Honestly i think all the mechanism tight to leveling, and they are many, i mean a truck full of it, and some really have a huge impact of gameplay, like the natural miss you encounter when level difference become too high. But all those mechanisms really become a problematic in pvp. If they have this feature to rebalance the toon levels in pvp so, unless it doesn't work properly i don't think it will create problems. In pve in fact you don't really care about levels, if the leveling curve is neither endless neither too exponantial, which is not the case in GW2.
So why not? they seam to have taken care of the worst problems. I'm not very attracted about leveling system, but then again a mass of people need to 'have something to accomplish". Personally i can clearly go and do fine without it, i even felt i did more acheivement in Uo than any other super grindy mmo, but i understand that kind of feeling is just alien to most mmo gamer. When i see how much non trinity combat is allien to some, i can't imagine what non level game would be.
So in short if their rebalancing of the toon power feature is set properly it doesn't really matter to me. We will have to see how it work really, they are already a ton of solo rpg with such feature, they are not all super great to be honest. Tweaking such feature will not be easy for the dev, you can already tell it from those solo games and the problems they encounter. Notably the fact the challenge is more or less always the same, and there is no really subtility or change of difficutly. This is maybe the only stuff you could have some reserve about, bt as said this system seam only to kick in pvp, and in dynamic event, if i understood it well. SO they might have even avoided this problem too.
C: Leveling is not a grind and is relatively fast.
..then why have levels in the first place? Is it to stagger spells and abilities? If so, a skill point system would be much better imo. Is it to make gamers feel like they are progressing? Lame.
I think Anet should ditch leveling in GW2 altogether.
I agree 100%. I also am disappointed with classes as well. Anet should of gone to a classless no leveling, skill system akin to more old fashioned sandbox MMO's, however something tells me they did this to placate the WoW/Rift/EQ/SWToR Themepark kiddies.
I would fracking go ape shit if Arena Net was to implement a skill system of advancement with a dynamic Alternate Advancement system for endgame.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Originally posted by Zylaxx I agree 100%. I also am disappointed with classes as well. Anet should of gone to a classless no leveling, skill system akin to more old fashioned sandbox MMO's, however something tells me they did this to placate the WoW/Rift/EQ/SWToR Themepark kiddies.
Wait. Theme park? ...the only place I ever hear that said in a derogatory way is from people who go out of their way to fetishise EvE, which I always find really worrying, to be honest. The Evians are as thick as thieves in this thread, aren't they?
Well, let me just put it this way. Going from sector A, which is a black backdrop filled with dull rocks, to sector B, which is a black backdrop, filled with rocks, is far less fulfilling than a ride on a roller coaster. If sandbox games had anything to actually explore and experience, then they wouldn't be so creatively bankrupt.
But that's the thing, isn't it? You want a creatively bankrupt game. Add in the slightest spark of imagination and it fires up your nerd-to-nerds-what-nerds-are-to-normal-people zealousness. So the question becomes: Why the hell aren't you just playing Mount & Blade? Is it simply that you aren't aware of it? Go do a web search, you'll find it more inexpressive and mundane than these so-called 'themeparks' you hate so much.
I also love that people use 'kiddies' to proclaim their maturity despite citing 'kiddies' being the most bloody utterly immature and bratty taunt there is. I call insecurity! Anyway, us 'themepark kiddies' aren't creatively bankrupt, soulless, and completely dead inside. We like our experiences to be romantic and imaginative.
Originally posted by Zylaxx I would fracking go ape shit if Arena Net was to implement a skill system of advancement with a dynamic Alternate Advancement system for endgame.
Not going to happen. Thank goodness.
Try Mount & Blade instead! It'd be a better fit for you.
A skill system seems like it would go against ArenaNet's philosophy of having a B2P game that you don't need to worry about keeping up with. I remember the days of trying to level an alt in EQ1 and wondering what the point was to even bothering since I'd always be hundreds of AA behind anybody else.
Part of the draw of the GW2 dungeon experience is being able to just grab any 5 people and go. That doesn't really mesh with setting up a system where people are going to not invite you to a group unless you have X hundred number of skill points.
There's also the issue of dynamic event scaling. I imagine it's pretty straightforward to reduce someone in power from level 80 to level 8 when they take part in a level 5 dynamic event. How do you do it when it's all skill points?
Part of the whole reason too in GW2 to have half your available skills be from your weapons is so that people can't make truly awful builds. You'll never be able to gimp yourself too terribly while at the same time providing a lot of flexibility and customization for people who really want to try to maximize their build for their role. A skill point system seems like it would add a lot of minimum complexity and make it easier for people to screw up.
