Level cap - GW2

I've thought about all of the reasons. I just haven't pointed to any of them and said "THIS IS IT!"

Ask how many people "liked" the rep grinds and how much "fun" it was earning and maintaining the old PvP gear.

No, most people do not like the grind. Most people like the content that comes after the grind. If the grind was so widely enjoyed we'd see a whole lot more people playing Lineage rather than in one country.

That would be under the assumption that those are the only types of people who would be more than willing to buy continuing expansions.

And, um, that assumption would be wrong.

Hard to reach level cap, no grind.

See, now if you emphasized on this like I asked you to a couple posts ago this would not be the cluster*%#@ it is now.

Grind in WoW: "Aw geez, in order to experience all of this awesome and great content I have to go through all this grinding crap D: Damn!"

Gind in GW: "Aw geez, look at all of this grind...Oh well, I'll just *play the game first* then do it if I feel like it : D Yay!"

BIG (emphasis on "big") difference between GW and WoW's grind. In GW I can see *all* of the game's content without doing any of the grind. In WoW I can barely do any of it without going through that grind. In GW I can see *all* of the game's content without doing any of the grind. In WoW I can barely do any of it without going through that grind. In Gw...You get it now, yesss?

Well maybe the reasons people want a higher level cap is something you should think about.

People don't like grind? Orly? Then why do we have all these people grinding titles which have nothing to do with the content?

Assuming people that bought Gw:en are more likely to buy expansions is a wrong assumption? Well ya fooled me.

Until we get a legit "hard way to reach level cap" without any grind at all, I call a load of poo on this idea.

I get your point, but it still doesn't change mine. Changing the level system/cap WILL increase the amount of grind. I have no doubts about that. I also have no doubts that more grind will be in Guild Wars 2, because it has been PROVEN that people enjoy grind in Guild Wars 1. Whether it is optional or not doesn't matter.

Np, I can do that - but only if you try to look outside the box for once.

Go find all of those hundreds of thousands of US and Euro players enjoying Lineage 1 & 2 to no end - oh right.

Direct me to the indisputable proof of people in WoW loving all of the work required to maintain the BG PvP Gear - hold up.

That aside, it's not safe to take one's statements to the complete literal level (unless you're trying to make them look stupid - in which case, yur bayad). I'd have to be one ignorant little ass to not understand that there are exceptions. But I'm not gonna look at someone with R6 KoaBD and say "hay, *everyone* must want to do that!!!"

Let's go back to your comment:

Maybe - just maybe - people enjoyed the HoM for reasons other than grind? Perhaps the fact that they could show off their armors? Their achievements? Their mini-pets? Soon to be rarer weapons? Their achievements? Their doodahdeedangdurr?

(ps: where the hell do you get these numbers?)

Then I insist you go and play Oblivion and Mass Effect: two beautiful games that show this system perfectly. Level cap in both is very high and a bit out of reach, but you're never compelled to feel that you "has to levels up!". There's never a situation in either game where you're required to be a certain level.

Hahahahaha - yes it does.

In Guild Wars I can take my sweet, sweet time with any of the titles and other carrots on a stick. I can take a whole five years with that KoaBD title track if I wanted to - even for rank 1!

The same can't be said in WoW. I have to keep up with my guilds' progressions. If I'm unable to do that I'm kicked out, unless I'm a highly required class - in which case I'm dragging them down. Both are pretty bad.

This isn't to say that there are guild's in GW that are the same. But if you get fed up with it all and tell them all to "*#$@ off" and say that you "don't wanna do this" then you won't be missing out on much. In WoW, you'd be screwed.

GW = Optional.
WoW = Isn't.
Huge - Difference.

@people: Way2notspecify#of.

But given, um, THIS:

...I'd say the #'s aren't terribly high as opposed to those who don't enjoy the grind. Notice how WoW's subscription fees continued to grow after they reduced the grind? I thought everyone liked it!?

I think its pretty clear that the title system has been a successful system (from Anet's point of view not from mine). This isn't a case of "exceptions", this is without question a case of the majority. Just go to any outpost and you see 90% of the players with some form of title on....many of them with a high level grind title. Do I have exact numbers? No...but its a very good educated guess.

Of course. But don't you see something interesting about Anet giving us a direct link to GW2 by something that promotes grind?

That is exactly what we have in Guild Wars 1 now...a system where you never feel you have to level up and you are not required to be a certain level (usually because you are already 20). Surely people want a higher level cap for reasons other than just being able to see a bigger number?

To me grind is grind. Either the game has it or it doesn't...particularly in Guild Wars which went from almost zero grind to a lot of "optional" grind. I see what you are trying to say...it is still irrelevent to my point though.

How do you know the #s aren't terribly high? I'd say the number of people in outposts with grind based titles is a good observation to the number of people who may enjoy some form of grind (optional or not). I'd also like to see the data saying that WoW's suscription fees grew based on changes in grind? I didn't think there was ever data done on that...

And lastly...I'm not saying everyone likes grind. I'm saying a lot of people are ready and willing to play it, and many people do like it.

Replying to this portion is in reply to a lot of your post:

Not really. Given what you've said here shows that your "educated guess" came from the personal observation of your gaming experience:

...and that single, biased lens from yourself is pretty much nothing. Even if "all yo' friends" agreed with each other it would still be nothing since in order for it to actually mean something you'd have to correctly and appropriately calculate data between quite a thousand people about quite a many experiences.

