Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * * - - 19 votes

Should the cap have been level 20?


  • Please log in to reply
577 replies to this topic

#181 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3316 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:12 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

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

But, did they build a comprehensible narrative? ;)
As I bitched here (and as you mentioned above):
http://www.guildwars...y-too-optional/
the gating in GW2 seems to be mostly about stopping the player from progressing. This is the means and the goal of gating. It's not Nightfall/Factions-like gating, where you were gated to force the player to experience the story, you are simply gated so that you don't finish the game too fast.

#182 Lordkrall

Lordkrall

    Legion Commander

  • Members
  • 5370 posts
  • Location:Sweden
  • Profession:Warrior
  • Server:Aurora Glade

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:13 PM

View PostRitualist, on 19 February 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

But, did they build a comprehensible narrative? ;)
As I bitched here (and as you mentioned above):
http://www.guildwars...y-too-optional/
the gating in GW2 seems to be mostly about stopping the player from progressing. This is the means and the goal of gating. It's not Nightfall/Factions-like gating, where you were gated to force the player to experience the story, you are simply gated so that you don't finish the game too fast.

Indeed, gating you behind reputation-grind did force you to experience the story. Right?

#183 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:15 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

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.

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.

How would you make the final boss challenging exactly? you mean using simple game mechanics like giving that boss attacks you have to dodge, heal etc..? cause if thats so all you will achieve is it will take a couple of days for all those people who rushed to the final boss to kill him. I am sure you're not expecting people to rush to the final boss try him/her once fail and decide to go do "lower level content" just to learn the game right?

Actual plenty of dungeons have mechanisms in place to prevent just that. Mechanics like you have to defeat a mini boss before the next one spawns. Certain conditions needs to be met before you can progress. Door that will not open until you clear a room etc... Do you really think if you had to do a circular dungeon with the last boss being in a room behind the one you start  in which you were totally free to go the moment you start the dungeon anyone would actually bother going forward instead of just face the boss immediately provided you get the full reward just by defeating that boss? And please dont go the realistic route again because okey find the end boss in a dungeon doesnt require you to gain levels or gear while inside the dungeon (of course every game including gw1 requires you prepare yourself properly before every stepping foot in the dungeon. At level 1 no amount of magic/luck is gonna allow you to finish glint's challenge)  there are many unrealistic aspects to any game. Such as how come you can keep killing this boss for ever or why just cause mobs are in a dungeon they're suddenly harder or better yet and at least this something that gw got right why do bosses put puny trash mobs that never pose any challenge as their own personal guard?

They are the same at their core. Level restriction, mission restriction, build restriction they're all designed to achieve the same outcome, slow the player down. conceptually reaching level 15 to begging  the next zone might be different then finishing mission z that requires mission x that requires mission y etc.. but if mission z is required to move to the next zone and mission z is in a level 15 map is that truly any different?

does it really matter that in gw2 gold are meaningful where as in gw1 werent?

soulbound makes more sense then customized to be honest. Why cant I use a weapon that has been customized to someone else? It might be less effective but a sword balanced for you is still deadly in the hands of any stranger. Soulbound at least puts in a minor element of explanation as to why a weapon is only useable by you. Thats my opinion at least

#184 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:29 PM

View PostElcee, on 19 February 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

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:



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.

I understood you perfectly but you keep thinking that if 80% of the zones where the same level they would offer exactly the same reward and I am sorry it just doesnt work that way. Look at Orr for example do you find the massive Orr group all over Orr or concentrated around the same X events farming them over and over at least before FotM? Even in the same zone of the same level with the same overall balance people flock to the area that offers the best rewards. The problem isnt the game, the problem is the attitude. Even if you manage to do a perfect balance where as playing whatever you play you get 100% exactly the same reward given a little time people will find the easiest, fastest play where you can get the same reward as anything else and farm that. Gw1 was no different. If you wanted to get a particular armor set in gw1 you wouldnt go to a random level 20 zone and play there even though the majority of the maps had the same level. You'd go to a dungeon, do one of the profitable missions or go to one of the elite zones.

I personally believe this is not a leveling issue. If any zone above level 20 would be turned to level 80 thus making rewards identical to Orr or any other Open world zone of level 80 people will not suddenly flock to Lornar's pass. Even if FotM didnt exist the players who got used to their Orr Farm would not travel north seeking new farming areas as the popularity of frostgorge compared to orr proves in my opinion. You'll play all over the world if thats what you enjoy doing and if reward isnt your primary focus. I keep hearing how the open world is completely empty. Thats not so on my server (Piken Square) why is my server different? I have to wonder. My theory is it being the unofficial roleplayer server it might have been avoided by the hardcore players who sometimes look down on roleplayers. Thus we might have a bigger population of players who dont make their game primarily about reward and thus dont mind playing in the open world as long as they're having fun.

