Guild Wars was right

So basically you like GW for not being neverending, and now when it's nearing the end of its life you want Arenanet to make more stuff for it so that it won't end?

There is a huge power difference going from Prophecies only skills, to Factions, to Nightfall. For PvE, the step to EotN with all its PvE-only skills is also a huge step. I'd say that not upgrading would leave you behind in the power curve, even if not as much as in other MMOs.

Having different things to do when you want to (content) is not the same thing as being "forced" to log in to keep up with the lasest must-grind weapons or armor (neverending grindfest).

Oh...well if thats all he said than he is right and I can't troll (sadly). I suppose it is just a matter of whether or not what Guild Wars did right outweighs what it did wrong.

Hmm. I wouldn't put it like that, but yes, I can see why it might seem like a paradox.

I think the difference here is that whatever ArenaNet would add to the game, it would not be power-forced upon players. It would be optional content in the sense that their characters abillities would not be diminished for not taking on the content.

As in many MMORPGs, you have to keep with the stream. So many people I have seen and talked too, seem to have this love/hate relationship to the MMO they are playing. They love it, until they "nerd rage" and quits out of frustration from repetition and a feeling of having to do something they don't want to. If you got to lvl 60 in World of Warcraft, you could not really choose not to lvl when the expansion came out, if you still wanted to do stuff like PvP.

I think this is a key difference. Character progression is great. I am not against it, and I wouldn't be in Guild Wars either, but it needs to serve a game, and it needs to be delivered in a way so all players can follow with an emphasis on skills, tactics and teamwork, rather than being an auto-piloted robot who is winning due to time investment.


Of course if a game is fun who is to say that the person having that fun is not allowed or should not be encouraged to play regardless if it's a game that rewards time spent over, personal ability?
That's just how I feel. It's not really about having 1337 skillz I think. I just don't like the idea of it.

I played Runescape for a while. They call it PvP, but it is a god damn problem when a level 50 beats your level 70 because he grinds an attribute more than you. Most MMORPG's follows this formula.

Time Spent > Skill

To more time you spend, the more payment for monthly fees.

I find this area of discussion to be rather amusing in a way. It's amusing that people do not see that GW uses "character progression" (in PvE) almost as much as other RPGs - they just do it differently.

Basically, in Guild Wars, you have a "level" cap of 20. But, if you are playing Factions, one of the things you must do to progress in the game is to accumulate Faction points. So, instead of leveling higher, you "progress" by acquiring Faction.

In Nightfall they took this a step further by adding Sunspear and Lightbringer points. And they added skills which required these points (levels) to use. So, again, instead of leveling higher, you "progress" by acquiring SS and LB points.

In EotN they took this even further by adding 4 point types and skills to go along with them. So that, in EotN you don't "progress" your character by getting higher "levels", but you progress by getting (grinding?) Asuran, Norn, Vanguard and Dwarven points.

In Factions and Nightfall, this form of leveling had the benefit (which I liked) that it was localized - having faction, SS, or LB points didn't do you much good outside of the campaigns they were used in. Which also meant that, when/if you went back to play earlier content, you were not unbalanced with the foes or the other players in your group.

But, in the case of EotN, there is really only a small semantic difference between say, needing to get to level 30 to use the various PvE skills or using the Asuran/Norn/Vanguard/Dwarven points. In either case, a player who has EotN has an easier time doing pre-EotN content because of "character progression". They basically did it that way in EotN because people needed/wanted character progression, but they had said that level 20 would always be the max (and, ofc, it doesn't affect PvP.)

But lets be clear about one thing - "character progression" is a big part of GW, just like in most RPGs.

True but that's where it's different by being "optional".

I suppose what I'm saying is that, yeah those skills may help you out....but if you don't have them you're not going to be completely crushed.

In most RPG's when you progress your character becomes stronger.
You must level to beat foes in PvE.
You must level to beat players in PvP.
You must level to equip weapons or armor.
You must level to obtain spells.

You can be level 7 and get obsidian armor. You can be level 1 to wield a Voltaic Spear and Tormented Shield
You can spend 30 seconds and create a PvP character of any profession and use any skills you have unlocked.
You can be level 1 and have access to any skill in the game.

I agree with you Lawnmower.

Incorrect. You can't get Ursan Blessing at level 1.

DAMN! we've been had!

Game over man! Game over!

crossed gamed experience.
game play involving doing something in GW1 in order to complete something else in GW2

Playable and entertaining, strangely enough.

After trying Aion and liking absolutely nothing in it more than Guild Wars, I'm thankful that GW at least got the basics right.

guild wars is never right...

I agree with a lot of what the op has posted here. I would love to see ANet add more content, once Guild Wars 2 is finished. I am not so sure Guild Wars 2 will be a game I will play for long, I am still looking forward to it but also fully prepaired to uninstall it too.
On the other hand, it has been so long since a content update that Guild Wars is losing experenced players. Then again, a lot left when hero's were introduced. What is there left to do when you have maxed all the titles you want?

You seem to have thought about this a fairly long while..brought up some very good points, especially about games having a clearly defined end.

Though, it certainly is epic in a way for a gameworld to live on forever, create a history etc. I imagine games like EVE (keep in mind, imagine, I haven't played EVE) could have a history of empires. Like, in year 120 the long-lasting Askroan empire fell, and the universe was took over by the Koliahnceh. Etc. It's epic to be able to be a small part of something big..

If I missed the point completely or even partially, excuse me, didn't read the OP very carefully..though I think I did understand the main points.

Well said OP.

GW has flaws no doubt and may not meet all players desires or wants, but for what GW does have it fits the niche just right.

I wanted to get into MMO's for a long time, but never had the time or money to invest in a Pay2Play game long enough to make a worthwhile investment.

GW filled that desire by offering a way for me to play in ways that were new and familiar.

I look forward to GW2.