Simply put, those are resources you don't have access to. Therefore you're "educated guess" is pretty much baseless save for your personal experience, but that too is completely and entirely insignificant.

What I bring to the table is a bit different:
-I point out continually that Lineage is popular only at it's point of origin. Both 1 & 2 are completely filled to the brim with grind, yet they're popular seldom in other areas.
-I frequently remind that WoW has been cutting down the amount of grind in it's game over the years, yet earning more players at the same time.

Because apparently grind is *all* it promotes. Totally not earning achievements for completing challenging dungeons, collecting heroes, armors, weapons, or mini-pets.

I wouldn't assume that those same people would want grind as well, though.

You're point (at least part of it, you seem to be greatly attached to the notion that "high levels automatically = grind") is that there's going to be grind. My point is that it's not going to matter. The more players ANet is able to cater to the better.

It's not the "grind" that's evil, it's why it's there and what it does.

You read what I said wrong. I was referring to your claim that "GRIND RULEZ" apparently and that if WoW chopped such a shitload of it off we'd see less players in it. The opposite happened: 12 million accounts.

Meh...you are being technical instead of practical. You sound like a person who clearly sees something take place, yet claims that many experiments must be performed until we know its true. I'm betting a global poll wouldn't be enough either. All I'm saying is go to an outpost and look for yourself. Its as clear as day.

You are claiming my assumptions are wrong, yet you make THIS claim?! How do we know that a grind reduction has anything whatsoever to do with increased subscriptions? Not to mention, what does this have to do with grind in Guild Wars?

It doesn't matter...all that matters is grind of PART of what it promotes in a game when grind used to be not promoted AT ALL and was FROWNED upon.

It doesn't matter whether they want it or not, because a higher level cap is almost surely going to bring it...assuredly compared to the level system as is.

High levels doesn't automatically equal grind, but a change in the level system means HIGHER grind. I'm saying if they increase grind that in itself is catering to more players. Guild Wars didn't have ENOUGH grind for the average player. Titles came into existence for these players, and Guild Wars 2is probably going to have grind x10 because Anet realized they didn't add enough to satisfy people in GW1.

Again...since when is accounts directly correlated with grind amount? I could easily argue that WoW is known in many circles as having a lot of grind (regardless of the lessened grind)...and yet it still has that many subscribers. And this is Guild Wars we are talking about...

High to unlimited cap would be best in my opinion as long as it is mainly for prestige. no one would have grind to access new areas or missions and what-not.

It's totally fine to be practical and wreckless until one person experiences something far different than the other. Case in point? PUGs. There are just as many people who love playing with others as those that do alone.

Further case in point? My experience: when I'm in LA I'm surrounded by "nubs". For every maxed Carto title I run across I bump into about 50 people with the map only covered by 60-70%. For every person I see with 15k I see 100 others with mismatched armor that's probably not even maxed.

...But what do I suggest? It's not that I'm jumping to saying "oh noes players don't likes the grind", I say we look more into it. See why players aren't going for titles and other goodies instead of glancing and guessing. You solve math problems, not estimate them.

The fact that we're arguing pretty much shows we cannot in any way be "practical" about this. Because my experience is widely different than your experience, that means we're actually going to have to do our homework.

But hey, you can go right ahead and do exactly like ANet did with it's PvP if you'd like: assume to know what the playerbase wants.

Sup Sonya? Anyways: What does matter, though, is that all of this grind is so unrequired to experience all of the game's actual content that it's questionable to call it grind at all. With the buff to the PvE skills (even though they more required a nerf) this became even moreso.

Grind that's required to experience the content is completely different than grind that simply inflates your e-peen and does a barely marginal difference in a few skills. Grasp this, understand this, love this.

Most of this portion is largely invalidated save for the bold (play ME or Oblivion, then talk).

See, the beauty in optional grind is you can add as much of it as you want to your game and it still won't matter. They could add a million different title tracks and I still wouldn't care because they would only poke, not shatter, my gameplay experience.

Now for the person who does enjoy the grind...then cool, it's win-win: I don't have to do it, he does it if he wants to. I don't feel discouraged and weak for not doing it, he gets his grind. If the utmost largest factor you can get from it is vanity, then awesome. If not, something went wrong.

That's what ANet did with GW1: They added not just grind but optional grind. They knew how bloated and cheap it could be interpreted if used to only extend the middle of the campaigns, but offered as an afterthought it's not so bad an idea.

It's the number of active accounts, people who are actually staying subscribed to the game after the trial is up.

But you do make a good point: the game's numbers were going up quite a bit before they reduced a lot of the required grind. However, it's not the fact that numbers are going up that points to people being more in support of less grind and rather that there may not be too many people who truly want the grindsandwhich. However this is also why I continually bring up the fact that the Lineage series is not terribly popular save for one area.

You say your experience is different than mine, and that you don't see the same thing I do. Fine. So let's go by the changes Anet has made to the game. Anet obviously is making changes they feel will make the most players happy. And what did they do? They added grind to their game.

And you don't have a point with PvP. Anet made automated tournaments specifically so they could take resources off of PvP, and move them to PvE where the majority of players wanted it.

Don't you see what happened? Even the content has been turned into grind (they want people to go through it more than once). All that matters is grind used to be FROWNED UPON in Guild Wars and now it is ACCEPTED and even LOVED. Optional or required is meaningless to my point. Grasp this, understand this, love this.

