to say, but you made the point better. Well said.

I am sorry but I don't agree. No matter how you look at it its essential a new player is artificially blocked from taking on any challenge. If at level 1 you could go farm Orr how many player do you think would have skipped 24 out of the 25 zones altogether and complained there is nothing to do before head start was even finished?

[Serris]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

let me ask you this hypothetical scenario, level cap is 20 as you wanted, you finished queensdale and just reached level 20 where would you go next in order?

wherever i feel like going maybe south of LA or something.

Volkon, on 19 February 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

No, but mainly because the whole game is balanced around 80. The number of skill points, the zones and progression, it all ties to 80 quite well. Sure, they could have done it all differently balanced around 20 no doubt, but this is working fine. Of course there's the old GW1 nostalgia, but this isn't broken, no need to speculate on them fixing it.

that's one of my points. levelling gives you nearly enough skillpoints to unlock all skills, practically killing all skill progression. if levelling stopped at 20 (but you still had the repeating levels like gw1), you would still be unlocking new skills after you hit max cap (thus horizontal progression, instead of vertical)

[Thaddeuz]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

if you did each story of each race / each order / each path it would mean you level 6 characters to max level. If you want to level more then 6 characters fine you'll have to repeat a one of those 6 paths lvl 30+ and You'll have to repeat content 100% granted but seriously lets be objective here no game can do unlimited unique story for alts. As for endgame content, what end game content specifically are you after?

Actually for each race (5) you need to go up to level 30. For each order (3) you need to go up to level 61. And you need at least 1 character up to level 80 to do the pact story line (which is the same for every races/orders combination. So you would only need to have 1 level 80, 2 level 61 and 2 level 30 to complete all the story possible. Personally i have 5 level 80.

As for the endgame. When I create a new character its for a new gameplay, new profession, trying different build, creating a awesome looking character, while using these different character in WvW, Dungeon and Fractal. I can do the actual engame with only 1 character, i just like to create new ones or different class and gamaplay. But i need to level up these character up to level 80 before i can. That is not so bad, i mean i still enjoy the game.

[XPhiler]

Serris, on 19 February 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

wherever i feel like going maybe south of LA or something.

With all due respect but I think its pretty clear based on you mentioning no specific location that you dont really have this issue its more like just a hypothetical issue.

Dont get me wrong I agree that a having the entire open world to choose from from level 1 sounds great on paper. But based on players actions (the systematic movement of Orr farming as events where nerfed, the mass migration of players to FoTM once that became the most profitable content etc...) that if you do that players are just going to skip all your content and flock to what is most profitable. In this regard I personally believe players need to be defended from themselves.

Yes at level 1 you cannot venture south of LA, you're 100% right. But at level 1 you have ~1/5 of 5 different zones open to you. doing that 1/5 content will open the next 1/5 and it will grow exceptionally. Finishing the first zone opens another 4, finishing a zone after that increases the count to 9 zones open to you etc..  In no way you're being closed in a cage. compared to other MMOs and I would argue that this includes Gw1 too you're as free as you can get in terms of choices where to go !

Thaddeuz, on 19 February 2013 - 01:54 PM, said:

Actually for each race (5) you need to go up to level 30. For each order (3) you need to go up to level 61. And you need at least 1 character up to level 80 to do the pact story line (which is the same for every races/orders combination. So you would only need to have 1 level 80, 2 level 61 and 2 level 30 to complete all the story possible. Personally i have 5 level 80.

As for the endgame. When I create a new character its for a new gameplay, new profession, trying different build, creating a awesome looking character, while using these different character in WvW, Dungeon and Fractal. I can do the actual engame with only 1 character, i just like to create new ones or different class and gamaplay. But i need to level up these character up to level 80 before i can. That is not so bad, i mean i still enjoy the game.

