RPGs & Leveling Caps: What do you prefer?

[aozgolo]

So while I understand some people may not like character levels in RPGs at all and may have preferences for a different system, let's talk about games that do specifically use character levels and how you prefer to see them?

Basically there's 2 main ways character levels are handled, and we see them often separated between JRPGs and Western RPGs.

1) More Levels, less punch: In JRPGs in particular we see character levels often capping at level 99. You usually don't have significant differences between character levels as it's a steady climb. Most of these games are designed to be beatable well before reaching level cap (often at level 50 or lower) but may provide expert challenges that encourage further leveling.

2) Less levels, more meaningful: In Western RPGs, particularly ones inspired by Dungeons & Dragons the level caps tend to be rather low, capping somewhere in the teens, or sometimes in the 20s or 30s. These level-ups tend to be more significant milestones of character growth and each one tends to be more rewarding as it unlocks new abilities or higher tiers of abilities, and often allows you to spend points to upgrade specific attributes and skills. These games are usually designed assuming you will be at level cap when you beat the game, often times completionist players will achieve max level well before they run out of content.


What is your preference? What game handled character levels the best? Opinion time!

 

[Maximum Bert]

If we are just talking about these two I tend to prefer more levels in the end you get practically the same effect its just a smoother progressive curve I feel D and Ds levelling works well for the tabletop but not so much in a game and tbh later on the progression in character often slows down to a crawl. It usually slows down in ones with higher level caps as well but not so much and while you may not get so big a jump each level you will still see a large increase every 5 levels or so in a lvl 99 capped game as you would in a single level of a 20 capped game basically equating to the same thing only in a much smoother way.

I tend to like the ones that play around with levelling more and do away with them in a way such as FFX and its sphere grid being one of the best imo there was a lot of scope to improve that took me 169 hours to max every stat on it (cept HP which I believe is impossible without seriously weakening the grid).

 

[SmallHatLogan]

I'd probably go lower level cap. I like the idea of having a complete character build by end game (or part way into new game plus at most). But the levelling system has to actually cater to this. Fortunately they usually do with things like perks, skill trees and/or the ability to pick your stats. Games like Fallout and Mass Effect are good examples. Demon's/Dark Souls is probably the best of both worlds for me. You can get a complete build by level 100-150 but if you're willing to put in the time (or cheat) you can grind your way up to level 700+ (I forget the exact number) and be good at everything.

I rarely get anywhere near max level in games with a high level cap. The only examples that spring to mind are Final Fantasy (the easy PSP version), Kingdom Hearts 2, Crisis Core and Persona 3 and 4.

 

[asdfen]

I like variety and enjoy multiple systems when they are well implemented. Disgaea 9999 is fun to do. FF games 99 is also great Baldurs Gate and other D&D games the leveling system is incredibly well done. Basicly I am saying it does not mater as long as combat and progression provide challenge as nothing bores me more than playing rpg with easy rpetetive combat.

 

[MirenBainesUSMC]

I don't like leveling caps --- I think you should be presented with a choice to over-power yourself if your willing to do the grinding and preparing.

Basically put, if you want your own progression to seem normal, then by all means make your way through the story as it should... but if you want to over-prepare and dominate the " bosses", you should be able to do that as well.

I think level caps, however, are used as a guiding tool and limitation for game structural purposes. You don't want someone to be too over-powered. DA:I handled this rather well in my opinion. In certain cases, you could very well grind up to a point but the Story-Arch placards basically gave you a scale as to what level you should be before you tackle the next big event. I wound up being extra-packed as I went but then again --- it was a choice. Plus after a while, the small creatures and enemies gave you little to no experience points to begin with so it forced you to move on --- and I think that system is a pretty fair one.

I come from the days of Phantasy Star II where you could grind and grind --- eventually most people tire of it and do continue.

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

I'd prefer to have both- meaningful levels and a high cap. The cap feels like an old software limitation that is only there because otherwise some players would spend hundreds of hours trying to reach the limit... not that it stops some people.

I'd say have all major abilities unlocked by Level 50-60 and the finale around that time, but the potential to level into the hundreds for further stat gains and at least one uber bonus area that expects that of you. That's what New Game + is for.

Of course above all I prefer the RPGs that only require this sort of grinding if you lack skill.

 

[Aerosteam]

More levels please.

If you reach max level before completing the main game (and still have secondary objectives to do), you have one less thing to look forward to when playing the game. It's the same with defeating enemies. If you don't get experience from them anymore, it seems like wasted effort.

 

[Knight Captain Kerr]

I prefer less levels which are more meaningful. In practice having 100 levels and having 20 levels could be the same in terms of how long it takes to advance and reach max level but I prefer the feeling of better granularity of less more meaningful levels. Gaining a level feels like you're improving and gaining power. If you go from level 11 to 12 in a game with less levels you get a sense of becoming stronger, go from 11 to 12 in a game with 100 levels and you'll barely notice it.

 

[SoreWristed]

I prefer the more gradual,more levels leveling experience. It takes me out of the game when I look at an enemy and go 'oh, he's lvl 8, i'm lvl 9, this guy should be easy.' When there are more levels, all of the creatures you encounter, wether they're one or five levels below yours, still present a challenge.

 

[Lufia Erim]

Level 99. I love seeing my number get higher and higher. And while you don't see a difference between each level, every3-4 levels you do notice a difference in power, especially whenthere are new spells / skills unlocked by leveling up.

I absolutely hate the WRPG way of this of making levels longer to achieve and have a low cap. When i got to level 20 in fallout3 i was like " that's it?". Nate that the only WRPGS i can stand to play are Elderscrolls and Dragon age. I prefer Jrpgs by far.

