Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
CAP'N LEVELS
Posts
Dyhalto
7536
Dyhalto
View playlists
Closeauthor=ChaosProductions
Level caps exist so that all of the game's challenges can be surmounted by a weak player via grinding, while still preventing grinding from defeating optional supercontent.
This says it all.
Otherwise, I could see level caps being used in episodic games. Ara Fell capped it at 20, but unfortunately there would be no new episodes after that ;-;
The number of the level cap is irrelevant. It's all about when you're expected to reach that cap, if at all. If it takes the entire game to reasonably reach level 20, for a game which level 20 is the set level cap, it's no different than level 99, where you need to be about level 99 to beat the final boss. It's all about the natural progression of the party.
Midgame changes to that cap are a different monster. Personally, I think there needs to be a good reason for that change if the game has a serious plot. A weak example might be something like the removal of limiters in Xenogears.
Midgame changes to that cap are a different monster. Personally, I think there needs to be a good reason for that change if the game has a serious plot. A weak example might be something like the removal of limiters in Xenogears.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=ChaosProductionsTo be more precise, that's an extremely unfortunate side-effect of levels. I sure hope it's not, on its own, actually anyone's goal. It's just a near-inevitable result of having a system where you can get stronger.
Level caps exist so that all of the game's challenges can be surmounted by a weak player via grinding
author=ChaosProductionsDude. Optional supercontent shouldn't be the only thing in your game that people can't skip. That's, like, the opposite of how "optional" is supposed to work.
while still preventing grinding from defeating optional supercontent.
I don't understand what you mean. How would optional content be something you "can't skip"? That's not how optional things work.
I think you've misunderstood something I've said.
I think you've misunderstood something I've said.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Well, if you level to the point where a battle is no longer challenging, you've effectively skipped that battle.
Yes, that is correct.
A player who wants to proceed without challenge knows that they can do so by grinding. A player who wants to seek challenge knows that grinding will spoil that challenge, and will avoid grinding. Everyone wins.
A player who wants to proceed without challenge knows that they can do so by grinding. A player who wants to seek challenge knows that grinding will spoil that challenge, and will avoid grinding. Everyone wins.
author=ChaosProductions
Yes, that is correct.
A player who wants to proceed without challenge knows that they can do so by grinding. A player who wants to seek challenge knows that grinding will spoil that challenge, and will avoid grinding. Everyone wins.
Yes, this is my philosophy as well; let the player set the level of challenge for the game, and balance the use of strategy with the amount of time they wish to spend on grinding as they see fit.
This is how many console RPGs do it, and I think, for a console RPG, it is still the best policy in many cases. Players can and do set their own challenges; the Final Fantasy series is full of fan-made guidelines and restrictions for overcoming the various obstacles in the games. It's been my experience that players tend to resent level caps, with some even finding them 'oppressive.'
That's not to say that level caps are necessarily a bad idea, as their effectiveness really depends on the game. For certain games a level cap can relieve the player of the burden of grinding, and can encourage creative thinking. Some games are even better off if they eliminate levels entirely, as there is no reason progression cannot just be through equipment and abilities (indeed, the importance of levels in many modern RPGs has been diminished because of this trend). To use a cliche, it all comes down to how the game is designed.
Gear-based progression exists in MMORPGs largely because it buys the developers time to create new content. A single player game already has all of its content, so I think capping ability progression too early is a mistake. In Rogue Galaxy you max out your skills well before the end and the game suffers for it. You've essentially removed a core game feature during the third act. It's more fun when your toolkit is always expanding.
This post assumes that your options in combat are a function of character level, as it is in most RPGs.
This post assumes that your options in combat are a function of character level, as it is in most RPGs.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
My problems with "grinding as a way of self-modulating difficulty" are: A) levelling up is often unavoidable unless you want to skip major parts of the gameplay, and B) difficulty doesn't work that way; as a player I shouldn't be forced to make up my own challenges when the game doesn't provide any for me.