Again irrelevent to my point above...but lets go back to the point of this thread. Increasing level cap...can you sit here and tell me with a straight face that the idea of a higher level cap will not increase grind more than the current system?

You keep bringing up Lineage...I don't know why. It simply proves that people enjoy grind, even if they aren't Americans. The fact that the majority of players like WoW is simply a cultural thing...most people I know have heard of WoW but not GW or Lineage.

Is it to make the most players happy, or to satiate a few players happy and to give everyone a chance to be recognized

It's essentially no different than the achievement system on the Xbox 360. I guess the entire game library for it is completely and utterly full of "grind".

Which brings us to another point: subjectivity. Yes, you're going to get a lot of heated comments from people being adamantly and violent against grind. But what happens when the "grind" of the discussion is 99% optional? When all of those millions of hours could be ignored at nearly no consequence?

Yes, your point can't be argued that there were people fully against grind in the past. But are people on the same page as you? Could it possibly be accepted because frankly no one's going to give a shit?

People will be pissed when they have to actually *do* the grind, but what can be said when it's all optional?:
"Does GW have grind?"
"Yes, so to speak."
"OMG THAT SUX! Why do I have to playthrough this crap just to play the game?"
"You don't. It's all optional."
"oh."

"All that matters is grind used to be FROWNED UPON in Guild Wars..."

It still is. But standard "mmo grind" is not the same as the "grind" we have in Guild Wars.

"...and now it is ACCEPTED and even LOVED."

What ANet has added to their game isn't terribly harmful if damaging at all. As is now it's pretty much exactly the same as earning achievements on Xbox Live, even moreso with the buff to PvE skills.

I hate doing snippets, but I'm just using this as an example.

In regards to my PvP comment: ANet got the players' priorities incorrect. People wanted, above all else, balance. ANet wanted to add more skills which would much more easily screw up said balance. Players got pissed. ANet lost.

Wait and see.

For me, it's not going to be "grind" if I have to be certain levels for certain areas. It's not going to be "grind" for me if I'm never beated and say "oh if only I was a higher level". It's not grind for me *now* because I don't have to do any of it.

It's full of grind. Nearly entirely.

To be good, you do not rely on skill. You really completely and entirely on time-spent.

If there's such a huge demand for "GRIND" then we would be seeing Lineage 2 to at least have somewhat of a gathering outside of Korea.

Guys why dont you just shake and make up its a no win argument

Yea...through grind.

Of course. At first many people (and Anet) were fully against grind, but then grind was added and a lot of people didn't give a shit. I did though because part of the reason I bought the game to begin with was the idea that NO grind was EVER going to be in the game. Optional or not, grind was not suppose to get you ANYTHING. SKILL was supposed to get you everything.

You keep bringing up the "optional" vs "neccessary" grind, but it keeps being irrelevent to my points or to this thread...

Wrong sadly. People above all else, didn't give a shit about balance. The PvP players did, but almost nobody else did. And Anet clearly obliged, with the recent update more icing on the cake. Most players love the update...people who want balance hate it. Just another thing Anet caved in on (with grind>skill being the other).

Its more grind if you have to do anything more to max out your level than what you have to do now in Guild Wars 1.

Not neccessarily. As I said...many Americans believe it or not haven't heard of Lineage. In fact, the only real "well known" MMO in America is WoW. It still raises the point that people enjoy grind though, or that game wouldn't have the huge share that it does. Isn't t in the top3 to top5 most played games online?

Why?

And what does the grind get you?

Titles. A few extra points of damage (very few now due to the PvE skills changes). Vanity. Things that make little to no impact on your gameplay experience.

It goes back to the subjectivity of the term: You see it as grind, I see it as achievements (same as my 360 comment which you skillfully ignored). They're only ANet's little "pat on the backs", just like PS3 trophies, like WoW's achievement system. The progression is near nonexistent. All you get from all this work is titles, vanity, and e-peen.

Calling what we got in GW1 "grind" is pretty much saying that every game for the 360 is grind, good luck with that. In GW1 it's still skill>time spent, and you don't get very much for that time spent.

Now you get to tell me where the grind is in Halo 3 and Gear of War, gogogogogo.

If generally all MMO's and MMO-like games are a bit unknown (I don't consider GW an MMO), then why isn't the Lineage series popular outside of Korea? Likewise, why does GW see such a large lack of interest in Korea?

In regards to the WoW comment: way2ignoreallofwhatisaidearlier. There's solid content in the game, you just have to go through all the grind to get to it. Want to raid this dungeon? First you have to get to be attuned, you have to have the proper gear, you have to etc. etc. etc. Want to be successful in PvP? Don't even think about going in there with a single green or without resilience. Guild Wars is an extremely nice breath of fresh air.