I was seeing it from the point of view of leveling your character rather then doing every possible story. If you wanted to do every possible storyline without regards to leveling up you'd need to level 15 characters to level 30 and that alone will take quite a long while. then 6 of those you'd need to take to level 60 and then 2 to level 80

Correct me If I am wrong but it seems to me you're mostly interested in the character's mechanic, how they play. Wouldnt you still be enjoying that while leveling up?

[raspberry jam]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

then what exactly do you expect a lower level cap will bring to the game?

So essentially what you're saying is you dont like any game?

There is no way to reasonably lower the level cap in the existing GW2.

I like lots of games.

[Elcee]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

Fine. Where is this point you wanted to go and leveling prevented you from going? is it the same story like raspberry jam? IE he wanted to start out in a level 8 area instead of a level 3 area just for the sake of argument and nothing else?

You're missing the point I'm making entirely. The point is if most of the content was level 20 when the cap is 20, you could have gone exploring anywhere you want to. I could have explored all over the place and stumbled across Blazeridge Steppes, possibly my favorite zone in the game, or one of the other zones that were pretty interesting like Mount Maelstrom.

Yes, it's hypothetical, but it could have worked out so much better and maybe Anet will think about that in their next game.

Edited by Elcee, 19 February 2013 - 02:53 PM.

[Lordkrall]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

You're missing the point I'm making entirely. The point is if most of the content was level 20 when the cap is 20, you could have gone exploring anywhere you want to. I could have explored all over the place and stumbled across Blazeridge Steppes, possibly my favorite zone in the game, or one of the other zones that were pretty interesting like Mount Maelstrom.

Yes, it's hypothetical, but it could have worked out so much better and maybe Anet will think about that in their next game.

And yet in GW1 you could not do that.
There where quite a bit of areas that were completely locked down even after you got to lvl 20, unless you had done certain parts of the story.

In GW2 it actually IS possible to run to Orr at lvl 2, while you could not get to Ring of Fire in GW1 without doing parts of the story.

[XPhiler]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

You're missing the point I'm making entirely. The point is if most of the content was level 20 when the cap is 20, you could have gone exploring anywhere you want to. I could have explored all over the place and stumbled across Blazeridge Steppes, possibly my favorite zone in the game, or one of the other zones that were pretty interesting like Mount Maelstrom.

Yes, it's hypothetical, but it could have worked out so much better and maybe Anet will think about that in their next game.

you're missing my point which is if you want to explore all the world you're going to explore all the world the level might prevent certain combinations on how you can go about that but nothing else. I mean if you want to explore without levels you could start from Orr and finish in Queensdale sure but how it is right now you can still visit every single one of the 25 zones. On the other hand what you're saying IE that with no levels you might stumble across Mount Maelstrom makes me think (maybe I am completely off mark in which case I apologize in advanced)  that you're the type of play that if you're level 80 you will not visit a level 30 zone in which case having no levels in my opinion makes that situation worst not better. why? because you'll go towards what you seek at level 80 right now. If its better reward, or higher difficulty whatever levels or not that disparity will still be there. Difference is right now you need to experiance a bit of the low level areas with no levels you could go straight for what you want the most and never leave there.

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

There is no way to reasonably lower the level cap in the existing GW2.

I like lots of games.

pehaps there is no reasonable way to lower the level cap but I would argue you can still achieve what you want to achieve within a level 80 mechanic if one wanted to.

You want freedom to travel where ever? upscaling
you want harder content? thats a balancing issue not a leveling issue

What I am trying to say I dont believe that what we're discussing are limitations because of the level 80 system. They're design choices that are designed specifically to address issues such as people rushing at level 1 to the most rewarding content in the game.

[raspberry jam]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

apologies didnt mean to offend you.

Not really, you were not ambushed for no reason, you were ambushed because you invaded the bandits territory and you got killed because you were not ready for that encounter. The same situations exists in every single game out there. In Gw1 the same situation could happen even once you reach max level. Unless one cheated and found before hand what an encounter involved and thus prepared a counter build in advanced I am sure there were times where you lacked the correct build for a particular situation resulting in defeat. In some cases it was as simple as changing the build while in other cases you had to go buy the missing skill or capture it.