In anycase there is just one solution to this problem that I can see and thats to make meaningful rewards all around in the open world. So far dailies have managed to create the interest by providing meaningful reward. With this update they should be directing players to play in specific zones and that might help with this issue. IMHO making most zones the same level would not work for the reasons explained above.

#185 Arewn

Arewn

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1069 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:36 PM

View Postraspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

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.
Not necessarily. Levels are not purely there for gating content, they act as a character progression tracker. This is very important for many people because a feeling of some form of quantifiable gain and progress (even if that gain is artificial and or hollow) is pivital to their enjoyment of the experience, likely because it helps justify their use of time on the game.

Personally, I like to tell myself that even if all my characters started at level 80, my enjoyement and time spent on the game would remain unchanged. I dont particularly care for leveling up, and find great enjoyement just running around killing stuff and completing what ever events I happen upon.
But honestly, I can't guarentee that I would have spent as much time on the game as I did if not for levels. Leveling is a powerful driving factor, even if the levels themselves are made inconsequetial by a scaling system. The "forced" 1 to 80 leveling experience gets you vested in a character and the game, which is a basis on which many will continue playing the game.

This coming from someone who leveled their mesmer to 80, and then a month later started using that same mesmer to level along side a friend's new character from 1 to 80. I essentially leveled that mesmer from 1-80 twice, just because I enjoyed playing it. But whether it was my own character's or my friend's, it was levels that gave me a reason to do that, and I can't guarentee I would have spent the time doing so without levels.

#186 stormofstatic

stormofstatic

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 101 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:36 PM

cap should have been 30, 80 was just a number taking from what was WoW top level at the time imo is like Microsoft naming the xbox 360 casue it sounds bigger than ps3 sad but true :P anyways getting back to the topic if the lvl cap was 30 there would be more "end zones" and maybe the loot drops wouldn't been so messed up, I think I have more chance of the horsemen's reins to drop in WoW 0.2% on a 7 day reset than a good item to drop in gw2 lol, it would also not be a drag to get to 80 yes its not hard its just boring after 30 as u have unlocked your bars and most of the skills u will ever use. Its also more alt friendly to have a low cap.

#187 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:39 PM

View PostRitualist, on 19 February 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

But, did they build a comprehensible narrative? ;)
As I bitched here (and as you mentioned above):
http://www.guildwars...y-too-optional/
the gating in GW2 seems to be mostly about stopping the player from progressing. This is the means and the goal of gating. It's not Nightfall/Factions-like gating, where you were gated to force the player to experience the story, you are simply gated so that you don't finish the game too fast.

Ohh please how is it any different. Its just semantics you can argue either way. I could argue that Nightfall/factions gating didnt stop you from just moving to the next step from the story, it kept you from the most profitable areas in the game (at which stage it become unenticing reward wise to play anywhere in the open world) , it also kept you from "finishing the game" too fast

I could also argue that limiting levels in gw2 is story gating since it forces you to do dynamic events / hearts which all contribute to the story of the area.

Hey could even argue that nightfall/factions had it worst cause it gave you just one way to overcome that gating which gw2 gave you plenty of choices.

Bottom line is as a matter of fact Gating no matter what kind is simply intended at pacing the game.

#188 Serris

Serris

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 165 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 05:45 PM

View PostXPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 02:02 PM, said:

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 !



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?

yes, at level 1 you have 5 zones. then at level 15 a lot of "racial paths" start converging (asura and sylvari), and this keeps on converging until you have only 3 level 80 zones (2 orr maps and frostgorge). i would have preferred a lower level cap and a lot more "end game" maps, since Anet sold us endgame as "what you've been doing all along". the problem is not having no zones to level in, the problem is endgame zones being pigeon holed into orr and frostgorge.

i enjoy the difference in playstyles along characters, yes. but the thing that keeps me playing games is exploring new maps. it is ultimately what made me grow bored with the WoW, the fact that i knew every map like the back of my hand.
and it's a problem i never encountered in gw1, there were enough maps to keep me interested for the 1.000 or so hours i spent on it.

View Postraspberry 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.

this is sadly the bottom line of my thread :\ there's no way to change the game now :(

i do hope anet knows this is a problem, and adds more level 80 maps in an expansion or something.