In the end that grind becomes worth it because that's just how much so many enjoy the game. But without that grind, those paychecks at Blizz start to get a bit low much to many's dismay.

should be interesting to see the new cap. more likely than not it will be higher than current.

lol that's pretty funny since WOW had over 8 million subscribers before they even reduced the grind and just like GW introduced grind to gain more players of that sort WOW reduced it to gain more players of the GW sort. They are drawing upon each other because they are COPYING one another. It's also funny you types keep saying you can't compare GW to WOW yet you continually do when it suits your agenda. lol WOW is clearly the winner in every catagory except one thing....monthly fees. That is the only reason GW stands where it does now, add a monthly fee to GW and it would be down amongst the ranks of a Shadowbane or SWG's. It's not about grind it's not about skill > time, it's about No Monthly Fee period.

it always was about the no monthly fees
at the end of things it wont matter how high the lvl cap is a lot of ppl wont ever be happy to have to work for their stuff.
take the original the way that was set up got it bang on in my opinion it was such a long way to get max armour/weapons all the best skills were near the end or in some nasty out of the way place .
you could byepass and get run to droks or you could just hunt for mats to get better gear than you found in towns from collectors again hidden all over the shop.
then came those skill unlock packs,factions and,the lazy got worse the point being why has time spent become a nasty phrase

20 is a good lvl- it works here so y change


tbh it doesn't matter what the lvl cap is - on the condition that after a certain lvl u don't gain anymore health/energy/attributes etc.

I see it as achievements as well...achievements through grind.

I wouldn't know, I don't play those games.

Because people are playing other games? There are a lot of reasons it might not be. Also, GW was getting a growing Korean following in the beginning, but changes made to the game contributed to a sharp decline.

Thats fine, but like I said...this optional vs required thing has nothing to do with my point. My point is that many people enjoy grind optional or not, and raising the level cap almost certainly will cause more grind than we currently have. It gives me a sneaky suspicion that some people actually want a harder level cap for that reason.

Every MMO type game has to be compared to WoW...there is no other option. And you saying WoW is clearly the winner in every category makes me LoL. Maybe its the leader in categories you enjoy (such as grind), but it still isn't the leader in PvP, even after all these broken GW updates. That being said...yes a monthly fee would be stupid for GW.

loving how the majority of this topic is quotes ....
Unlimited level cap would be different actaully (they could make it cosmetic changes at a certain point). I can't really think of an MMO with 'unlimited' levels.

Anet keeps adding in all of this "grind" because it's the only ounce of longevity it can give to it's players. They know how vital it is to keep their game so strictly to skill>time, so they toss in all these title hunts as a "this is the best we can do" for players who wish to persue them.

They also keep adding more and more because not only is it completely optional but it's simple to implement: add a title, make it a bit out of reach, satisfy those who like to hip-thrust and show off their e-peen. All the "grind" in Guild Wars does nothing but recongize players who span a long playtime in the game. In such an instance it's completely open to interpretation whether or not it becomes "grind" at all.

For insight: If I was someone completely new to Guild Wars and asked you "does it have grind?", what would you say? Would you leave it at "yes", or would you say "yes, but..."? If the former, shame on you. If the latter, especially if it's to claim that it's optional, then you did good. In many MMO circles, grind is the "content" (many refer to it as "bullshit") you have to go through to get to the actual content, i.e. gameplay that does not consists of "goto A, kill X number of hobgoblintrolls, goto B". But when that grind is only treated as an afterthought, when I can get from point A to point B without having to spend hours killing the same generic monsters over and over again, things are different. It's why you'd need to be specific in your statements. It's why 360 achievements aren't labeled as "grind". It's why some players consider themselves spoiled by Guild Wars.

For further insight: If I myself had never played Guild Wars, asked you the question "does it have grind", you said "yes" and left it there, but then asked you to emphasize on that and find out that the "grind" is completely unneeded to experience all of the game's content, I would easily say: "oh...that's not grind, then". It's not just the amount of time you have to put into something that qualifies it as grind, but also the benefit you get from it and what you miss out on when you don't do it. What's the benefit in being "God Walking Amongst Mere Mortals" besides gaining attention? What do you get for being the highest Zaishen rank besides having swords and spears appear out of nowhere and that do nothing?

You are most certainly right in saying that there are people who like grind. But to assume that's the only group ANet should cater to is quite an oversight. You cater to all types of players possible, easily satiating those who'd like to play through the game from start to finish on a casual lifestyle and those who like to spend numerous hours in each of their games, and it's a good idea to cater to those as well.

This is pretty much why I've been having trouble comprehending your point for so long, and why I've just now realized it: it's 10000000% subjective with little supporting it. You point to all the "grind" in GW as proof of its "high demand" but I point out how easy it is to put in the game and the fact that it's not needed to experience the content. You point out WoW's popularity but fail to realize the rewarding content that comes from the grind - and in addition to that how Blizzard has taken note of the "deadzone" areas in leveling (the points that get the most grindy - and hence, most unpopulated). You point to ANet's decision to "increase the level cap" but I point to Oblivion and Mass Effect, both having high and hard to reach level caps but with no amount of "grind" required to go through (if anything the cap increase sounds just like what they did with titles in GW1: easily satisfy those who like to spend large amounts of time in their game).

That's why I'm not seeing any harm in what ANet's doing to GW2 with the increased level cap and why I don't see anything wrong with what they've done with titles in GW1: they're catering, only slightly, to a very easy to please portion of players while having very little harm to the core beliefs of their game. Given how much ANet makes from it's players each month (i.e. $0), it's hard to implement anything else.

mmm.... i would like about 50 cause u can get to lvl 20 in a a hour or two

Which is exactly the problem they are going to run into in Guild Wars 2....in which case more grind will be added. The only way they could avert this problem is to put the grind DIRECTLY into the game...

It depends on how in depth they wanted me to go. In general though I tell people that Guild Wars is not an MMO, but it is trying to be one by adding things that typical MMOs have. I say it is a single player playthrough game that used to be a PvP game.