But the bandit only spammed simple attacks until I was dead (which did not take long). I as a player was ready for it in every way. My character on the other hand for some reason had to do meaningless and mostly unrelated things, such as picking apples, doing jumping puzzles, and, which is the one related thing, fighting bandits identical to (but for some magical reason much weaker than) the one that killed me.

[rukia]

Nah, the theme is <nothing from GW1 is allowed in GW2>

[Elcee]

Lordkrall, on 19 February 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

And yet in GW1 you could not do that.
There where quite a bit of areas that were completely locked down even after you got to lvl 20, unless you had done certain parts of the story.

In GW2 it actually IS possible to run to Orr at lvl 2, while you could not get to Ring of Fire in GW1 without doing parts of the story.

That's an awful comparison. GW1 was an instanced game, not an open-world one. You can get to the end-game areas in both at level 2 if you got run but that has absolutely nothing at all with exploring and actually playing the content.

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

you're missing my point which is if you want to explore all the world you're going to explore all the world the level might prevent certain combinations on how you can go about that but nothing else. I mean if you want to explore without levels you could start from Orr and finish in Queensdale sure but how it is right now you can still visit every single one of the 25 zones. On the other hand what you're saying IE that with no levels you might stumble across Mount Maelstrom makes me think (maybe I am completely off mark in which case I apologize in advanced)  that you're the type of play that if you're level 80 you will not visit a level 30 zone in which case having no levels in my opinion makes that situation worst not better. why? because you'll go towards what you seek at level 80 right now. If its better reward, or higher difficulty whatever levels or not that disparity will still be there. Difference is right now you need to experiance a bit of the low level areas with no levels you could go straight for what you want the most and never leave there.

There wouldn't be high level areas like that relative to the rest of the game. There would of course be lower leveled starting areas, but the point is places like Mount Maelstrom/Blazeridge Steppes would be the same as somewhere like Harathi Hinterlands or however the hell you spell that one centaur zone. I didn't like those zones for the rewards, I liked them because they were cool places to explore and complete. You're right in that I didn't really play the lower level areas, but part of that's because so many of the 30-45ish zones were completely friggin' empty with everyone in Orr and Fractals.

Edited by Elcee, 19 February 2013 - 03:15 PM.

[Lordkrall]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

That's an awful comparison. GW1 was an instanced game, not an open-world one. You can get to the end-game areas in both at level 2 if you got run but that has absolutely nothing at all with exploring and actually playing the content.

Actually you couldn't. Even if you see the end game areas as FoW/DoA/UW, seeing as those needed you to be at a certain part of the story. And some areas in especially Prophecies were completely impossible to even get to without leveling up and doing the story, while in GW2 it is very possible to run straight to Orr and go into the Arah Dungeon if you wish.

[raspberry jam]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 03:02 PM, said:

pehaps there is no reasonable way to lower the level cap but I would argue you can still achieve what you want to achieve within a level 80 mechanic if one wanted to.

You want freedom to travel where ever? upscaling
you want harder content? thats a balancing issue not a leveling issue

What I am trying to say I dont believe that what we're discussing are limitations because of the level 80 system. They're design choices that are designed specifically to address issues such as people rushing at level 1 to the most rewarding content in the game.

Scaling both up and down would mean that levels would be completely meaningless and could be removed - if the scaling was done right. Of course it isn't in GW2, there are a lot of irregularities.

There are many ways of ensuring that "level 1", as in completely new characters, rush to the final boss. One way would be to make the final boss actually challenging. But the main way is to put things in the way, things that are challenges in themselves. Take a classic dungeon for example, in a random game, there is nothing to prevent you from going to the final boss and killing him, in fact that's what the dungeon is about: you traversing it to reach the final boss. The thing that makes it take 2 hours or whatever is the fact that the dungeon is filled with all kinds of enemies that needs to be defeated before you reach the boss.