What is the objection to levels? That they are artificial? Is the preferred system one where you have to grind up every skill that you use and only those skills?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
To be honest, anyone who claims that a game doesn't have numbers sounds like they're coming over as though they're saying that a game doesn't have big enough numbers, or that a game doesn't require enough time->skill to get those numbers. This is something that applies to WoW's gear grind equally as much as it applies to EvE's skill grind. I think that what some people are objecting to, more than levels, is the more casual-friendly entry level of Guild Wars 2.
It won't be a gear grind, there won't be skills, but you have people who're locked into ancient MMORPG ways of thinking, and can't free themselves from tht. It makes me wonder if they've ever played some of the more interesting single-player RPGs out there. Ultima VII didn't need numbers to be interesting, to the contrary, it was more interesting when all of its numbers were hidden, and it endeavoured to do that. It's worth keeping in mind how old of a game Ultima VII is, too, so this is hardly a new idea.
But you'll always have people who go on and on about their numbers and how hard their numbers should be to earn, either via gear grinding or a skill system, because if you don't have to earn your numbers then it's a 'themepark.' Well, excuse me princess but I don't exactly care for a second job. I play games for fun. So I get where you're coming from, cali59, and personally I don't have any problems with a lack of grind related to getting increasingly bigger numbers at all.
The day that gamers stop fetishising numbers will be a happy day for me. It has levels solely as a thing for balancing character progression and scale, those are the only numbers the game will ever need. No, Guild Wars 2 does not need any more numbers than that.
Originally posted by cali59 I'm kind of new to the whole debate about skill points instead of levels, so I'd be curious to hear what kind of system the OP has in mind specifically and why they think it's better than levels.
An example that I would prefer over a numerical level system would be to spend experience points to purchase skills. You could stockpile XP and get more powerful abilities earlier on, or spend as you go, picking up utility spells, cc, etc. There would be prerequisites to get some of the best skills ie you must obtain at least rank 3 firespark to get rank 1 fireblast.
Overall, I think it would allow your character to feel more personalized. It would also help alleviate the number stigma like what Locke was saying. If im level 50 and I see a level 40 creature, I do not hesitate to jump in and beat its ass. But if there were no levels, Id actually pay more attention to mobs patterns and abilities. Its a lot more fun going into combat with a mob youve never fought before, because there is no number over their head, you have no expectation that youre "supposed" to win because you severely outlevel it.
The problem with a skill based system is that the main progression tool which is "learning in skill use", is a tottally fail system, it is great on paper but it always prooved to be a mess and nothing else that a macro heaven. They could definitly go out of this path and make their own progression system, but again it would have gave them a good sum of job. Eve progression isn't very good either, the first to come are the best served isn't really that good either. So untill someone managed to made a good skill based system, and some are just great but people don't know them, untill then its just better to avoid them.
C: Leveling is not a grind and is relatively fast.
..then why have levels in the first place? Is it to stagger spells and abilities? If so, a skill point system would be much better imo. Is it to make gamers feel like they are progressing? Lame.
I think Anet should ditch leveling in GW2 altogether.
A) I was unaware that GW2 was not a gear-centric MMO. Throughout the leveling process, GW2 will feature several dungeons, which promise to provide the more challenging, fun PvE content in the game. Each of these dungeons will feature its own unique full set of gear for each class, which, based on some of the art revealed on the GW2 site, look amazing. Combine their in-depth dye system and stat customization, and obtaining these badass gear sets is one of the things I'm looking forward to the most in GW2. Oh and GW2 has "end game" raids, for which gear is awarded.
The sidekick system actually works more fluidly with a level system than a UO style skill point system. The point of the sidekick system in GW2 is to prevent high levels from completely trivializing dynamic events in low level areas and to allow low level characters to have a fighting chance when playing with their high level friends, while still allowing each to help out and participate if they want to. Attributing a numerical level to your character and to each zone allows the game to easily decrease or increase your character's stats to the appropriate level. (I can't remember if GW2 will allow you to retain your higher level abilities after being sidekicked down, so don't quote me on this, but if this is not the case, then levels provide a simple, clear-cut point by which to allot you your new level appropriate skills. Whereas a skill point system tends to have multiple paths, leading to multiple different skills.) Either way, without levels it would be significantly more difficult to balance moments when "more progressed" characters visit areas intended for "less progressed" characters, and vice versa.