#189 verskore

verskore

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 27 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 07:28 PM

Nooo, just...no

#190 chuckles79

chuckles79

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1685 posts
  • Guild Tag:[FANG]
  • Server:Sea of Sorrows

Posted 19 February 2013 - 07:34 PM

I'm fine with the lvl 80 system, I just hope they don't add more levels upon expansions.

#191 Strawberry Nubcake

Strawberry Nubcake

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 683 posts
  • Location:On a boat!
  • Profession:Elementalist
  • Guild Tag:[ssss]
  • Server:Yak’s Bend

Posted 19 February 2013 - 07:55 PM

View Postchuckles79, on 19 February 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

I'm fine with the lvl 80 system, I just hope they don't add more levels upon expansions.
Don't scratch me up for this...

"In GW1 we never advanced the level cap through four campaigns/expansions. The game design didn't allow for it. But GW2 was designed without those restrictions, and we've always expected that we will someday raise the level cap in GW2."  That's from the AMA they did on Reddit a while back.  Anything could change, but it seems like their plans are to raise it.

My friends call me Dream Killer for a reason!  ;)

Edited by Strawberry Nubcake, 19 February 2013 - 07:56 PM.


#192 Own Age Myname

Own Age Myname

    Vigil Crusader

  • Community Contributors
  • 4615 posts
  • Location:Mankato, Minnesota
  • Guild Tag:[LoH]
  • Server:Dragonbrand

Posted 19 February 2013 - 08:10 PM

Of course it should of been level 20, but we all know ANet isn't that smart!

For real, level 20 would make the game much more enjoyable for me. Honestly have never reached a level cap in any RPG with a high cap, be it single player or multiplayer, because leveling is boring. What's so fun about it? How about give me a small tutorial like GW1 and let me get max level just when I get the basics down. Level 30 would be perfect for GW2 because that's when you really start to get the game down.

Oh and don't worry once they release an expansion and raise the cap your gear will be useless!

Just another think to check on the list of ANet's failures.

Edited by Own Age Myname, 19 February 2013 - 08:14 PM.


#193 El Duderino

El Duderino

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2292 posts
  • Location:Drowning in a White Russian listening to Creedence
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Guild Tag:[DuDE]
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 19 February 2013 - 08:15 PM

View PostSerris, on 19 February 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

yes, at level 1 you have 5 zones. then at level 15 a lot of "racial paths" start converging (asura and sylvari), and this keeps on converging until you have only 3 level 80 zones (2 orr maps and frostgorge). i would have preferred a lower level cap and a lot more "end game" maps, since Anet sold us endgame as "what you've been doing all along". the problem is not having no zones to level in, the problem is endgame zones being pigeon holed into orr and frostgorge.

i enjoy the difference in playstyles along characters, yes. but the thing that keeps me playing games is exploring new maps. it is ultimately what made me grow bored with the WoW, the fact that i knew every map like the back of my hand.
and it's a problem i never encountered in gw1, there were enough maps to keep me interested for the 1.000 or so hours i spent on it.

i do hope anet knows this is a problem, and adds more level 80 maps in an expansion or something.

That is specifically WHY many of us agree that GW1 was better. Not that is was GW1, but that there was more max level content.

View Postverskore, on 19 February 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

Nooo, just...no

Great reasoning there. Thanks for the input!

View Postchuckles79, on 19 February 2013 - 07:34 PM, said:

I'm fine with the lvl 80 system, I just hope they don't add more levels upon expansions.

Check the quote below. You will be disheartened.

View PostStrawberry Nubcake, on 19 February 2013 - 07:55 PM, said:

Don't scratch me up for this...

"In GW1 we never advanced the level cap through four campaigns/expansions. The game design didn't allow for it. But GW2 was designed without those restrictions, and we've always expected that we will someday raise the level cap in GW2."  That's from the AMA they did on Reddit a while back.  Anything could change, but it seems like their plans are to raise it.

My friends call me Dream Killer for a reason!  ;)

Yup, boy and girls - all that work you've done to get your max gear and stats won't stay max for long - unless you get a legendary weapon.

Don't get too comfortable, ANet will find more ways to make you grind or spend money to get to the next tier of gear! Yay!

#194 mdapol

mdapol

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 08:43 PM

View PostOwn Age Myname, on 19 February 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Of course it should of been level 20, but we all know ANet isn't that smart!

'Smart' being defined with you at the top I suppose? So anyone who disagrees with you is, by definition, not smart?