Then of course there are narrative elements to prevent a new character from reaching the final boss. For example you might need to do certain things, talk to certain NPCs and so on, to unlock access to the final boss. An example is GW1 Prophecies: to reach the lich, you must do certain things, for example you absolutely must defend Thunderhead Keep from a siege.

Before you derp up again, no, a limiting challenge is not the same thing as a group of open-world quests that unlock part of a level restriction.

rukia, on 19 February 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

Nah, the theme is <nothing from GW1 is allowed in GW2>

QFT. They even changed the vocabulary from GW1. Tell me why gold coins are suddenly so much more valuable in GW2 than in GW1, and where are platinum coins? Why is "customized" changed to "soulbound"? And so on.

[Elcee]

Lordkrall, on 19 February 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

Actually you couldn't. Even if you see the end game areas as FoW/DoA/UW, seeing as those needed you to be at a certain part of the story. And some areas in especially Prophecies were completely impossible to even get to without leveling up and doing the story, while in GW2 it is very possible to run straight to Orr and go into the Arah Dungeon if you wish.

When I said end-game area I meant the Ring of Fire chain, I probably should have clarified that. You ended up being level 5 or so if you ascended. Either way, it's still meaningless. Great, you can get to Arah at like level 2. Are you going to actually fight in it? If not, then what does that whole example have to do with anything?

Edited by Elcee, 19 February 2013 - 03:22 PM.

[Lordkrall]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

When I said end-game area I meant the Ring of Fire chain, I probably should have clarified that. You ended up being level 5 or so if you ascended. Either way, it's still meaningless. Great, you can get to Arah at like level 2. Are you going to actually fight in it? If not, then what does that whole example have to do with anything?

And in order to get to Ring of Fire you needed to complete quite a few missions, and would have been at around lvl 20 when you got there.

You seems to think that you could explore more in GW1 than you can in GW2 at low level, that is quite clearly not correct, seeing as you are mechanically locked out of areas of the game, which is not the case in GW2.

[Ritualist]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

That's an awful comparison. GW1 was an instanced game, not an open-world one. You can get to the end-game areas in both at level 2 if you got run but that has absolutely nothing at all with exploring and actually playing the content.

More importantly, GW1 had flaws. Gating content was a dumb-ass decision in GW1 and it is a dumb-ass decision in GW2.

[Elcee]

Lordkrall, on 19 February 2013 - 03:26 PM, said:

And in order to get to Ring of Fire you needed to complete quite a few missions, and would have been at around lvl 20 when you got there.

You seems to think that you could explore more in GW1 than you can in GW2 at low level, that is quite clearly not correct, seeing as you are mechanically locked out of areas of the game, which is not the case in GW2.

Okay:
1)You could get to Ember Light camp at level 2 by getting run to and through THK. Getting to level 1 was impossible because of the experience you had to get along the way.
2)No, no I did not say that. I was the making the OPPOSITE point that GW1 was instanced and gated so by its design it didn't let you do a whole buttload of exploring. Although, to be fair, there was a pretty decent amount of exploring you could do in Prophecies. That's (part of) why I hated Factions so much, it took gating to the extreme, while Nightfall and especially EOTN toned it down some. GW2 is an open world but doesn't give you nearly as much flexibility as you would think for a game that was hyped and advertised for being open world and explorable. They should be held to two different standards.

Edited by Elcee, 19 February 2013 - 03:34 PM.

[raspberry jam]

Ritualist, on 19 February 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

More importantly, GW1 had flaws. Gating content was a dumb-ass decision in GW1 and it is a dumb-ass decision in GW2.

Gating certain content is required to build a comprehensible narrative, though.

[Thaddeuz]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 02:02 PM, said:

Correct me If I am wrong but it seems to me you're mostly interested in the character's mechanic, how they play. Wouldnt you still be enjoying that while leveling up?

