Poll: Level caps
- Thread starter Souplex
- Start date
A well-designed system should allow you to level up continuously throughout the course of the game without maxing out every attribute.
The problem with Fallout 3 was not the level cap per se, but the fact that your character leveled up too quickly for a level 20 cap to make sense. In my opinion, I should have to do a fair amount of level grinding (in addition to completing all the game's quests) before I reach the cap. As it stands, my Fallout 3 character is level 19 and I still have several missions to complete and huge areas to explore (I'm waiting for the level cap raising DLC before I continue). XP should have been doled out at a much slower rate.
Additionally, I didn't find Fallout 3's level cap all that effective at preventing you from maxing out your skills (perks, of course, are another matter). My aforementioned character has already maxed out all of the skills that I've found useful (and a few that I haven't). Given the many skill-raising books (25 per skill, if I remember correctly) and bobbleheads to be found, I'm pretty sure that a well-planned character could completely max out all his skills.
The problem with Fallout 3 was not the level cap per se, but the fact that your character leveled up too quickly for a level 20 cap to make sense. In my opinion, I should have to do a fair amount of level grinding (in addition to completing all the game's quests) before I reach the cap. As it stands, my Fallout 3 character is level 19 and I still have several missions to complete and huge areas to explore (I'm waiting for the level cap raising DLC before I continue). XP should have been doled out at a much slower rate.
Additionally, I didn't find Fallout 3's level cap all that effective at preventing you from maxing out your skills (perks, of course, are another matter). My aforementioned character has already maxed out all of the skills that I've found useful (and a few that I haven't). Given the many skill-raising books (25 per skill, if I remember correctly) and bobbleheads to be found, I'm pretty sure that a well-planned character could completely max out all his skills.
I don't remember if the original fallout games had a level cap or not, because I never reached them, but almost all skills go up to 300% and not 100, and the only skills that were really worth leveling up were your tagged skills which leveled up faster, so really, no matter what - you had to specialize. Even without a level cap.Souplex said:
I guess doing the "stat cap" is better than a level cap.
i think making it high enough to be able to max out everything is good, however you need to be skilled to be able to max out everything
I like high level caps so long as theres an incentive for reaching them i.e interesting/powerful new abilities which can be put to good use in the game.
It doesn't really matter whether there's a level cap or not so long as there are ways to improve your character throughout the game. Take Guild Wars: you have a level cap of 20, which you reach fairly quickly, but getting all the skills and gear is a trickier task since you have to get them from various enemies.
I'd actually like to see more RPGs with the kind of skill system EVE has. No base level, you just improve your skills. Of course, you'd improve by doing the thing you're leveling up instead of playing the waiting game, but you get what I mean.
I'd actually like to see more RPGs with the kind of skill system EVE has. No base level, you just improve your skills. Of course, you'd improve by doing the thing you're leveling up instead of playing the waiting game, but you get what I mean.
i like for everything to be able to be maxed, especially in single player games with so many different aspects like fallout 3. IMO not being able to play a jack of all trades feels like part of the gaming experience has been taken away from me. I think fallout's cap should have been at least 35-40. IMO the only reason they made it that way in the first place was so they could sell us on broken steel
I think the Final Fantasy series did things right. You could get up to a ridiculous level, where the game was no challenge, and you were uber, but it wasn't necessary for the main plotline. People who never wanted to grind to a high level didn't really need to; and those who wanted better characters could put a little more time into crafting supercharacters.
Fallout 1 capped at level 20, just like Fallout 3. Fallout 2 capped at 99.ElArabDeMagnifico said:
The thing is, people say that Fallout 3's level cap is low, but it's pretty much guaranteed that by the time you're level 20 you're a god striding the wasteland, and you laugh at the pitiful attempts of entire armies to bring you down. So whilst the numerical level cap is "low", the actual power cap is extremely high indeed. (and you can get all your skills to 100 fairly easily if you're willing to scour the wasteland for skill books).
And anyone who wants to experience the true dizzying heights of levelling should be playing Disgaea anyway,
Level 99? Pitiful.
Level 999? You're nearly trying.
Level 9999? That's more like it.
Level 99? Pitiful.