C) The name of the game is progression. Progression is the single most compelling and addictive quality to MMOs. To get all sociological up in here for one brief sentence: in a world where the common proletariat's life has grown stagnant, in a world where the college-educated cannot seem to find degree-appropriate jobs right out of college, in a world where many people feel an utter lack of advancement and progression in their own lives, escape into a virtual world where progression occurs excedingly fast feels extremely compelling. A leveling system is one of the first and most tangible ways a player experiences character advancement in an MMO. It lays the foundation for unlocking new abilities, gear upgrades, and crafting levels, and it provides direction from zone to zone and dungeon to dungeon, all while providing a nice little number that slowly increases. I understand that character advancement can occur in all the same ways without "levels," but I wouldn't underestimate the importance that slowly increasing little number has with many players. The increasing number itself accentuates the actual progression your character experiences in the form of abilities, stats, gear, new zones, etc.
C: Leveling is not a grind and is relatively fast.
..then why have levels in the first place? Is it to stagger spells and abilities? If so, a skill point system would be much better imo. Is it to make gamers feel like they are progressing? Lame.
I think Anet should ditch leveling in GW2 altogether.
That will stretch the development timetable out at least, what, another couple of weeks? Works for me.
C: Leveling is not a grind and is relatively fast.
..then why have levels in the first place? Is it to stagger spells and abilities? If so, a skill point system would be much better imo. Is it to make gamers feel like they are progressing? Lame.
I think Anet should ditch leveling in GW2 altogether.
A) I was unaware that GW2 was not a gear-centric MMO. Throughout the leveling process, GW2 will feature several dungeons, which promise to provide the more challenging, fun PvE content in the game. Each of these dungeons will feature its own unique full set of gear for each class, which, based on some of the art revealed on the GW2 site, look amazing. Combine their in-depth dye system and stat customization, and obtaining these badass gear sets is one of the things I'm looking forward to the most in GW2. Oh and GW2 has "end game" raids, for which gear is awarded.
When Foomerang is saying "gear-centric" he's talking about a game where gear power is the defining feature of a person. He means the kind of game where there is raid gear progression. You do dungeons to get gear for tier 1 raids which you do to get gear to be able to do tier 2 raids, etc. GW1 was fairly easy to get statistically near perfect gear, and only slightly harder to get perfect gear (the proper upgrade components). By contrast, vanity was the big grind. It was lot of work to get gear that was functionally equivalent but looked an awful lot better.
We're still a little in the dark about the nature of the high end gear but if i's anything like GW1 and if ArenaNet sticks with their no grind philosophy, I'd expect that gear obtainable from dungeons, DE raids, crafting or big karma/gold purchases would have unique skins but fairly similar stats.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
An example that I would prefer over a numerical level system would be to spend experience points to purchase skills. You could stockpile XP and get more powerful abilities earlier on, or spend as you go, picking up utility spells, cc, etc. There would be prerequisites to get some of the best skills ie you must obtain at least rank 3 firespark to get rank 1 fireblast.
Overall, I think it would allow your character to feel more personalized. It would also help alleviate the number stigma like what Locke was saying. If im level 50 and I see a level 40 creature, I do not hesitate to jump in and beat its ass. But if there were no levels, Id actually pay more attention to mobs patterns and abilities. Its a lot more fun going into combat with a mob youve never fought before, because there is no number over their head, you have no expectation that youre "supposed" to win because you severely outlevel it.
Just my 2c
A skill point system would eventually be used the same way as levels. You gain experience and level up skills. How does a potential ally know how long/good you have been playing? It will just show how much experience points you have and how many you have spent. Instead of saying level 30, it will say you have gained 320 skill points or something. People will eventually start looking for experience points rather than level. And to be honest, I would rather spend time looking for a level 30+ rogue than a rogue with 320+ experience.
Same goes for skill points. Skill points are just like attribute points, you gain them, then feed them into your character to make them stronger. In the end, people will just start LF Rogue with 36+ skill points.
The problem with gauging a mob is quite easily fixed. Even with levels...
Just make it so that in that area mob levels have a range of 10 levels (example). So in a level 50 area, the mobs are 45-55. The next step would be to hide the level. That way, a player cannot see if that mob is easily taken down or a real challenge. Hell, you could just list that mob as 45-55 and it would still be tricky.