What is the benefit of playing through the game? To have fun? Perhaps people got God Walking Amongst Mere Mortals, a title that almost certainly requires good amounts of grind to achieve, for fun?

Yes that would be nice, but in reality it doesn't work that way. Just ask the PvP players how well they were catered to. The way it works with their marketing model is they have to cater to the people who give them the most sales, and adding more of something they didn't have is a way to do that. Adding a higher level cap that will be harder to achieve (and very possibly require some amounts of grind) is a way to do that.

Irrelevent. Its still proof of high demand or it wouldn't be in the game.

Just as rewarding things come from the grind in GW, its just not content like it could easily be in GW2.

The problem is Oblivion and Mass Effect aren't MMORPGS. People want the Guild Wars franchise to be a MMORPG like they expect it to be, just without a monthly fee. The core issue of this whole thing is that in Guild Wars 1, one of the MAJOR POINTS of the game was levels meant nothing, but now people want it to mean something. They want it to be harder to attain....like other MMOS...instead of Guild Wars being uniquely NOT an MMORPG.

Think about all the posters who want a higher level cap because the current level cap is too easy to attain. Think about how they want the level cap to be HARDER to attain. They could easily say they just want the game be longer with the same level cap...but they don't. Ask yourself WHY Anet went through the trouble to implement this grind in GW1 though. Then ask yourself WHY they would increase the level cap in GW2.

The core beliefs and philosophy of the franchise are all but gone, and in Guild Wars 2 I bet anything they will be completely gone. One Anet rep even came out and stated that the philosophy has changed! You don't see the harm because you are either one of the people who enjoys it (like a LOT of people) or one of the people who simply doesn't care (like the people who don't care about balance). When you are a person like me, who doesn't enjoy it and does care about how much the game has degenerated from its roots, then you start to see it.

It's not even a good one of those as even the single player games offer more than GW does. GW offers grind for longevity and that's about it or these silly mini pets that are worthless for play value. Single player games offer so much more loot and challenge as games like Diablo 2 which offer practically unlimited phat loot and 3 yes 3 levels of difficulty and make playing those areas over more fun. I enjoy chapter 2 in Diablo 2 more than any other games areas, love the tombs and phat loot abounds. It's a lot more fun rummaging through 100's of pieces of loot vs the occassional blue, purple or gold you get in GW. GW loot drop rate is so boring and unfun now it's just not worth the time to play it anymore. GW has always needed power loot and it's scale of modifications increased a whole lot more than it is. 15^50 and +30hps I'm sorry is just not enough to go adventuring for.
Even Oblivion offers more and it offers a ladder of challenge and loot scaling as you play because the mobs level along with you instead of you reach the top of the ladder before you find the challenging mobs. The best loot is at the top of the ladder where it should be and there's a ton of it. The only problem with Oblivion is it's small world of only 16 square miles. But, it hardly lacks for other content or fun value. Morrowind is a lot bigger and with player mods even better. I certainly hope they take lessons from the more successful offline rpgs and WOW as skill>time gets boring way too fast when there's nothing else to do with it after you've finished the stories except pvp.

Sigh...A wall of quotes is no less painful than a wall of text.

Yeup. And that's all you get. No gear, no boosted stats, just that sense of personal achievement.

There's 0 harm in adding trophies. If having the kind of "grind" that we have in GW is a problem, then pretty much every 360 game would be in some sense of trouble (they're not, don't worry).

Which is funny, because that's exactly how it worked in GW1: people wanted grind, people didn't want it to get in the way of their game, both groups are happy. If you want to spend hours upon hours doing a tedious task you totally can. You don't have to if you don't want to and there's no drawbacks for not doing so. Now if you have some sort of fear that the grinder's are "GONNA TAKE OVA", then that might be something else...

There's very few routes ANet could take in implementing a high level cap while being able to satisfy both those who enjoy the grind and those who do not:

-Scale encounters based around player's level (as seen in Oblivion and Mass Effect): In doing so, you eliminate some of the urgency of needing to level and eliminating some of the "cheap shots" you see in leveling (ex:killing monsters/mobs only due to how high a level you are). In addition it provides the player with being able to go any route in the game they wished, being able to complete and progress through the game's hubs in any order they desire.

With the game set-up in such a sense, you could pretty much just have the whole game stay at any set level and it would still have that depth. However there are quite a few people who like to see their character grow in such a sense and who love to see how far they've come, and given such a system there's no harm done in implementing it.

-Provide a long and in-depth campaign in a static world: This would be a bit harder to do. In Prophecies it was done highly well, and being level 20 showed that you went through a lot to get there. The problem would be fine-tuning it to not feel drawn-out in any sort of sense (see the "Mumorpuger" path).

-Pull a Diablo: In addition to the previous method, this would mean having a static world but with the option to turn on more challenging difficulties. This would provide with some more consistent gameplay so it doesn't just get easy and effortless because your character is so powerful. Likewise, if you do want to be able to breeze through stuff you could just stay on a less challenging difficulty. If you want to be able to breeze just as easily on the hard as on the "easy", then get better.

-Have a "hard cap" of a certain level and make the rest of the levels completely based on vanity: This is something they've already discussed about not doing, but nonetheless it's worth a mention. Players who like to keep GW reliant on skill are happy, those who like to see their progress tracked are happy.