View PostOwn Age Myname, on 19 February 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

For real, level 20 would make the game much more enjoyable for me. Honestly have never reached a level cap in any RPG with a high cap, be it single player or multiplayer, because leveling is boring. What's so fun about it? How about give me a small tutorial like GW1 and let me get max level just when I get the basics down. Level 30 would be perfect for GW2 because that's when you really start to get the game down.

Oh and don't worry once they release an expansion and raise the cap your gear will be useless!

Just another think to check on the list of ANet's failures.

It's only a failure if you don't achieve your goal.  Did you consider that Anet's goal was not to please you?

#195 Mordakai

Mordakai

    Mordakai7

  • Community Contributors
  • 8121 posts
  • Guild Tag:[GSCH]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 19 February 2013 - 09:27 PM

I think some of this is nostalgia...  GW1 was a great game, don't get me wrong but it seems some are forgetting all the annoying things like Infusion (remember when you had to infuse every piece of your armor, one piece a run?), Nightfall's rep. Point grind, and all the backtracking and locked gates in Cantha.

For all it's flaws, GW2 feels like the most open world since Prophecies.  Yea, I would prefer a lower level cap, because I like alts and have about 4 level 30ish characters. But it's not a race for me, I'm still trying all the personal story options and I know level 80 will still be there (or whatever the new level cap will be).

#196 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7990 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 20 February 2013 - 12:21 AM

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

Spoiler

Actually, adding or removing letters to an alphabet is far less demanding that changing vocabulary, subtext, and complexity.  Numerous languages have done so without issue, but trying to get someone to understand text outside their capabilities is impossible. Stats changing on a ratio don't actually change anything and if you can count or glance at a health bar it isn't an issue. Tactics building is what levels are all about, limiting the tools makes you more likely to understand each tool better and thus fit them together better. That's also literally how education and training works. On the topic of challenge, levels provide the ability for players to choose their challenge, but you already knew that because I've been saying it for years. You'll probably say it doesn't exist or matter, I know you like that tactic, but vague personal anecdotes and "because I say so" doesn't actually mean anything when it comes to this topic, whereas these systems are obviously parallel to how pretty much everything around the world operates.

What is the GW2 equivilent of The Republic? Once you are an adult are you forced to read only adult books and everything like an SAT question? No, you can read any level of book with any style. Recently I have read quite a few Duck and Goose and Winne the Pooh books, along with many other books targetted at young children. Is that because I find the content to be compelling and rich in educational value for an adult? No, it's because I'm reading to my two-year-old niece and I enjoy that experience. Do I have to take my level 80 character to a level 15-25 zone? No, but I enjoy exploring the zone with my guild mate. I don't have to zip from map objective to map objective, just like I don't have to read Duck and Goose: It's Time forChristmas as fast as I can with no emotion, only paying attention to the main points.

Levels don't restrict me, they don't impact my activity to any large degree. My activity is not dictated by my level. My goal is not to send all my characters to one spot to farm.

I made the exact point I wanted to make, which you repeated. There is no difference in motivations or activity between a game with a high number of levels, a low number of levels, or no levels at all. Levels are just a universal indicator that are useless without considering the structure of the game. That is a lesson you should have learned years ago when I talked about levels. The levels don't matter, all that matters is the structure of the gating, progression, and the learning systems. You can have a game with no "levels" that is far more restrictive than GW2, and when you can do nearly anything with a selection of zones to pick from GW2 can't be called restrictive at all.

When you're just enjoying the activity of the game you're not limited. I don't view reading to my niece as a waste of time, even though I could use that time reading research I need to do for work. I don't view inefficient time in GW2 with guildmates as wasted time. I know how to be efficient with leveling in GW2 too, my best so far is 50 hours to level 80 with no boosts, limited to two crafting professions with "inefficient time" sprinkled in, maybe that could be an issue for some as well. Overall it just seems like there are some personal issues with the idea your character is not perfect right away.

View PostElcee, on 19 February 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

Wheerever the hell I want, that's the point :P

You still can't go "wheerver the hell I want", you have to get to the zones first. In order to get to the zones you have to go through other zones. What you are really saying is you don't want anything to do with those zones, you have a particular point in mind and that is the only place with any value to you. You could do that in Morrowind, you could walk a straight line to nearly any point, but did most people do that? Not that I know of, most people wandered around through connected territory. The structure of GW2 is exactly how people naturally play games when they want to just play a game in the first place. So instead of playing the game in between point A and point B you view the actual content and experiences of the game as simply a barrier between point A and point B. That is setting yourself up for grind and the definition of endgame mentality. Again and again the message is repeated, "I don't like the things I can do in the game but I keep playing it for the rewards at the end of the game".