To put a different spin on point B: RPGs are all about overcoming challenges by gathering resources and making your characters more powerful. Like, that's actually the definition of the genre, as far as most gamers are concerned, right? Games where you build up your characters' power over time. So in my mind, if something's only challenging if you're not playing the game like an RPG, i.e. if you're actively trying to be weaker, then it's not a challenge that's going to be fun to people who enjoy RPGs.
So, to me, I feel like something is only really challenging if 1) it's still hard at the highest power level I can be when attempting it, or 2) the act of getting to that power level is challenging in itself. In a game with no level cap, neither is the case; the game never requires any skill out of me, never requires any thought or strategy, only requires time.
A level cap, on the other hand, allows both of those types of challenges - the challenge of progressing forward and the challenge of gaining power - to exist. It makes sure the highest power level I can be isn't too powerful to ruin the challenge I'm facing at the moment. And it also makes sure that in order to become more powerful, I have to overcome new challenges and obtain their rewards, instead of just spending time.
Personally, I am a fan of the World of Warcraft method of level caps: everything before you hit the level cap is effectively a tutorial, and then the real game starts. And to become more powerful from then on, you have to overcome challenges, and get the equipment that comes as a reward from those challenges. ...This is, uh, ignoring the part of World of Warcraft where they release an expansion pack and raise the cap, and the part where they release a patch and let everyone skip to the latest dungeon, and the part where it's an MMO so if you grind enough gold you can always just pay someone else to let you ride along while they kill a boss. So really, I just mean the idealized version of Burning Crusade that only exists in my head.
@Jude: In MMORPGs, very few of the rewards you get from overcoming challenges offer legitimately new abilities that expand your toolset, but there's no particular reason for that to be the case. A boss could reward you with a new spell as easily as it could reward you with a new weapon. Hell, many bosses in single-player games DO reward you with new spells.
One of these days I'm going to just literally make a single player, turn based version of Burning Crusade in RMXP. Right after I figure out how to have infinite time.
To put a different spin on point B: RPGs are all about overcoming challenges by gathering resources and making your characters more powerful. Like, that's actually the definition of the genre, as far as most gamers are concerned, right? Games where you build up your characters' power over time. So in my mind, if something's only challenging if you're not playing the game like an RPG, i.e. if you're actively trying to be weaker, then it's not a challenge that's going to be fun to people who enjoy RPGs.
So, to me, I feel like something is only really challenging if 1) it's still hard at the highest power level I can be when attempting it, or 2) the act of getting to that power level is challenging in itself. In a game with no level cap, neither is the case; the game never requires any skill out of me, never requires any thought or strategy, only requires time.
A level cap, on the other hand, allows both of those types of challenges - the challenge of progressing forward and the challenge of gaining power - to exist. It makes sure the highest power level I can be isn't too powerful to ruin the challenge I'm facing at the moment. And it also makes sure that in order to become more powerful, I have to overcome new challenges and obtain their rewards, instead of just spending time.
Personally, I am a fan of the World of Warcraft method of level caps: everything before you hit the level cap is effectively a tutorial, and then the real game starts. And to become more powerful from then on, you have to overcome challenges, and get the equipment that comes as a reward from those challenges. ...This is, uh, ignoring the part of World of Warcraft where they release an expansion pack and raise the cap, and the part where they release a patch and let everyone skip to the latest dungeon, and the part where it's an MMO so if you grind enough gold you can always just pay someone else to let you ride along while they kill a boss. So really, I just mean the idealized version of Burning Crusade that only exists in my head.
@Jude: In MMORPGs, very few of the rewards you get from overcoming challenges offer legitimately new abilities that expand your toolset, but there's no particular reason for that to be the case. A boss could reward you with a new spell as easily as it could reward you with a new weapon. Hell, many bosses in single-player games DO reward you with new spells.
One of these days I'm going to just literally make a single player, turn based version of Burning Crusade in RMXP. Right after I figure out how to have infinite time.
I approach RPGs the same way I approach, say, a TCG or tabletop game. I have a set of tools (my cards/abilities) and a set of challenges. I must apply my tools to pass the challenge.