Then there are the problematic paths:

-Have a static world with an ever increasing (and stat boosting) level cap: If ANet took that "unlimited level cap" they were talking about, put it in GW1, and have none of the enemies scale to that level, things would get boring real fast. Games are supposed to get easier as you get better, not because you've spent time grinding yourself out. You'll see a lot of people that do want things made easier for them in such a fashion, but you'll see the most successful games challenging you and demanding you to be more skilled (like ya know, Mario? Zelda? Any good game released recently?). If all of this change in the Guild Wars franchise is pointing to ANet wanting a lengthier game, this has the potential to bomb it.

-Pull a "Mumorpuger" (see: Zero Puncuation): Have a high level cap but draw it out through numerous kill quests and quests that require items with insanely low drop rates that may or may not come from monsters who also have insanely spawn rates. This also has quite the potential to axe GW2. This is what many consider to be "grind": needlessly long and tedious to obviously keep you subscribed longer.

Bear in mind that these are just some of many possibilities. Not everyone may have the same idea when they think of a higher level cap.

wat

The only thing I and anyone can get from the grind in GW is personal fulfillment. In WoW I get access to new instances and raids and the gear required to progress through said instances and raids.

The only way ANet would be able to "easily" provide with as much content in GW2 would be to give it a subscription fee.

I don't care because all the "grind" is optional, isn't required to play through the game, and makes little to no difference on your gameplay if you choose to do it all. I just see zero harm in Guild Wars 1 having the varient of 360 achievements, just in GW1 it's shown a bit more pretty-like when you get them. How GW2 goes is different, as shown from above.

There is harm when the game was advertised as something else and turned into this. If the game was always this way, I wouldn't have a problem with it (most likely because I would have never bought it).

You have a 3rd group...people who don't want the crap to be in the game to begin with. People who want the game to stick to its roots instead of degenerating into something else.

Again, optional or not is irrelevent. What matters is all this added grind has changed the franchise into something else. This WILL trickle into Guild Wars 2.

Quite honestly, my opinion is that people who enjoy grind or even a higher level cap should not be playing Guild Wars. It was ALWAYS advertised as a no grind high skill game where level meant nothing.

Of course the problem with that opinion is that the grinders have now been catered to and the higher level caps will be catered to in 2, thus changing the entire concept of the franchise. I am now in the minority though, so I get flamed for that opinion even though it is truthful.

So in other words, you have quite a few people who want a higher number on the screen (like WoW does it). Couldn't you add depth or length and challenge to the game without adding levels?

Or to add grind that "acts" as content and lengthen out the game until the next expansion. Hey...as long as everybody is content. (c wat i did there)

Again, you don't see the harm because you are in the majority opinion. Honestly your argument sounds almost as bad as "DLDU". You are saying if I don't like it I don't have to do it. Fine...but that doesn't mean the crap isn't in the game still when it shouldn't be in the game to begin with.

The problem you face, Dreamwind, is that you are indeed in the minority.

If Anet kept GW to its original concept, then we would have very little PvE content if any at all and this would be a PvP only game. We would also have seen the number of people playing GW drop drasticaly much sooner and with far less chance of anyone returning to this game or franchise in the future.

Anet made a buisness decision. GW2 will cater to the widest possible number of people so they have the largest player base possible.

I do know that some companies create games that only fill a small niche market, but those companies have other games that bring in the majority of their income. GuildWars seams to be the big cash cow for Anet so they have to keep spreading the franchise as far and wide as possible.

I think level 30 or 35 would be a good cap..

This all begs the question: Why stick to that vision? Why not have optional achievement hunts that contribute nothing to your character's power?

There isn't. This is what Microsoft knew, it's what Sony knew. Achievements and Trophies are solid and harmless additions to the game.

This was already discussed a few pages ago between Zwei and I. Short answer: yes.

I saw, and it wasn't too good. Keep on reading til you get to where I go back to ME and Gears of War, you have a lot of work to do.

GW PvE was never meant to hold you, and it still holds true to that. Titles are only meant for those who want to spend an extra period of time in the game, to seek personal fulfillment after a long period of work, or just in general have nothing else to play and they really put GW on a high pedestal.

It's one of the few areas where the "DLDU" applies, because it doesn't affect just your own personal gameplay, it doesn't affect anyone's.

If you didn't like Ursan you didn't have to use it if you didn't like it...but in not wanting to use it you're arguably gimping yourself. You forcibly restrict yourself from blazomg through the most hardest difficult areas in the game in the game with little effort. Same thing goes for not wanting to use PvE skills or consumables: if you don't like or use them, you're missing out.

Now if all Ursan did was change the appearance of your character, would there be as much of an outcry? If you didn't like it and didn't use it, what'd you miss out on besides looking like a bear?

At this point I'm going to ask you how Epic supplying all the achievements brought a negative effect on Gears of War 1 & 2, how the officer ranks in Halo 3 were a bad idea to implement, how achievements in general were a "bad idea". Here, I'll get you started:
Gears of War 2 achievements
Mass Effect Achievements

Besides, grind like titles have been in existence in Guild Wars since the start: 15k armor, and even moreso with Obisidan. If you don't like it, don't get it. And nothing will happen.

Yep...the fact that the game changed is indisputable. The fact that the majority wanted it that way is also indisputable. I am only in this thread to point out these facts though.

I strongly disagree with both of your claims made here. Anet could have easily continued adding more PvE content while keeping it a PvP game and keeping the population.

I agree...if they are not against the philosophy of the game and they were part of the game from the beginning.

Exactly. So why make half assed attempts at trying instead of focusing on the good parts of your game?