Originally posted by BlahTeeb Originally posted by Foomerang
An example that I would prefer over a numerical level system would be to spend experience points to purchase skills. You could stockpile XP and get more powerful abilities earlier on, or spend as you go, picking up utility spells, cc, etc. There would be prerequisites to get some of the best skills ie you must obtain at least rank 3 firespark to get rank 1 fireblast. Overall, I think it would allow your character to feel more personalized. It would also help alleviate the number stigma like what Locke was saying. If im level 50 and I see a level 40 creature, I do not hesitate to jump in and beat its ass. But if there were no levels, Id actually pay more attention to mobs patterns and abilities. Its a lot more fun going into combat with a mob youve never fought before, because there is no number over their head, you have no expectation that youre "supposed" to win because you severely outlevel it.
Just my 2c A skill point system would eventually be used the same way as levels. You gain experience and level up skills. How does a potential ally know how long/good you have been playing? It will just show how much experience points you have and how many you have spent. Instead of saying level 30, it will say you have gained 320 skill points or something. People will eventually start looking for experience points rather than level. And to be honest, I would rather spend time looking for a level 30+ rogue than a rogue with 320+ experience. Same goes for skill points. Skill points are just like attribute points, you gain them, then feed them into your character to make them stronger. In the end, people will just start LF Rogue with 36+ skill points.
The problem with gauging a mob is quite easily fixed. Even with levels... Just make it so that in that area mob levels have a range of 10 levels (example). So in a level 50 area, the mobs are 45-55. The next step would be to hide the level. That way, a player cannot see if that mob is easily taken down or a real challenge. Hell, you could just list that mob as 45-55 and it would still be tricky.
makes sense to me. all im really saying is that the little number next to someones avatar is not really necessary. in gw2 it seems to be even less important.
Originally posted by madnagash My real problem with levelling - a level 50 rabbit may kill the whole level 10 wolf population and won't lose a single hitpoint. It's plain stupid and once i realised it several years ago, I can't stop thinking about it
And a max skilled rabbit does the same thing to the partially skilled wolves, there isn't a real difference.
I think what you really have a problem is levels playing such a huge role in to hit rolls and HPs, skill based systems tend to slow down the hit curve a lot more than level based ones do but that isn't because they are skill based, it is a design choice that could exist in a level based game if you wanted it to.
makes sense to me. all im really saying is that the little number next to someones avatar is not really necessary. in gw2 it seems to be even less important.
The number only exist to show how effective another player. You have basically 2 choices when selecting an ally.
You can look at the number next to his name. This can be a few different things. Experience points, skill points, elite skills unlocked, bosses slain, or levels. Either way, that number is just used to guage a character level. I prefer a low number too, such as 80. I wouldn't want to look at a character and see he's earned 3,415 skill points or similar.
Or you can read his personal story journal and see who hes killed or whats hes been through.
Though the latter actually sounds interesting, I don't want to have to read 4 journals every time I try and run a dungeon.
GW 2 has levels to appease the millions and millions of achievement-oriented players who enjoy it.
You can look at the number next to his name. This can be a few different things. Experience points, skill points, elite skills unlocked, bosses slain, or levels. Either way, that number is just used to guage a character level. I prefer a low number too, such as 80. I wouldn't want to look at a character and see he's earned 3,415 skill points or similar. Or you can read his personal story journal and see who hes killed or whats hes been through.
Or you could just talk to them and ask them yourself.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Originally posted by BlahTeeb Originally posted by Foomerang
makes sense to me. all im really saying is that the little number next to someones avatar is not really necessary. in gw2 it seems to be even less important. The number only exist to show how effective another player. You have basically 2 choices when selecting an ally. You can look at the number next to his name. This can be a few different things. Experience points, skill points, elite skills unlocked, bosses slain, or levels. Either way, that number is just used to guage a character level. I prefer a low number too, such as 80. I wouldn't want to look at a character and see he's earned 3,415 skill points or similar. Or you can read his personal story journal and see who hes killed or whats hes been through.
Though the latter actually sounds interesting, I don't want to have to read 4 journals every time I try and run a dungeon.
Id prefer a title system. In other words, once you aquire a certain set of skills, it unlocks vaious titles that could also indicate a player's effectiveness. For example if you bought a lot of fire spells, youd get access to a title called Firestarter or something. That would be an immediate indication of the ammount of skill points this person invested without having to look up specific numbers.
Also, Im a big fan of players proving themselves regardless of level or gear. I always have a large friends list of people to pull from when trying to for a group. Regardless of gear or level, I can usually tell if someone is going to be wirth their weight in polygons just by talking to them for a few minutes.