Yes and no. I learn how each character play while i'm leveling, but only a part of it. Several character play differently in low level and in high level. For exemple, if you wanna try to do a Necromancer Wellomancer you have to wait until level 60 because you need to put a lot of point in Blood Magic. The same thing with my Death Shroud Power Build where i need 30pts in Soul Reaping. I don't say that you cannot play those things in lower level, but you may found those build really bad because you don't have access to the right trait at the moment. In addition, I don't find the Open World challenging or rewarding enough to repeat it like i do with fractal, dungeon or WvW.

[XPhiler]

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

But the bandit only spammed simple attacks until I was dead (which did not take long). I as a player was ready for it in every way. My character on the other hand for some reason had to do meaningless and mostly unrelated things, such as picking apples, doing jumping puzzles, and, which is the one related thing, fighting bandits identical to (but for some magical reason much weaker than) the one that killed me.

You can look at things in many different ways. A soldier with a gun is arguably not really any different then  a person with no training and a gun yet a soldier could in most likeliness take a might bigger force then the untrained man. Experiance provides an edge. Those two bandits arent identical, one of them is more experienced then the other.

fighting the inexperienced bandits teaches you how bandits with those weapons behave making you better at it. Jumping puzzles teach you reflexes and train you to be more agile. Apples keep you in peak condition by keeping the doctor away. In any case its all game mechanics to give you an edge in combat.

If you want realism no amount of training spells or skills can save you from a dragon that he has to do is fly above you to turn you into an undead or a dragon that can freeze you death etc... it works both ways!

[XPhiler]

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

That's an awful comparison. GW1 was an instanced game, not an open-world one. You can get to the end-game areas in both at level 2 if you got run but that has absolutely nothing at all with exploring and actually playing the content.



There wouldn't be high level areas like that relative to the rest of the game. There would of course be lower leveled starting areas, but the point is places like Mount Maelstrom/Blazeridge Steppes would be the same as somewhere like Harathi Hinterlands or however the hell you spell that one centaur zone. I didn't like those zones for the rewards, I liked them because they were cool places to explore and complete. You're right in that I didn't really play the lower level areas, but part of that's because so many of the 30-45ish zones were completely friggin' empty with everyone in Orr and Fractals.

Fine pick any open world game that at level 1 allows you to roam freely and safely a max level area. Dont know a single one personally.

If those zones where completely empty even though every single player on your server was forced to be for a while level 30 - 45 do you really think making everyone level 80 from the first second would have made them more populated? Fact is Excluding reward to a degree there is no difference in playing in a level 80 zone or a level 30 zone. They both have cool story, you progress in both zones and they both equally fun. Stories arent even more epic the higher level. I mean if I had to choose between forgegorge and the Harathi Hinterlands wouldnt you agree that zone wide war the centaurs have with the humans is more epic then the challenges the kodan face? I am sorry but apart from rewards which are indeed a bit smaller there is no reason why a level 80 zone is more enticing then a level 30 zone. Funny thing is people keep mentioning how Gw1 did it right. In Gw2 playing in a level 30 zone might give you 1/3 - 1/5 of the rewards you get in a level 80 zone but in gw1 playing any open world zone gave you way less then 1/5 the reward you would get doing dungeons, specific missions or elite areas.

[Elcee]

XPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Fine pick any open world game that at level 1 allows you to roam freely and safely a max level area. Dont know a single one personally.

Okay, I think this right here shows that you aren't comprehending a damn thing I'm saying and you're just fighting a strawman. I explicitly said:

Elcee, on 19 February 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

There wouldn't be high level areas like that relative to the rest of the game. There would of course be lower leveled starting areas,

You guys are the ones who brought up the level 1 thing, not me. It's a totally idiotic, irrelavent thing to talk about and I was putting it to rest.

The rewards for most of the areas would be the same. Yes, there will sometimes be a certain "efficient" way that people will try to abuse, but those can be ironed out such that the rewards for doing something you enjoy aren't that much different from the people grinding a certain "dynamic" event.