Feedback:User/Silverdawn/No Levels

I would like to bring up the possibility of removing the Level Progression system. Because 4thVariety already brought up this suggestion once before (which is worth taking a second look at here), I will be focusing on entirely new reasons why you should seriously consider this possibility. I know that you are aware of many of these problems already because you have taken measures to mitigate them with complex scaling mechanisms, but please hear me out; I will address that too.

Why Levels Suck
Here are some reasons why character levels suck. If you're not convinced, read the next entry under this heading. Repeat until you are convinced. If you've reached the end and you're still not convinced, look at the "Summary" section to see how much the pros outweigh the cons (and if you have better cons, please let me know because mine are few and feeble). If you're STILL not convinced, see the "Further Reading" section to find suggestions by other players to address problems that levels cause. If you are convinced and you find yourself in need of some inspiration, check out the "Better Alternatives Exist" section. These headings can all be skipped to by the table of contents conveniently located right above the big "Why Levels Suck" headline at the top of this paragraph.

Invalidation of Content
Look at a game like "Guild Wars: Nightfall" and then look at a game like "City of Heroes". The game developers worked really hard on each area in both games, delivering quality content. It's almost guaranteed that (barring runners) each player will experience all that content at least once as he or she works her character up to max level. But what then? How much of that content is useful and enjoyable to the player? In City of Heroes, a game with a tall progression system that is stretched over the entire game, not much. Only the ending levels, which I bet get pretty boring pretty quickly. What about Nightfall, a game with a short progression system where you reach max level when the game just begins? The answer is: most of it. I'm sure as developers, you want as much of your hard work to be enjoyable for as long as possible.

Player Segregation
Levels are bad because they divide up the playerbase. One of many examples is if a friend who has been playing a while invites a new friend to come join in the game. Naturally they want to play together. So, they have three options: one, the high level player rushes his friend through the beginning of the game, skipping plenty of content and killing everything with impunity, robbing his friend of the opportunity to play, learn and be useful in the beginning content. Guaranteed, the new player will feel rushed and unprepared for the harder content, even with a sidekick system. Two, the new friend is abandoned to work through the beginning of the game by himself. In the best case scenario, (three), the more experienced player abandons his other friends to make a new character and play through the early content with the new character. None of these options are really desireable.

Core Principles
Guild wars 1 was revolutionary because it reduced grind and extolled player skill as the ultimate deciding factor in the outcome of battles. It reduced the importance of gear, reduced the level spread and balanced the professions as best it could. It offered a simple system that was easy to learn but provided enough nuance to make skill one of the biggest deciding factors. GW2 seems to be partly taking this a step further by doing more work to balance builds (removing the second profession and making half the skillbar dynamic, forcing a self heal) and partly taking a step backwards by increasing the importance of other variables like level, correct distribution of attributes and gear on the outcome of battle.

I understand that GW2 is an entirely different game, but it is still "a" Guild Wars and should have not just the same lore, but the same spirit as its predecessor. Look at the Zelda franchise, for instance. It evolved and became better mechanically over time, but it never lost sight of its core principles. More levels is just... not Guild Wars-ish.

Conceptual Problems
Levels run counter to the natural difficulty progression of the game. Games are supposed to go from easier (where people have a chance to learn how the system works) to harder (to provide a challenge to players who have become proficient in the system). Levels are the opposite: the more you have, the easier the game gets. In order to make an area both a challenge for stronger characters and more of a challenge than previous area, you have to scale the difficulty up more than you would otherwise. This can lead to some rather hilarious conceptual problems that run counter to the game's stated goals of making the character feel heroic and make the lore that much harder to swallow. For example:

In the demo, there were two scenarios that were shown: a 1st level human and a 50th level charr. The first level human fought an epic battle against a powerful earth elemental and the charr fought some vermin (devourers). Now, imagine putting that L50 bug up against the L1 giant powerful earth elemental, and you'll see how big and epic the L1 human's accomplishment really was. We know the earth elemental should easily win, but the inclusion of levels forces a vastly different outcome. While that situation will never happen in game, another situation might: the human gets to the L50 area a little early. Now this epic hero, who comfortably pwned the earth elemental, suddenly finds himself having trouble with vermin for reasons not readily explainable.

In other words, conceptually, levels are just silly.