I agree 100%. I also am disappointed with classes as well. Anet should of gone to a classless no leveling, skill system akin to more old fashioned sandbox MMO's, however something tells me they did this to placate the WoW/Rift/EQ/SWToR Themepark kiddies.
Wait. Theme park? ...the only place I ever hear that said in a derogatory way is from people who go out of their way to fetishise EvE, which I always find really worrying, to be honest. The Evians are as thick as thieves in this thread, aren't they?
Well, let me just put it this way. Going from sector A, which is a black backdrop filled with dull rocks, to sector B, which is a black backdrop, filled with rocks, is far less fulfilling than a ride on a roller coaster. If sandbox games had anything to actually explore and experience, then they wouldn't be so creatively bankrupt.
But that's the thing, isn't it? You want a creatively bankrupt game. Add in the slightest spark of imagination and it fires up your nerd-to-nerds-what-nerds-are-to-normal-people zealousness. So the question becomes: Why the hell aren't you just playing Mount & Blade? Is it simply that you aren't aware of it? Go do a web search, you'll find it more inexpressive and mundane than these so-called 'themeparks' you hate so much.
I also love that people use 'kiddies' to proclaim their maturity despite citing 'kiddies' being the most bloody utterly immature and bratty taunt there is. I call insecurity! Anyway, us 'themepark kiddies' aren't creatively bankrupt, soulless, and completely dead inside. We like our experiences to be romantic and imaginative.
Not going to happen. Thank goodness.
Try Mount & Blade instead! It'd be a better fit for you.
This is a bad post and I'll tell you why. Skill based systems do work. In fact they are probably the most fun system. The problem is that a lot of the companies that have tried to do this, did a poor job. Personally I hated the skill based system in EvE, and I think it was a poor reflection of what a skill based system should be. Ultimate Online did it right. Pre-NGE SWG did a pretty damn good job too. Skill based systems are about using your items and abilities to progress in your skill. I.E. You pickup a sword and hit a monster, or spar with a friend, and you gain points in that skill. The object is also to have a skill cap. This allows people to customize their character in many ways. I.E. You have 100 skills that max at 100 skill points. You have a skill cap of 700. You can max out any 7 skills you like to make and customize your own personal character. For example.. I had a Fisherman that could go out in a boat in UO, cast magic, and fight with a bow. I had a blacksmith that could mine ore, cast magic, and also steal from people. This is the type of customization that you cannot find in Themepark style MMOs. It very possible that you've not experienced this, because again.. no games have really done it right. Darkfall was close, but they didnt have a skill cap.. so you could master everything. Mortal Online is interesting. A little too hardcore for my taste, and not many people play the game.
I personally don't care which system this game has. I'm sure i'll play it either way. I think a skill based system would be great, but I'm also afraid they might accidently screw it up, and that could really take a turn for the worse. So I'll gladly play a level based system, as the game looks impressive from everything I've seen thus far.
in pve, i myself would prefer a no-cap level system that is mostly cosmetic, but slightly rewarding, whereas you would gain no extra benefit skill-wise but would gain maybe 1 additional life/hit-point. Mobs you encounter would also take that into effect with the difficulty scaling mechanic reguardless of who else is in the event. you shouldn't get too extreme though. five years after release, i wouldn't mind seeing a level 178 player character and saying dam, theres someone who has been around the mill for quite a while.
Comments
Honestly i think all the mechanism tight to leveling, and they are many, i mean a truck full of it, and some really have a huge impact of gameplay, like the natural miss you encounter when level difference become too high. But all those mechanisms really become a problematic in pvp. If they have this feature to rebalance the toon levels in pvp so, unless it doesn't work properly i don't think it will create problems. In pve in fact you don't really care about levels, if the leveling curve is neither endless neither too exponantial, which is not the case in GW2.
So why not? they seam to have taken care of the worst problems. I'm not very attracted about leveling system, but then again a mass of people need to 'have something to accomplish". Personally i can clearly go and do fine without it, i even felt i did more acheivement in Uo than any other super grindy mmo, but i understand that kind of feeling is just alien to most mmo gamer. When i see how much non trinity combat is allien to some, i can't imagine what non level game would be.
So in short if their rebalancing of the toon power feature is set properly it doesn't really matter to me. We will have to see how it work really, they are already a ton of solo rpg with such feature, they are not all super great to be honest. Tweaking such feature will not be easy for the dev, you can already tell it from those solo games and the problems they encounter. Notably the fact the challenge is more or less always the same, and there is no really subtility or change of difficutly. This is maybe the only stuff you could have some reserve about, bt as said this system seam only to kick in pvp, and in dynamic event, if i understood it well. SO they might have even avoided this problem too.