So again, do we need levels? No, but the game wouldn't be any better without them. Another gating mechanism would be used to fulfill the same objectives, and from past experience it would probably be a more restrictive gating mechanism, like linear story progression, gear, map completion, or "ranks, tiers" or any other name for another leveling system.

Edited by Krazzar, 20 February 2013 - 12:23 AM.


#197 Raytla

Raytla

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 116 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Guild Tag:[KotA]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 20 February 2013 - 12:55 AM

View PostLordkrall, on 18 February 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

A rather fun thing here is that if they had left it at lvl 20, people would complain about the lack of progression.
No matter what they do there will always be people that don't like it.

I for one don't really care, I did not play to level, I leveled while I played, didn't even think about it most of the time.

Agreed.  People complain about anything even if the cap was at 20 you would have someone post about how the cap should have been this instead of that.  No matter what you do people will complain. Having the cap at 20 doesn't change anything.

I got to level 80 because I wanted to feel that sense of accomplishmet as well so, that I can work on other things. I have been 80 since septmeber and haven't finished my story, never fought this Zhitain or w/e its name is. Haven't fully obtained exotic or ascended accessories (don't even have 1 ascended) and I've only ran 3 dungeons and one of those 3 i've only done p2.

Edited by Catiine, 20 February 2013 - 01:03 AM.


#198 Mekkakat

Mekkakat

    Vanguard Scout

  • Moderators
  • 371 posts
  • Location:Pittsburgh
  • Server:Borlis Pass

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:45 AM

I would have been fine with the level cap being level 1, but yes...

If I had ONE thing I would change about GW2 (and could only pick one thing), it'd be that the max level was no higher than 20. I think Anet really turned off a lot of players with the.. dare I say it.. WoW leveling in GW2. Not to mention the will to make and fully outfit alternate toons.

- I want that purple stuff.


#199 Trei

Trei

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2930 posts
  • Server:Jade Quarry

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:22 AM

View PostKrazzar, on 20 February 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

...
So again, do we need levels? No, but the game wouldn't be any better without them. Another gating mechanism would be used to fulfill the same objectives, and from past experience it would probably be a more restrictive gating mechanism, like linear story progression, gear, map completion, or "ranks, tiers" or any other name for another leveling system.
Yeah, basically I see the whole issue here not being about levels at all.
It is a system mechanic of having content and rewards to be "unlocked" progressively as one plays the game that's the problem most people here seem to have.

The level system is unfortunately the first most obvious point of contact here, so it gets the blame.
Without the level system, it will simply be replaced by more specific systems for each progression mechanic, for example:
Skill points - only from skill challenges.
Trait points - only from a separate set of trait challenges.
Weapons and gear - specific training or proficiency points (if they want to really get you good, they can have each weapon and armor type as a separate skill to train)
Zone restriction - countless ways to gate them like quest completion, linear zone track ... etc just to qualify for entrance.

Notice how none of these things need to have anything to do with character level per se?

The level system simply bakes all these into one single universal currency to qualify for them progressively.
But no, that's apparently not enough.

I don't think a lot of you are being honest about your true motivations for wanting no levels, with the readers here or even yourself.

I don't remember the last time I actually checked my character lvl while playing any of my alts.
I don't need to know.

Gear?
Red text = cannot use.
No red text = compare with existing gear then use if upgrade.
Zones?
Despite frequent warnings from zone "guard" npcs when I am perceived to be technically not high level enough for the adjacent zone, I usually go anyway. It's only when the zone is 20-30 levels higher that I get into real trouble.
One of my alts is currently bent on world completion before level 40 (call it his wyld hunt).

As far as I'm concerned, they can literally remove all traces of information regarding my character level right now and it wouldn't affect me one single atomic bit.

Edited by Trei, 20 February 2013 - 02:35 AM.


#200 omar316

omar316

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 323 posts
  • Location:Singapore
  • Guild Tag:[BRG]
  • Server:Jade Quarry

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:12 AM

View PostMekkakat, on 20 February 2013 - 01:45 AM, said:

I would have been fine with the level cap being level 1, but yes...

If I had ONE thing I would change about GW2 (and could only pick one thing), it'd be that the max level was no higher than 20. I think Anet really turned off a lot of players with the.. dare I say it.. WoW leveling in GW2. Not to mention the will to make and fully outfit alternate toons.