Level 999? You're nearly trying.
Level 9999? That's more like it.
Kotor. The cap in Kotor 1 was a little low, but it was alright because you had most of the skills you wanted by then. Kotor 2 removed that. Since its level cap was SO HIGH that it wasnt even possible to get to it without using infinite exp glitches, they kinda ruined the fun. By the end of the game, everyone was the same, and that ended up ruining the game for me.
That and the fact that there were game-breaking glitches in the TUTORIAL. If you make a game, you should at least debug the TUTORIAL.
That and the fact that there were game-breaking glitches in the TUTORIAL. If you make a game, you should at least debug the TUTORIAL.
Well it is a tough line to be next to. Though when it comes down to it I think it should go along the route of it there is a level cap it can only be reached by getting near the end of the game. So that it doesn't really feel like a level cap. Mass Effect I think is a good example of how leveling up should be. I say this because I had done everything possible for experience(I collected everything the first play threw.) Even so I was short of the level cap of 60 by the end of the game. To reach the level cap you had to replay with the same character. So if all you did was play threw the game once it doesn't feel like a level cap. It just seems that you have done the best you can.
Now to have a level up system where everything is realitive to your level up as in Too Human it gets boring. This is because the same experience that is given the first time threw is there every time. A friend getting to a high level them me was the only thing that keep me going to realize this point. There is no feeling of winning or leveling up. Since the same guys who were tough on level 1 are tough on level 30. So it seem that there was no reason to level up really. This is in a game where I had played threw once or twice not even getting near the level cap(of 50 I think could be wrong).
The deal is that each level a character should feel like it is growing. While the cap should be one that is so lofty realitive to experience that you can get in the game that it isn't there. The level cap should be something that can only met threw playing threw the game more then once. That way those playing it have this feeling of achievement as one grows while it still being a challenge. I think this is something that is as much a good thing as it is a bad thing. It just something that needs to be approached with the idea that the player never notice it. That to get the level cap everything that can be reached is reached. For example to allow for experience be relative to what you take on. If you are weaker then what you are taking on, in the end you should be getting more experience then that you are stronger then.
Yes I know this is a bit flawed since I am using games that aren't really classified as rpgs but they are used for the sake of example in leveling up.
Now to have a level up system where everything is realitive to your level up as in Too Human it gets boring. This is because the same experience that is given the first time threw is there every time. A friend getting to a high level them me was the only thing that keep me going to realize this point. There is no feeling of winning or leveling up. Since the same guys who were tough on level 1 are tough on level 30. So it seem that there was no reason to level up really. This is in a game where I had played threw once or twice not even getting near the level cap(of 50 I think could be wrong).
The deal is that each level a character should feel like it is growing. While the cap should be one that is so lofty realitive to experience that you can get in the game that it isn't there. The level cap should be something that can only met threw playing threw the game more then once. That way those playing it have this feeling of achievement as one grows while it still being a challenge. I think this is something that is as much a good thing as it is a bad thing. It just something that needs to be approached with the idea that the player never notice it. That to get the level cap everything that can be reached is reached. For example to allow for experience be relative to what you take on. If you are weaker then what you are taking on, in the end you should be getting more experience then that you are stronger then.
Yes I know this is a bit flawed since I am using games that aren't really classified as rpgs but they are used for the sake of example in leveling up.
I'm not much of a fan of leveling based systems. I mean they're everywhere, in JRPG's you usually don't care about maxing things out you just level high enough that you can continue on with the rest of the content. In Elder Scrolls games.. ugh.. I can't stand the leveling system without mods.. once you start trying to level efficiently it just stops being fun.
I prefer to just level my skills up through use.
I prefer to just level my skills up through use.
It really depends on the game, but personally I don't think I would care either way. As for Fallout's case. When I started the game I maxed out my int so my other non primary stats were mostly all maxed by the time I hit max level 
Which I fully agree with, though I don't think is being used though it is available. Both Crackdown and Fable have done. It is still in flawed way, but it is available to use. Just that that most can't figure it out. This I blame because at GDC Peter(the one with the last name I can't spell correctly who in charge of both Fables) never talks about it.Devildoc said:
FO3 is an interesting example of a game with a low level cap -- interesting because it's not terribly hard to maximize a character in FO3 to get the highest stats in all areas.