I suppose that's a fundamental difference.
I suppose that's a fundamental difference.
That really comes down to how well the game is designed in either case. Gameplay requiring grinding is, indeed, often a poor design decision, but that doesn't necessarily mean that not having a level cap automatically eliminates challenge from a normal game.
For example, Final Fantasy VII, despite being one of the easier games in the series, had excellent progression balance; you could walk through any given dungeon, fighting only the enemies which got in your way, and be strong enough to have a good shot at the next boss. The only real reason you'd ever want to grind is to level up your materia, and only then to have access to cool optional abilities. Unless the player was for some reason obsessed with obtaining the highest level of power they could obtain, grinding wasn't really an issue and the normal game (the kind of game most players would experience) was pretty balanced.
Conversely, a level cap does not necessarily guarantee a balanced game; if a challenge requires a certain max level to beat, the player will still have to acquire that level through grinding, and will likely also want to obtain items and equipment through money grinding to have a better chance at success. Again, this can be avoided in a well designed game, but having a level cap doesn't automatically mean that the game will have fair and well structured challenges any more than not having a level cap will guarantee that a game will have no challenge.
For example, Final Fantasy VII, despite being one of the easier games in the series, had excellent progression balance; you could walk through any given dungeon, fighting only the enemies which got in your way, and be strong enough to have a good shot at the next boss. The only real reason you'd ever want to grind is to level up your materia, and only then to have access to cool optional abilities. Unless the player was for some reason obsessed with obtaining the highest level of power they could obtain, grinding wasn't really an issue and the normal game (the kind of game most players would experience) was pretty balanced.
Conversely, a level cap does not necessarily guarantee a balanced game; if a challenge requires a certain max level to beat, the player will still have to acquire that level through grinding, and will likely also want to obtain items and equipment through money grinding to have a better chance at success. Again, this can be avoided in a well designed game, but having a level cap doesn't automatically mean that the game will have fair and well structured challenges any more than not having a level cap will guarantee that a game will have no challenge.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=LucidHeh, I'll definitely concede this one. Any feature can be mishandled to ruin your game, if you suck bad enough at making use of it. Some are easier than others to screw up, and some seem practically inevitable to end in disaster.
Conversely, a level cap does not necessarily guarantee a balanced game
FF7 didn't have a lot of incentive to grind; sadly it also was never hard enough for me to want to be higher than about level 10-15. If it had a level cap of 20 or 25, I'd be happy. Though my first time playing it, I did get all the master materia by mastering every materia in the game for some ungodly reason, and got to level 99 in the process, so there's that.
I'll say I liked the way FF7 handled it way better than, say, FF12. Where the game is constantly dangling bounty-hunting carrots and torturing me with pavlovian synth-shop antics to make sure I'm level 50 before I start disc 2.
author=Lucidstillness
{H}aving a level cap doesn't automatically mean that the game will have fair and well structured challenges any more than not having a level cap will guarantee that a game will have no challenge.
I like you. You have the logic about you.
Awww, I like you guys too. :)
And yeah, while I did like 12's story, characters, music and art style, it's gameplay...had some issues. Very early in that game I came across a winning strategy of healing and attacking that I almost never had to even modify throughout the regular game. Good design is generally one which makes use of all the abilities available to a player, in my opinion.
And yeah, while I did like 12's story, characters, music and art style, it's gameplay...had some issues. Very early in that game I came across a winning strategy of healing and attacking that I almost never had to even modify throughout the regular game. Good design is generally one which makes use of all the abilities available to a player, in my opinion.
Shinan
4314
I think level caps exist to limit stuff available to a player. Without a level cap a player character can max out all stats and skill trees while with a level cap the choices you make as you level up make more of a difference since you have to decide whether you focus on one area or try a balanced jack-of-all-trades approach.
Having no level caps essentially means that all characters eventually become jack-of-all-trades, removing a piece of the roleplaying aspect of a level-based game.