I had the most fun leveling from 1 to 80.
It literally made me log in and whack shit to see myself closer to the next level.

It gave me a real sense of the world itself, like challenging my self to content/zones 10/20 levels higher.
the gear difference made a lot of difference as well. I ran in rank 10 gear from the vendor and  till 45 i survived on green drops and then crafted a full set of MF 50 gear to beat the game at 80 and then crafted a full set of MF Exotics.

Mind you this was before DR and loot nerfs.

I hardly played my alts past level 2 now. Same shit worse environment. The gating mechanism is being gated. WTF Anet.

#201 Own Age Myname

Own Age Myname

    Vigil Crusader

  • Community Contributors
  • 4615 posts
  • Location:Mankato, Minnesota
  • Guild Tag:[LoH]
  • Server:Dragonbrand

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:16 AM

View Postmdapol, on 19 February 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

'Smart' being defined with you at the top I suppose? So anyone who disagrees with you is, by definition, not smart?

Um, no? Just my opinion that ANet is stupid, this isn't the only thing I can point out.

Quote

It's only a failure if you don't achieve your goal.  Did you consider that Anet's goal was not to please you?

Yes, considering I've never gotten to 80.

#202 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3316 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:46 AM

View PostMordakai, on 19 February 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

I think some of this is nostalgia...  GW1 was a great game, don't get me wrong but it seems some are forgetting all the annoying things like Infusion (remember when you had to infuse every piece of your armor, one piece a run?), Nightfall's rep. Point grind, and all the backtracking and locked gates in Cantha.

Remember when we said we disliked all those things?
We said we hated them at the time of their release, we said we hated them during the design of GW2 and we said we hated them in this thread.
And yet A.Net incorporated the same elements (or equally annoying elements) into GW2.

#203 Tenicord

Tenicord

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1334 posts
  • Location:Denver, CO

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:56 AM

Levels hardly matter in gw2 since you always scale down to the zone. So really it's just a way to block lower level players from higher level content until they get up there.

I remember when they said they were thinking about not having levels in gw2 and i really wish that was what they wanted with.

Furthermore I like the things like needing rep in Nightfall to continue on or completing something because they I feel like I'm truly progressing. I don't feel that in gw1... but maybe that's just me.

#204 WrathfulForce

WrathfulForce

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 08:28 AM

Absolute yes. At first I thought I'd love the fact that the max level wouldn't be achieved in a matter of few hours but once I got to leveling my 2nd character I realized the fact how boring the actual level progression is. Gameplay is fun and I enjoy exploring but after going through it once I simply can't justify being in "not optimal" areas for long periods of time. The loot is better nowadays than it used to be in lower level zones as a lvl 80 character but because of T6 materials and better chance of actually getting lvl 80 item drops the Orr and Frostgorge are pretty much always going to be the most popular zones.

If lvl 20 had been the level cap and there were more events in such zones as lornar's pass and if material drops were as good (in terms of profit) I am sure the population would be more evenly spread amongst different zones. But because it is just overall better to farm Orr than to farm random lvl 50 zones people won't move from their favourite locations.

I loved how things were in GW1 but yeah, one of the changes that I don't like that much.

View PostMekkakat, on 20 February 2013 - 01:45 AM, said:

I would have been fine with the level cap being level 1, but yes...

If I had ONE thing I would change about GW2 (and could only pick one thing), it'd be that the max level was no higher than 20. I think Anet really turned off a lot of players with the.. dare I say it.. WoW leveling in GW2. Not to mention the will to make and fully outfit alternate toons.

Oh well, at least you can quickly level up by crafting. So people that want a lot of alts to max lvl can just farm few days and just level up by crafting :) But yeah, I agree, lvl cap should have been lower. But I guess they wanted to attract more players that were used to maximum level being something higher than just 20 as GW1's maximum lvl cap was highly criticized at least by non-GW1 players ie. "ugh, you can hit max lvl so fast, what's the point?" and so on.

Edited by WrathfulForce, 20 February 2013 - 08:34 AM.


#205 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 08:44 AM

View PostKrazzar, on 20 February 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

Spoiler
Om yjsy vdr, yraa zr ejsy yjod dsud.

Tactics is an acquired skill and has nothing to do with levels, and levels do certainly not allow you to "choose your challenge", except possibly during leveling itself - but in GW2 you'll hit max in like two weeks and then what?

Where are these personal anecdotes you refer to, by the way?