 

[Level 7 Dragon]

Lower level caps seem to be more up my alley. Especially if they offer perks that significantly augment the play style, such as Fallout 3.

I feel like if the cap is higher, it might encourage grinding and drown out the sence of progression.

Captcha: Bonus Points

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I don't like leveling caps --- I think you should be presented with a choice to over-power yourself if your willing to do the grinding and preparing.

Basically put, if you want your own progression to seem normal, then by all means make your way through the story as it should... but if you want to over-prepare and dominate the " bosses", you should be able to do that as well.

I think level caps, however, are used as a guiding tool and limitation for game structural purposes. You don't want someone to be too over-powered. DA:I handled this rather well in my opinion. In certain cases, you could very well grind up to a point but the Story-Arch placards basically gave you a scale as to what level you should be before you tackle the next big event. I wound up being extra-packed as I went but then again --- it was a choice. Plus after a while, the small creatures and enemies gave you little to no experience points to begin with so it forced you to move on --- and I think that system is a pretty fair one.

I come from the days of Phantasy Star II where you could grind and grind --- eventually most people tire of it and do continue.

pretty much this, rpg's have always had that awesomeness to basically let you play as you want to, and having a shit ton of levels really lets you control your stats and play how YOU want to. (usually helps more when you have a party of characters and not just one.)

I also love the idea of overleveling yourself if you want to, if you're just getting pummeled by a boss or whatever, grinding and coming back to whoop his ass later on always feels great.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

I just like the way Piranha Bytes (used to) do it, with the Gothic and first Risen games. Have it be an open world with certain areas (including late game ones) containing really, really fuck-off tough enemies. That way you don't really need a level cap, yet it'll still be challenging later on (unless you spend hours upon hours just grinding). Although in those games there are a limited numbers of re-spawning enemies and quests, so I suppose in a way there is a more natural cap anyway.

I just like the way they did it there. I'm not a fan of just artificially telling you "sorry, you can't level up anymore now, even if there is still enough enemies to kill/quests to complete for you to do so".

 

[Lazy Kitty]

I prefer the kind where the level cap is infinity or possibly 4,294,967,295.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Cup full of awesome always trumps bucket full of mediocre in my book.
And that doesn't just go for levels, we are talking classes, abilities, armors, weapons, spells, enemies, areas, quests,...
If you can make all those with a special touch to them then you deliver something really special, if not it's just pointless grindy shit which is what most bad RPG design comes down to.

 

[MajorTomServo]

I never thought about it, but I guess I prefer low level caps. That way, I can grind to max level, then just sit back and enjoy the game.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I don't really care what the cap is but I much prefer leveling where you gain abilities/skills/feats/etc. when you level. I hate it when you level just to up your stats because then the only reason you can't beat the tougher enemies is due to numbers alone. To me, that is completely a "fake" progression. For example, the Souls games and Bloodborne do this, each and every area really has enemies with the same level of difficulty. In Dark Souls at the start, you can't beat those skeletons (you can beat them but it takes forever) just because you can't deal enough damage; however, when you actually progress through the game and are "ready" to fight those skeletons, you're killing them in the same amount of hits you killed the enemies of the Undead Burg. To me, that's not progression at all and it's exactly the same as just walling off sections like say GTA did with having broken bridges. I do totally understand you have to make enemies that deal more damage and have higher health that the player can't defeat at the start. I love how a game like Borderlands gives you all these skills, which really makes you feel like your character is getting better because it does greatly change what you can do in combat, but we all know deep down that the main reason you can beat later game areas is because you have a gun that deals much more damage and a much better shield. Whereas in many RPGs with high level caps, combat barely changes all game and your numbers merely go up to deal and take more damage.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I admit I kind of lazy when it come to RPG at times. What I mean isI prefer higher level cap since the game enemy should still be at a lower level unless it is design to be harder as in still continue to level up to your character level.

I complete Xenoblade Chronicle with ease cos my partys were all level 80 (the capped point I think) due to fighting all of the roaming bosses while the final boss was only around 60 or 70.

Boderland 2 and the Pre-sequel is kind of similar but I was only above the final boss level by 2 due to slower expereince gain. Granted beating the game and playing it on normal mode is alot more difficult due to the enemies being the same level as you or alot higher!

 

[L. Declis]

I prefer a game has little grinding; as in, if I walk to a place, by the time I arrive, I should be at a level where the combat is difficult if you do the wrong thing, but easy if you do the right thing, and bosses are difficult but do-able. I should have the option to grind further, but I also feel that grinding for grinding sake because you poorly paced your game and now I have to spend several hours levelling just so I can continue your game just sucks out all the fun.

Final Fantasy has always been pretty good at this, I must say.

 

[ExDeath730]

I prefer a low level cap, something meaningful.

That's one of the reasons i like The Witcher 2 gameplay. Because let's face it, in the start of the game, you're really screwed, but investing in a skill tree, getting better skills, or making the ones you have, work better...At the end of the game, you're a god of destruction, mooks die like flies around you and only bosses really pose a threat. For me that's the kind of thing that should happen in a RPG, people usually forget that in those worlds strong enemies are really rare. But i guess that Bioware/Obsidian are the ones at fault here. From Neverwinter Nights onwards there was so many uneeded fights, i remember i groaned in one of those games when i entered a house and it was like a really big dungeon.

Some games can do both high level cap, and meaningful levels at the same time. One of those titles is Diablo 2, why do you think so many of the old guard of that game didn't like the pathetic leveling that was in Diablo 3? Because in 2, every level was important, for the skills, for the attributes, etc...