Celtic Heroes

Should have stopped at stonevale and add much more horizontal content to get people to stay.

If it ended at stonevale, people would beat the game in a day or two, no game that ik of stops at that, most games i play take at least a week to beat

If it ended at stonevale, people would beat the game in a day or two, no game that ik of stops at that, most games i play take at least a week to beat

Not exactly... remember-- they streamlined leveling.

Most games take under a week to beat if you know what you're doing. CH is way to unpopular to have up to 240 difficult levels. If you know what you are doing and don't pay inordinate sums of money CH will take you about a year to beat. And you will have to solo your way because you are literally the only person leveling at any given time at your level 99% of the time. It is ludicrous.

At least now the end is in sight even though the end level is asinine.

Most games take under a week to beat if you know what you're doing.

I think it's more directly related to how much time you can put in rather than if you know what you're doing. In most cases, you won't know the most efficient way to play a game unless you follow a guide or if you've beaten the game previously. In any case, it takes a time investment.

People that "beat" games quickly do so because they invest a lot more time into them than those who don't.

Most games take under a week to beat if you know what you're doing.

I think it's more directly related to how much time you can put in rather than if you know what you're doing. In most cases, you won't know the most efficient way to play a game unless you follow a guide or if you've beaten the game previously. In any case, it takes a time investment.

People that "beat" games quickly do so because they invest a lot more time into them than those who don't.

It's better to invest some time and about $60
On a game rather than years plus lots of money, or just years.

I think that depends on the player's expectations. If you think about regular console games and compare them to MMO's, they are inherently different.

I think the overall point of an MMO (from a consumer standpoint) is to make it last as long as the player feels fit to play it. While most console games are short-lived, MMO's are games designed to make players invest years into it. That's how they make their money. Running an MMO is expensive, so of course they'll want you to play for as long as possible. That's not necessarily a bad thing.

And remember: if you don't like a game, you're not forced to play it.

What happens in most MMO's is that they keep u playing for years with content and not endless grind, ive been playing lots of MMORPG's and none of them (even one with lvl 400 as 'cap') had lvling as hard and expensive as in CH, ppl in CH play for years after they reached the lvl they wanted not for the game, but for the ppl. Can u try and guess what happens if some of these ppl quit? It'll lead to more and more ppl quitting which only shows that CH's existence is on timer unless something is done.

150 wo have been nice IMO.

150 wo have been nice IMO.

I agree. 150 was the best cutoff. More bosses/horizontal content should've been the focus after Otherworld, instead of 3 huge zones with nothing on them.

There was always a way to make bosses harder than Aggy, even at level 150. All levels are relative anyway. You had the same difficulty killing a level 140 4* mob at level 140, and killing a level 180 4* mob at 180.
Increasing the level cap in Update 4 was simply a way to extend the game by grinding. If all the event bosses were permanent and placed around Sewers/Fingals/Carrow, we would have a much better end-game than what we have now.