LoL...I can't believe you are backpeddling on DLDU now. Please don't flip flop on me.

That is not the reason I found Ursan to be repulsive. I found it to be stupid because it was overpowered, degenerative, ruining the game, and should have never existed or even been conceived in the mind of somebody at Anet. I didn't think it was stupid because "not using it gimped you".

Frankly, most people didn't give a crap about Ursan and it didn't affect them in the slightest. I'm actually surprised it was eventually semi nerfed (even though it took FAR too long to do it and is still being heavily used due to its remaining strength). I guess that shows that if a minority wants change enough it might happen as long as the majority doesn't care much. But if a minority wants to keep things the same it doesn't stay the same if a majority wants change.

Those aren't grind titles. Besides, theres a big difference between things that already existed, and things that were later added. The armors were game starters. The additions were game changers.

"Anet could have easily continued adding more PvE content while keeping it a PvP game and keeping the population. "

That statement really doesn't make much sense. Based upon the design of GW you can really only be playing one or the other, so if you add more PvE you are taking people out of PvP to play that new content.


"Originally Posted by Bryant Again
GW PvE was never meant to hold you, and it still holds true to that. Titles are only meant for those who want to spend an extra period of time in the game, to seek personal fulfillment after a long period of work, or just in general have nothing else to play and they really put GW on a high pedestal.

Exactly. So why make half assed attempts at trying instead of focusing on the good parts of your game?"

Anet didn't expect people to get hooked on the PvE, they expected players to use PvE as a training ground for PvP and a means of customizing the look of their characters.

However people did indeed become hooked on the PvE content, as well as the PvP, but in much larger numbers. This forced them to shift the direction of the game putting a larger focus upon that which brought in the most money.

Granted they could have done things a bit differently, such as split off PvP (skills/items/armor/training island/ect) much sooner and that would have allowed them much more flexibility when it came to adding content to the PvE side and maintaining ballance in PvP. Based on statements they have made this is closer to the path they will follow for GW2.

This goes back to asking why ANet were so admantly against something so easily harmless. What ANet's added aren't half-assed attempts to keep you in the game longer, they have no reason to do that. They're just like what the 360's done, what the PS3's done, what Valve's done. They're little cookies that rewarded to you for an extended period in the game should you choose to do so.

Not using it forcibly restricted yourself because it was so overpowered. It eliminated a huge chunk of the skill threshold that existed in PvE. It discouraged build diversity.

It "gimped you" because the skill that existed at the time was no longer recognized. The same thing could be said if id Software put in an infinite ammo BFG9000 at the start of every level. Sure you can avoid picking them up, but that goes against the point. When you have to resort to finding a challenge by ignoring numerous overpowered facets in the game - and when using the things that are overpowered is recognized - something's wrong.

ANet saw this, though, in addition to the fact that reducing the skill threshold has a great ability to reduce longevity ("when you don't need to improve..."). This is a problem that WoW's endgame content has at the moment.

The only time you'll know what the majority wants is when they don't want it, and that can only be shown by a lack of sales and interest. Other than that there's very little that you can do to collect the thoughts of the majority of players when they never state their opinion. Not to mention your experience has colored what you imagine the "majority" to be.

As far as we can tell right now, the people voicing for "GRINDD" are a crowd just as big as those against it.

But it's grind, isn't it? You have to spend an extended period of time getting all those materials, don't you? You actually have to put forth a portion of hours to get those armors (especially FoW) to get those sets, correct? Especially if you want each and every one?

The answer is yes. Getting all of those sets will take a large amount of time. But nobody cares because the higher end armors aren't paramount to your success in any way - *just* like the titles, which are just elite armors in the form of text.

I want as high a cap as possible - preferably 300ish...ill settle for 178. This way I can call people bad for playing too much pve

No no...you can add PvE content just fine. You just keep the game a PvP focused game. Today the game is no longer a PvP focused game...its PvE focused. Also...most people play both PvE and PvP. It mostly isn't cut and dry play one or the other.

Let's just say I'm not convinced. Anet has proven to us in GW1 that they don't know how to run a PvP game. To me it isn't a case of them learning from their mistakes, because they haven't. The recent update alone was proof.

But they are attempts at keeping you in the game longer...they have reason to keep players in the franchise until 2 comes which will make them more likely to buy it. Which goes back to my original point...it is these little cookies that are essentially pseudo content and gives rewards for grind.

This is the problem the entire Guild Wars game has...reduction of skill. Ursan was just a shining beacon for the problem. The problem still remains, just in less talked about forms (except in PvP circles).

Yea...and as far as I know there were more sales when the game was still a PvP focused game than when it was a PvE focused game. I haven't done the research on that, but I'm guessing its about correct. Even though most players are PvE players, can we guess what the majority wants? I guess not..

You didn't respond to my point though. Armors have always been in the game. Titles were added later. The former was a game starter. The later was a game changer. Titles have created a culture of player in Guild Wars. Guild Wars has BECOME a game of titles, just as in Guild Wars 2 I'm guessing there will be a culture of power levelers.

Tabula Rasa anyone?

tabula rasa isint that going down the toilet

So how does the Mario series keep being so successful? Not because it keeps players in the game for months on end until the sequel comes out, not because they fill it to the brim with content. But because that one journey was insanely enjoyable. The same can be said of any solid and well made game series.