It doesn't matter what the GW2 equivalent of The Republic is, it is sufficient that it is difficult to understand for an average 7-year-old, and that you should not prevent a 7-year-old that has the rare ability to understand it from reading it. Until you address that issue, you can blab on about reading to your niece all you want, and it won't change anything.

There is plenty of change in motivation in a game with levels compared to one without. The most important one being the imperative to reach max level - ironically enough, since it means converting the personal gameplay experience to what it would be in a level-free game.
And when we talk about "levels" here, we of course mean xp based levels as they work in GW2 and every other MMO, so there is your "structure of the gating, progression". Learning, of course, does not factor in because the amount of xp your character has is no indicator of learning.

Basically, everything you say is either wrong or simply irrelevant.

Edited by Feathermoore, 20 February 2013 - 05:40 PM.
removed flame


#206 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 08:49 AM

View PostSerris, on 19 February 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

yes, at level 1 you have 5 zones. then at level 15 a lot of "racial paths" start converging (asura and sylvari), and this keeps on converging until you have only 3 level 80 zones (2 orr maps and frostgorge). i would have preferred a lower level cap and a lot more "end game" maps, since Anet sold us endgame as "what you've been doing all along". the problem is not having no zones to level in, the problem is endgame zones being pigeon holed into orr and frostgorge.

i enjoy the difference in playstyles along characters, yes. but the thing that keeps me playing games is exploring new maps. it is ultimately what made me grow bored with the WoW, the fact that i knew every map like the back of my hand.
and it's a problem i never encountered in gw1, there were enough maps to keep me interested for the 1.000 or so hours i spent on it.



this is sadly the bottom line of my thread :\ there's no way to change the game now :(

i do hope anet knows this is a problem, and adds more level 80 maps in an expansion or something.

I think this is a problem of interpretation, Your interpretation of end game is exclusively level 80 content it seems. for me its any viable content. I cant read Anets mind and this is my personal opinion obviously but the fact they did downscaling and made sure you get reward even for playing in a starter zone at max level what they meant by the entire game is the end game was preciesly that once you reach level 80 unlike every other single MMO other there (excluding gw1) you can decide to play in any zone and arent restricted at lvl 80. Now I understand that for you and others Anet still failed because they didnt do lower level zones enticing enough granted 100% and I am not disagreeing with you, how can I? you are the one who can say how you feel without any doubt. That being said then you say you like exploration and you puzzle me there a bit because how is exploration having you stuck in Lvl 80 maps exactly? Any zone is open to you in that regards, you'll also earn XP, Gold and Karma while you're enjoying doing what you love in any other zone. Sure it will be less then what you'd earn in a level 80 map but the risks are less too and the events go faster as well.

In any other mmo you wouldnt be earning anything exploring lower level maps. In most other MMOs there wouldnt even be anything to explore because the leveling process itself would have made you see absolutely everything there is to see. I love Exploration myself and it is what I do most and in all honest if this is not the best MMO in terms of what it offers in the exploration department I honestly cant understand if at least someone wouldnt consider it amongst one of the best.

Why is there no way to change the game now? we already had a new lvl 80 zone added. granted its a bit bare in terms of content but its also better in terms of difficulty and  I think its also one of the most beautiful zones visually.

View PostOwn Age Myname, on 19 February 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

Of course it should of been level 20, but we all know ANet isn't that smart!

For real, level 20 would make the game much more enjoyable for me. Honestly have never reached a level cap in any RPG with a high cap, be it single player or multiplayer, because leveling is boring. What's so fun about it? How about give me a small tutorial like GW1 and let me get max level just when I get the basics down. Level 30 would be perfect for GW2 because that's when you really start to get the game down.

Oh and don't worry once they release an expansion and raise the cap your gear will be useless!

Just another think to check on the list of ANet's failures.

I have a question for you... lets assume the level cap was changed to 30 like you suggested. What would you change in terms of how you played the game up to lvl 30?

#207 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 08:50 AM

View PostArewn, on 19 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

Not necessarily. Levels are not purely there for gating content, they act as a character progression tracker. This is very important for many people because a feeling of some form of quantifiable gain and progress (even if that gain is artificial and or hollow) is pivital to their enjoyment of the experience, likely because it helps justify their use of time on the game.

Personally, I like to tell myself that even if all my characters started at level 80, my enjoyement and time spent on the game would remain unchanged. I dont particularly care for leveling up, and find great enjoyement just running around killing stuff and completing what ever events I happen upon.
But honestly, I can't guarentee that I would have spent as much time on the game as I did if not for levels. Leveling is a powerful driving factor, even if the levels themselves are made inconsequetial by a scaling system. The "forced" 1 to 80 leveling experience gets you vested in a character and the game, which is a basis on which many will continue playing the game.