My cry against FO3 is probably that the perks fall largely into the categories of either useless or essential, and so most characters I build have the same stuff. Maybe there's a small category of neutral perks that you can take to specialize your character, but it's still the same character. Just this character gets help from a mysterious stranger, and this character gets help from animals... Etc. I woulda liked to see more perks in the essential category, that would make me think hard and make sacrifices... but I digress.
The advantage to a high cap and NOT needing to specialize is that the system becomes more noob friendly. When you have to carefully manage your character and specialize from level one, then first time players often hit endgame with some mediocre character that doesn't do anyone one thing particularly well.
The advantage to having a low level cap and needing to specialize is that the game has greater replay value. If you can make one character that can do anything, then you're driven to continue playing till you max your character, at which point you may safely shelf your game. On the flip side, if you specialize your character each time you play through, then you are encouraged to replay the game with different character builds for different experiences.
A note: I like fast leveling systems in low-cap games. If the point is to make a really strong character with one particular strength, then you want to be able to reach that point. If I only have 20 levels to build my ninja-sniper-alchemist build in game X, then I damn well want to hit that 20 mark so I can finish my build and proceed to kick ass with it. Conversely, when your level cap is 80, 99, etc, then the game is already dragging out the leveling process for you and making you grind. Here, the hardcore can enjoy their grind (for whatever reason) and the rest of us can safely ignore the grind if we want to.
My preference: The low cap. 20-30 levels, where each level is important and meaningful, but also on a fairly fast leveling system. I don't like gaming to be a second job for me, I want to sit down and accomplish something in an hour of play. When I need to grind for 4 hours to get from level 18-19, then I'm not going to play the game anymore. Unless the grind is fun, like COD or something. But then, I don't find grinding prestige in COD to be grinding at all.
/2cents
My cry against FO3 is probably that the perks fall largely into the categories of either useless or essential, and so most characters I build have the same stuff. Maybe there's a small category of neutral perks that you can take to specialize your character, but it's still the same character. Just this character gets help from a mysterious stranger, and this character gets help from animals... Etc. I woulda liked to see more perks in the essential category, that would make me think hard and make sacrifices... but I digress.
The advantage to a high cap and NOT needing to specialize is that the system becomes more noob friendly. When you have to carefully manage your character and specialize from level one, then first time players often hit endgame with some mediocre character that doesn't do anyone one thing particularly well.
The advantage to having a low level cap and needing to specialize is that the game has greater replay value. If you can make one character that can do anything, then you're driven to continue playing till you max your character, at which point you may safely shelf your game. On the flip side, if you specialize your character each time you play through, then you are encouraged to replay the game with different character builds for different experiences.
A note: I like fast leveling systems in low-cap games. If the point is to make a really strong character with one particular strength, then you want to be able to reach that point. If I only have 20 levels to build my ninja-sniper-alchemist build in game X, then I damn well want to hit that 20 mark so I can finish my build and proceed to kick ass with it. Conversely, when your level cap is 80, 99, etc, then the game is already dragging out the leveling process for you and making you grind. Here, the hardcore can enjoy their grind (for whatever reason) and the rest of us can safely ignore the grind if we want to.
My preference: The low cap. 20-30 levels, where each level is important and meaningful, but also on a fairly fast leveling system. I don't like gaming to be a second job for me, I want to sit down and accomplish something in an hour of play. When I need to grind for 4 hours to get from level 18-19, then I'm not going to play the game anymore. Unless the grind is fun, like COD or something. But then, I don't find grinding prestige in COD to be grinding at all.
/2cents
I was going to say this. The level 20 cap (which can be reached in as many hours if you travel, or are born in Cantha) is amazing. It's all about your skillbar and your knowledge of the game, not about how many million hours you've grinded. Same thing for GW's weapons. A "perfect" butter knife does as much damage as a "perfect" Killer Longsword of Awesome On Fire.Psychosocial said:
That said, although GW2 will have a very high level cap (or even no cap at all), I'm still looking forward to it very much.