Same is said for Guild Wars, what exactly are you rewarded for with all that grind? As of right now, nothing besides personal gratification. That could change when they finally announce what you get for all the junk in the HoM, but that's the point where we also wait and see. For me, given all of ANet's emphasis on "skill>time", I'd go with it being something not terribly monumental to your game.

The bolded is your problem. You don't attempt to "guess" what people want amongst so many accounts. It's pretty much the saying as pulling a statement out your bum. So unless you can back that up with some qualifying and in-depth research, simply: no. We've already gone over that you can't be "practical' about this.

The only thing you're gonna see from "copies sold" is that copies are being sold. ANet announced on Aug 21st 2007 that they had reached 4 million copies, a long time after the PvP cluster*#$@ that was Nightfall. It then reached 5 million in the following Febuary on the 26th. Sou rce.

Is it still skill>time? Yes it is.

Do titles affect the game as much as the hunt for high-end vanity gear and weapons have been? Indeed.

Are you rewarded just as much for grinding out the money for that high-end armor set as you are for grinding out that cartographer title? Yeup.

Same for that crazily rare weapon? Yes.

The only difference I'm seeing is that titles weren't at the start of the game. That's it. They're still just as harmless as the culture that's been created from the high-end weapons and armor, and I don't see anyone complaining about how harmful that's been.

Well then Guild Wars wasn't a solid or well made game, because people need additional stuff to keep playing.

Again...what do you get for doing ANYTHING in the game? Even if it made you more powerful somehow, what would you do with it? Probably more personal gratification. See the entire problem with titles or higher level caps even existing? This grind gives a reward, and either the players are enjoying the grind or enjoying the reward by doing the grind. Either way the grind is still there.

So you say I shouldn't be making guesses, then you give me a source that basically proves what I was saying. Hmm ok. As far as I can tell, there was nearly 3 million copies sold before Nightfall was released. Between Nightfall and Eotn they sold another 2 million or so. That is 1 million less...? I'd be interested to search for the numbers by expansion...but I don't know if they exist.

No? The entire concept isn't skill>time. Every single thing we have been talking about in almost this entire thread isn't skill>time. It is people wanting more time>skill.

There was never a high end armor culture. There is now a high end title culture fueled by things such as HoM and supported by Anet. Grind was nothing more than a sidequest and not the endgame, but NOW it is the endgame.

Look we can go back and forth forever about this, but I'm just trying to get across the point I try to get across in a lot of threads. The game changed. Some people liked it, some didn't. Now people want the game to change more, and people like me just look from the outside and are amazed at what happened.

100, just so we can have more levels than WoW

That would mean all of Valve's games - in addition to many solid 360 and Playstation 3 games - are "bayad".



No.

Nope, because you have yet to show how all the achievements in the hundreds of 360 games, the trophies in the PS3 titles, and the achievement trackers in Valve's game cause "harm" to the playerbase - because they simply don't.

I've still yet to see how adding something that causes no damage to the game is causing damage to the game. The only thing I see is more players being catered to with very few being pushed aside (besides those who enjoyed high-end PvP, but that doesn't correlate to well to this discussion), and that's always a good thing.

The franchise aged and Guild Wars wasn't as "fresh and new" anymore. There goes your "proof".

ANet stated during one of the claims that they would never release the information as to how much each campaign sold individually.

The emphasis of "skill>time" meant that the player would never become a better player just by playing the game for an extended period of time. Straight from the Guild Wars synopsis: "You don't have to spend countless hours on a leveling treadmill to get to the interesting parts of the game, because combat is designed to be strategically interesting and challenging right from the beginning."

And today that still holds true.

Interesting that you left out the mention of the communities fueled by high-end and rare weapons.

P.S: You just called 360 achievements "endgame". Careful there.

And some people - like me - are amazed and confused at your (over?)reaction, especially when it's based upon so many assumptions. Given how flavored your experience was, though, it's a bit understandable.

Uh...no it wouldn't? I'm not saying GW is bad...in fact originally it was a great concept. I'm saying the game changed to something less unique because people apparently weren't satisfied with the original game.

Again, there is a big difference. People buying those games EXPECT those things to be in the game, because they are in the game and advertised to be in the game from the beginning. People buying Guild Wars (skill>time PvP endgame etc etc) should not have expected what the game is today. You think a company changing its entire core philosophy is harmless? Yea...maybe to those who either like the new philosophy or don't care one way or the other. Personally I wouldn't buy from a company who changes their core beliefs like rolling a dice.

Because releasing fresh and new expansions isn't fresh and new anymore, despite the fact that they had the existing playerbase as potential buyers and new players as potential buyers as well? Yea ok...I wonder why they won't release that information.

No it doesn't. The idea of skill>time is that the games entire philosophy is skill>time, not time>skill when people want time>skill. SKILL>TIME thats IT. The point is that skill>time was everything. Time meant NOTHING. Levels meant NOTHING. Now people want time to mean something and levels to mean something. Bye bye Guild Wars franchise as we knew it?

Interesting you left out the mention of the endgame changing...

And I don't play 360...

Again...because you are in the majority. You just don't see it. I speak for a lot of people who don't speak here or just flat out quit the game already.

Also, just look at every single post between ours. They all want higher level caps of course. Now look at their reasons for wanting that higher cap (WoW, longer and harder to get, etc etc). I think my "assumptions" on the playerbase still stand. In fact, you are probably one of the only people in this thread to give decent level cap suggestions. Everybody else simply wants a bigger number for other reasons.