I agree 100%. I also am disappointed with classes as well. Anet should of gone to a classless no leveling, skill system akin to more old fashioned sandbox MMO's, however something tells me they did this to placate the WoW/Rift/EQ/SWToR Themepark kiddies.
I would fracking go ape shit if Arena Net was to implement a skill system of advancement with a dynamic Alternate Advancement system for endgame.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Well, let me just put it this way. Going from sector A, which is a black backdrop filled with dull rocks, to sector B, which is a black backdrop, filled with rocks, is far less fulfilling than a ride on a roller coaster. If sandbox games had anything to actually explore and experience, then they wouldn't be so creatively bankrupt.
But that's the thing, isn't it? You want a creatively bankrupt game. Add in the slightest spark of imagination and it fires up your nerd-to-nerds-what-nerds-are-to-normal-people zealousness. So the question becomes: Why the hell aren't you just playing Mount & Blade? Is it simply that you aren't aware of it? Go do a web search, you'll find it more inexpressive and mundane than these so-called 'themeparks' you hate so much.
I also love that people use 'kiddies' to proclaim their maturity despite citing 'kiddies' being the most bloody utterly immature and bratty taunt there is. I call insecurity! Anyway, us 'themepark kiddies' aren't creatively bankrupt, soulless, and completely dead inside. We like our experiences to be romantic and imaginative.
Not going to happen. Thank goodness.Try Mount & Blade instead! It'd be a better fit for you.
A skill system seems like it would go against ArenaNet's philosophy of having a B2P game that you don't need to worry about keeping up with. I remember the days of trying to level an alt in EQ1 and wondering what the point was to even bothering since I'd always be hundreds of AA behind anybody else.
Part of the draw of the GW2 dungeon experience is being able to just grab any 5 people and go. That doesn't really mesh with setting up a system where people are going to not invite you to a group unless you have X hundred number of skill points.
There's also the issue of dynamic event scaling. I imagine it's pretty straightforward to reduce someone in power from level 80 to level 8 when they take part in a level 5 dynamic event. How do you do it when it's all skill points?
Part of the whole reason too in GW2 to have half your available skills be from your weapons is so that people can't make truly awful builds. You'll never be able to gimp yourself too terribly while at the same time providing a lot of flexibility and customization for people who really want to try to maximize their build for their role. A skill point system seems like it would add a lot of minimum complexity and make it easier for people to screw up.
What is the objection to levels? That they are artificial? Is the preferred system one where you have to grind up every skill that you use and only those skills?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
To be honest, anyone who claims that a game doesn't have numbers sounds like they're coming over as though they're saying that a game doesn't have big enough numbers, or that a game doesn't require enough time->skill to get those numbers. This is something that applies to WoW's gear grind equally as much as it applies to EvE's skill grind. I think that what some people are objecting to, more than levels, is the more casual-friendly entry level of Guild Wars 2.
It won't be a gear grind, there won't be skills, but you have people who're locked into ancient MMORPG ways of thinking, and can't free themselves from tht. It makes me wonder if they've ever played some of the more interesting single-player RPGs out there. Ultima VII didn't need numbers to be interesting, to the contrary, it was more interesting when all of its numbers were hidden, and it endeavoured to do that. It's worth keeping in mind how old of a game Ultima VII is, too, so this is hardly a new idea.
But you'll always have people who go on and on about their numbers and how hard their numbers should be to earn, either via gear grinding or a skill system, because if you don't have to earn your numbers then it's a 'themepark.' Well, excuse me princess but I don't exactly care for a second job. I play games for fun. So I get where you're coming from, cali59, and personally I don't have any problems with a lack of grind related to getting increasingly bigger numbers at all.
The day that gamers stop fetishising numbers will be a happy day for me. It has levels solely as a thing for balancing character progression and scale, those are the only numbers the game will ever need. No, Guild Wars 2 does not need any more numbers than that.
An example that I would prefer over a numerical level system would be to spend experience points to purchase skills. You could stockpile XP and get more powerful abilities earlier on, or spend as you go, picking up utility spells, cc, etc. There would be prerequisites to get some of the best skills ie you must obtain at least rank 3 firespark to get rank 1 fireblast.
Overall, I think it would allow your character to feel more personalized. It would also help alleviate the number stigma like what Locke was saying. If im level 50 and I see a level 40 creature, I do not hesitate to jump in and beat its ass. But if there were no levels, Id actually pay more attention to mobs patterns and abilities. Its a lot more fun going into combat with a mob youve never fought before, because there is no number over their head, you have no expectation that youre "supposed" to win because you severely outlevel it.