This coming from someone who leveled their mesmer to 80, and then a month later started using that same mesmer to level along side a friend's new character from 1 to 80. I essentially leveled that mesmer from 1-80 twice, just because I enjoyed playing it. But whether it was my own character's or my friend's, it was levels that gave me a reason to do that, and I can't guarentee I would have spent the time doing so without levels.
The levels system is one of constant, rewarding feedback. Basically whatever you do in the game you will get a pat on the head and grow a bit stronger (until you hit 80). Of course that is attractive. In fact your brain is wired to seek out things that reward you with low effort.

But tell me this, are you playing the game because the gameplay is fun, or because it is fun to level up and grow stronger? Well you already answered that one.

And if the gameplay isn't that fun, then why should the game exist?

#208 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:05 AM

View PostXPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

Spoiler
How would you rush to the final boss again? I mean, isn't every game really just a rush to the final boss? What stopped people from rushing to the lich in GW1? Certainly not levels, because they'd easily get those while "rushing to the boss".

Glint's Challenge isn't particularly hard, and a level 1 that was attending it would be leveled up to 20 due to Journey to the North. Anyway, that is the point, narrative gating (certain conditions needing to be met, such as the siege of THK in GW1 being required to reach the lich) works just fine.

Restricting by level is not the same as restricting based on actions taken, of course. The difference in your example is that "mission z" can potentially be completed by a player when that player reaches it, or the 1682nd time the player attempts it, if it is up to the player's skill, whereas if it is up to the character's level, "mission z" will be beat around the time the player reaches level 15. Basically, if leveling actually tracked the player's skill, it would be the same, but it doesn't. The worst GW2 player in the world is capable of reaching 80, and the best GW2 player in the world would still be very weak when playing a character that she just created.

Yes, both the gold thing and the word "soulbound" matters, not in themselves but in the obvious fact that they were taken from MMO generica.

#209 XPhiler

XPhiler

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1826 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:07 AM

View Postraspberry jam, on 20 February 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

Om yjsy vdr, yraa zr ejsy yjod dsud.

Tactics is an acquired skill and has nothing to do with levels, and levels do certainly not allow you to "choose your challenge", except possibly during leveling itself - but in GW2 you'll hit max in like two weeks and then what?

Where are these personal anecdotes you refer to, by the way?

It doesn't matter what the GW2 equivalent of The Republic is, it is sufficient that it is difficult to understand for an average 7-year-old, and that you should not prevent a 7-year-old that has the rare ability to understand it from reading it. Until you address that issue, you can blab on about reading to your niece all you want, and it won't change anything.

There is plenty of change in motivation in a game with levels compared to one without. The most important one being the imperative to reach max level - ironically enough, since it means converting the personal gameplay experience to what it would be in a level-free game.
And when we talk about "levels" here, we of course mean xp based levels as they work in GW2 and every other MMO, so there is your "structure of the gating, progression". Learning, of course, does not factor in because the amount of xp your character has is no indicator of learning.

Basically, everything you say is either wrong or simply irrelevant. I'd feel sorry for you, if not for the fact that there are so many just like you.

And the problem once again boils down to people making the game all about reward. I mean seriously if you're leveling up in WvW prior to level 80 you'll be fighting enemies, doing Events, taking over objectives. After hitting level 80 you'll be fighting enemies, doing events, taking over objectives.

If you're leveling in PvE prior to level 80 you'll be doing Dynamic Events, Hearts, Skill challenges, Jumping Puzzle, Exploring, Gathering, Dungeons, etc... what is this "personal gameplay experience to what it would be in a level-free game." you talk about exactly? This is not WoW once you hit level 80 the game doesnt change to a raid grind to acquire the next tier of armor, What you're doing to level up is identical to what you will be doing once you reach max level.

Unless obviously you're ruled by the reward. In which case you'll find the most profitable content and grind it ... most likely complaining how boring the game is.

So yes, two weeks and then you get to max level... what then? there is yet another 19 zones that need playing and exploring... thats what. at least that how it was in my case.

#210 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4843 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 09:10 AM

View PostXPhiler, on 19 February 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

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!
Trained soldiers don't shoot harder bullets. They just behave differently, and that bandit didn't behave differently from the ones I killed. She just shot harder.

And yes, it is kind of retarded that the dragons don't just kill us. So much for ANet's ability to create a setting.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users