Dependence on Gear
Another conceptual problem is that gear often scales with levels, making the aforementioned problems even worse. You can have one high level warrior with a starter weapon trying to kill an otherwise defenseless high level warrior. Conceptually, it makes sense that this should be able to be done in short order (it is, after all, a length of sharp steel much the same as any other), but it probably won't work out that way mechanically in the game. Instead, that high level warrior (who is trying really hard) will probably end up tickling the other warrior for 15 minutes or so before the other even starts getting uncomfortable. Barring extraordinary circumstances, this shouldn't happen, but there is a point here: high level characters are dependent on high level gear to be effective, making the character using that gear less powerful and making the player of that character feel less heroic. It happens in the Diablo games, it happens in WoW and it will probably happen in GW2 if things aren't changed. I think I speak for the whole of the GW community when I say: I do not want to see "gear levels" in the next game.

Needless Complexity
Levels have a lot of problems. I know you know this because you are going to such great lengths in order to fix them. Sidekick systems, level scaling, interval (rather than exponential) distances between levels, ease of gear aquisition, transmutation stones... not to mention all the balancing you have to do at every level and between levels to make everything work right. And that is even ignoring the work you put into the advancement system itself! I only have one question: why are you doing all of this? So the player can enjoy being stomped on by higher level monsters if he enters an area too early with no chance to win, no matter how good he is? So the player must grind his way to be able to play the character he wants? Because WoW has 80-ish levels? Personally, I can't think of a single reason why I'd want levels in a game.

Now, imagine if you took levels out: suddenly, all that needless complexity would be gone. Your entire map would become useful to everyone, even without a sidekick system (which never works quite right anyway). Beginning players can have an experienced player help them without being overshadowed, and experienced players wouldn't have to grind up character stats when they wanted to play something else. Players can get to the fun faster. You wouldn't have to spend time on systems that compensated for all the negative effects that levels produce, and things would be that much simpler to balance and rebalance. You could actually have Izzy work regular hours! The simpler game mechanics will also let you focus more on content and getting the game out sooner.

Better Alternatives Exist
Although I'm all for taking out levels, I'm not suggesting you start everybody off with everything. "Levels or no progression" is a false dichotomy, as demonstrated quite clearly with GW1's character progression after level 20.

I think a player should start the game with the character they want to play, so give them a choice of builds (all dynamic skills for two weapons and one offhand, the basic attack for all other weapons and a healing skill). Trainers should incrementally offer a wide choice of utility skills, paced at a rate similar to gaining skill points in GW1. They will be playing that build they want (and changing/experimenting with it) in no time at all. Let them learn other weapon sets in the order of their choice from trainers at longer intervals, one at a time, possibly with an optional hands-on tutorial showing them the multiple uses of each skill and the kinds of things it's good at (after all, trainers should be trainers and not just vendors). By the time they want to try another weapon/role, they should be able to get it.

Epic skills are heroic in nature, so a character should get his choice of any elite skill the first time he gets one after a significant event (Ascension for humans, rite of passage for charr, dreaming for sylvari, graduation for asura, spirit journey for Norn, or something along those lines). He must complete flavor quests for the ones he doesn't have if he wants more.

I can say from experience, this kind of character progression is more satisfying and less grindy than level progression. The increasing utility of an advancing character's bar, additional traits, and the flexibility of roles he can fill will make the player more powerful/useful while avoiding the ridiculousness levels cause. On top of that, it will maintain a unique Guild Wars feel because it is in fact a Guild Wars innovation!

Pros:

 * o Less time and money spent balancing mechanics in future releases.
 * o 100% of the map is useful to all characters regardless of progression.
 * o Players don't have to wait to get the character they want, and they can use it the whole game rather than just the final stretch.
 * o Characters progress in a more satisfying, flavorful, organic way.
 * o Doesn't dilute emphasis on player skill.
 * o Makes players feel more heroic and useful in any situation, even if they aren't at the maximum progression.
 * o Friends (both new to the game and old) have an easier time playing together.
 * o Players will never feel powerless. In difficult areas, even new characters can contribute effectively.
 * o Fewer conceptual problems.
 * o GW2 will get more of a reputation for being innovative.
 * o The progression system will feel like the best part of it's predecessor's character progression.
 * o There can still be easy areas near starting locations with no levels, giving new players a safe environment to become proficient enjoyably.
 * o Maintains a consistent gameplay feel for the same character in different difficulty areas (unlike the sidekick system).

Cons:

 * o 80 levels have already been confirmed, so it will surprise fans (not as many will be disappointed as you think).
 * o Ardent traditionalists will whine a bit (they probably won't buy your game anyway, even with 80 levels).