Just my 2c
The problem with a skill based system is that the main progression tool which is "learning in skill use", is a tottally fail system, it is great on paper but it always prooved to be a mess and nothing else that a macro heaven. They could definitly go out of this path and make their own progression system, but again it would have gave them a good sum of job. Eve progression isn't very good either, the first to come are the best served isn't really that good either. So untill someone managed to made a good skill based system, and some are just great but people don't know them, untill then its just better to avoid them.
A) I was unaware that GW2 was not a gear-centric MMO. Throughout the leveling process, GW2 will feature several dungeons, which promise to provide the more challenging, fun PvE content in the game. Each of these dungeons will feature its own unique full set of gear for each class, which, based on some of the art revealed on the GW2 site, look amazing. Combine their in-depth dye system and stat customization, and obtaining these badass gear sets is one of the things I'm looking forward to the most in GW2. Oh and GW2 has "end game" raids, for which gear is awarded.
C) The name of the game is progression. Progression is the single most compelling and addictive quality to MMOs. To get all sociological up in here for one brief sentence: in a world where the common proletariat's life has grown stagnant, in a world where the college-educated cannot seem to find degree-appropriate jobs right out of college, in a world where many people feel an utter lack of advancement and progression in their own lives, escape into a virtual world where progression occurs excedingly fast feels extremely compelling. A leveling system is one of the first and most tangible ways a player experiences character advancement in an MMO. It lays the foundation for unlocking new abilities, gear upgrades, and crafting levels, and it provides direction from zone to zone and dungeon to dungeon, all while providing a nice little number that slowly increases. I understand that character advancement can occur in all the same ways without "levels," but I wouldn't underestimate the importance that slowly increasing little number has with many players. The increasing number itself accentuates the actual progression your character experiences in the form of abilities, stats, gear, new zones, etc.
That will stretch the development timetable out at least, what, another couple of weeks? Works for me.
When Foomerang is saying "gear-centric" he's talking about a game where gear power is the defining feature of a person. He means the kind of game where there is raid gear progression. You do dungeons to get gear for tier 1 raids which you do to get gear to be able to do tier 2 raids, etc. GW1 was fairly easy to get statistically near perfect gear, and only slightly harder to get perfect gear (the proper upgrade components). By contrast, vanity was the big grind. It was lot of work to get gear that was functionally equivalent but looked an awful lot better.
We're still a little in the dark about the nature of the high end gear but if i's anything like GW1 and if ArenaNet sticks with their no grind philosophy, I'd expect that gear obtainable from dungeons, DE raids, crafting or big karma/gold purchases would have unique skins but fairly similar stats.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
A skill point system would eventually be used the same way as levels. You gain experience and level up skills. How does a potential ally know how long/good you have been playing? It will just show how much experience points you have and how many you have spent. Instead of saying level 30, it will say you have gained 320 skill points or something. People will eventually start looking for experience points rather than level. And to be honest, I would rather spend time looking for a level 30+ rogue than a rogue with 320+ experience.
Same goes for skill points. Skill points are just like attribute points, you gain them, then feed them into your character to make them stronger. In the end, people will just start LF Rogue with 36+ skill points.
The problem with gauging a mob is quite easily fixed. Even with levels...
Just make it so that in that area mob levels have a range of 10 levels (example). So in a level 50 area, the mobs are 45-55. The next step would be to hide the level. That way, a player cannot see if that mob is easily taken down or a real challenge. Hell, you could just list that mob as 45-55 and it would still be tricky.
Overall, I think it would allow your character to feel more personalized. It would also help alleviate the number stigma like what Locke was saying. If im level 50 and I see a level 40 creature, I do not hesitate to jump in and beat its ass. But if there were no levels, Id actually pay more attention to mobs patterns and abilities. Its a lot more fun going into combat with a mob youve never fought before, because there is no number over their head, you have no expectation that youre "supposed" to win because you severely outlevel it.
Just my 2c
A skill point system would eventually be used the same way as levels. You gain experience and level up skills. How does a potential ally know how long/good you have been playing? It will just show how much experience points you have and how many you have spent. Instead of saying level 30, it will say you have gained 320 skill points or something. People will eventually start looking for experience points rather than level. And to be honest, I would rather spend time looking for a level 30+ rogue than a rogue with 320+ experience.
Same goes for skill points. Skill points are just like attribute points, you gain them, then feed them into your character to make them stronger. In the end, people will just start LF Rogue with 36+ skill points.
The problem with gauging a mob is quite easily fixed. Even with levels...
Just make it so that in that area mob levels have a range of 10 levels (example). So in a level 50 area, the mobs are 45-55. The next step would be to hide the level. That way, a player cannot see if that mob is easily taken down or a real challenge. Hell, you could just list that mob as 45-55 and it would still be tricky.
makes sense to me. all im really saying is that the little number next to someones avatar is not really necessary. in gw2 it seems to be even less important.
And a max skilled rabbit does the same thing to the partially skilled wolves, there isn't a real difference.
I think what you really have a problem is levels playing such a huge role in to hit rolls and HPs, skill based systems tend to slow down the hit curve a lot more than level based ones do but that isn't because they are skill based, it is a design choice that could exist in a level based game if you wanted it to.
The number only exist to show how effective another player. You have basically 2 choices when selecting an ally.
You can look at the number next to his name. This can be a few different things. Experience points, skill points, elite skills unlocked, bosses slain, or levels. Either way, that number is just used to guage a character level. I prefer a low number too, such as 80. I wouldn't want to look at a character and see he's earned 3,415 skill points or similar.
Or you can read his personal story journal and see who hes killed or whats hes been through.
Though the latter actually sounds interesting, I don't want to have to read 4 journals every time I try and run a dungeon.
GW 2 has levels to appease the millions and millions of achievement-oriented players who enjoy it.
Or you could just talk to them and ask them yourself.Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
makes sense to me. all im really saying is that the little number next to someones avatar is not really necessary. in gw2 it seems to be even less important.
The number only exist to show how effective another player. You have basically 2 choices when selecting an ally.
You can look at the number next to his name. This can be a few different things. Experience points, skill points, elite skills unlocked, bosses slain, or levels. Either way, that number is just used to guage a character level. I prefer a low number too, such as 80. I wouldn't want to look at a character and see he's earned 3,415 skill points or similar.
Or you can read his personal story journal and see who hes killed or whats hes been through.
Though the latter actually sounds interesting, I don't want to have to read 4 journals every time I try and run a dungeon.
Id prefer a title system. In other words, once you aquire a certain set of skills, it unlocks vaious titles that could also indicate a player's effectiveness. For example if you bought a lot of fire spells, youd get access to a title called Firestarter or something. That would be an immediate indication of the ammount of skill points this person invested without having to look up specific numbers.
Also, Im a big fan of players proving themselves regardless of level or gear. I always have a large friends list of people to pull from when trying to for a group. Regardless of gear or level, I can usually tell if someone is going to be wirth their weight in polygons just by talking to them for a few minutes.
This is a bad post and I'll tell you why. Skill based systems do work. In fact they are probably the most fun system. The problem is that a lot of the companies that have tried to do this, did a poor job. Personally I hated the skill based system in EvE, and I think it was a poor reflection of what a skill based system should be. Ultimate Online did it right. Pre-NGE SWG did a pretty damn good job too. Skill based systems are about using your items and abilities to progress in your skill. I.E. You pickup a sword and hit a monster, or spar with a friend, and you gain points in that skill. The object is also to have a skill cap. This allows people to customize their character in many ways. I.E. You have 100 skills that max at 100 skill points. You have a skill cap of 700. You can max out any 7 skills you like to make and customize your own personal character. For example.. I had a Fisherman that could go out in a boat in UO, cast magic, and fight with a bow. I had a blacksmith that could mine ore, cast magic, and also steal from people. This is the type of customization that you cannot find in Themepark style MMOs. It very possible that you've not experienced this, because again.. no games have really done it right. Darkfall was close, but they didnt have a skill cap.. so you could master everything. Mortal Online is interesting. A little too hardcore for my taste, and not many people play the game.
I personally don't care which system this game has. I'm sure i'll play it either way. I think a skill based system would be great, but I'm also afraid they might accidently screw it up, and that could really take a turn for the worse. So I'll gladly play a level based system, as the game looks impressive from everything I've seen thus far.
in pve, i myself would prefer a no-cap level system that is mostly cosmetic, but slightly rewarding, whereas you would gain no extra benefit skill-wise but would gain maybe 1 additional life/hit-point. Mobs you encounter would also take that into effect with the difficulty scaling mechanic reguardless of who else is in the event. you shouldn't get too extreme though. five years after release, i wouldn't mind seeing a level 178 player character and saying dam, theres someone who has been around the mill for quite a while.