Having no level caps essentially means that all characters eventually become jack-of-all-trades, removing a piece of the roleplaying aspect of a level-based game.
author=ShinanNow I wonder if having a level cap at end game would help allow for some free-traversing of side quests.
I think level caps exist to limit stuff available to a player. Without a level cap a player character can max out all stats and skill trees while with a level cap the choices you make as you level up make more of a difference since you have to decide whether you focus on one area or try a balanced jack-of-all-trades approach.
Having no level caps essentially means that all characters eventually become jack-of-all-trades, removing a piece of the roleplaying aspect of a level-based game.
Because another thing I wanted to do for SR was give the player a bunch of side quests to gather party members that were only "guest fighters" in the first 3/4 of the game.
Also, they wouldn't start with maxed out crap like your main party members. So you'll have to work on that if you want more of an advantage over stupidly difficulty god creatures. (In-combat party changer)
Kaelan
61
I like low level caps (actually, I like low values for all your character stats, but that's another discussion). The less levels you have, the more significance you can attach to each individual level. This goes really, really well with games that have a significant amount of character customization (like, say, Final Fantasy Tactics). I'd say 20~30 is a pretty ideal number.
And the end-game level cap is always nice to provide content people have to find ways through without being able to resort to just out-leveling it. I think level caps mid-game are a bad idea though.
And the end-game level cap is always nice to provide content people have to find ways through without being able to resort to just out-leveling it. I think level caps mid-game are a bad idea though.
Zephyr
1241
One game, or rather, complete series I can think of when it comes to level caps is Pokémon.
It has the level 100 cap, but there's also the psuedo-level caps.
Each gym badge obtained ups the psuedo-level cap by 10 levels.
When you've obtained all 8, you can grind how much ever you want without problems.
But if you exceed the psuedo-level cap, your Pokémons will for the most of the time not listen to your battle commands.
I think this is a good approach to prevent overleveling. However, these psuedo-level caps are still too high, so you can still be curb stomping without breaking that cap.
It has the level 100 cap, but there's also the psuedo-level caps.
Each gym badge obtained ups the psuedo-level cap by 10 levels.
When you've obtained all 8, you can grind how much ever you want without problems.
But if you exceed the psuedo-level cap, your Pokémons will for the most of the time not listen to your battle commands.
I think this is a good approach to prevent overleveling. However, these psuedo-level caps are still too high, so you can still be curb stomping without breaking that cap.
Killer Wolf
1235
The only time I was really conscious of the level cap in a game was during my second run through Fallout 3. I knew how the story played out after the first trip through, so my second game was all about random exploration, sort of the way I played through Morrowind. Pick a cardinal direction and walk that way until something interesting happened. Repeat until you hit the end of the map. Pick a new direction. Continue.
Due to all the side-questing, I was bucking the cap less than half way through the story. It made the rest of the game feel like a chore. Without the promise of new story content, and without the skinner box prodding of new skills and better stats, there was really no point in playing the game.
I like the approach that Bioware tends to take. In Kotor 1 & 2 (barring the Hsiss exploit), you can complete every quest in the game and kill everything that isn't nailed down and still only make it to right around level 20. As stated above, you CAN'T max everything in a single play, so you have to decide on what ROLE you would like to play, and go with that.
I got an idea from some of the level-up messages Morrowind threw my way. After about level 20 or so, the messages started turned into variations on the theme of "Your best days are behind you, you're getting old."
I would still like to do a game at some point that features that sort of mechanic. Sure, you might gain a ton of Skill Lore, magic spells, and crafting recipes, but at the same time you are getting older... your injuries are adding up, your joints are getting stiff.
I would love to see a game where you had to evolve your play style as your character grew and changed. Just like a 55 year old Batman fighting the Mutant Leader in a mud pit (operating table). When you get older, you can't afford to fight like a young man anymore.
Due to all the side-questing, I was bucking the cap less than half way through the story. It made the rest of the game feel like a chore. Without the promise of new story content, and without the skinner box prodding of new skills and better stats, there was really no point in playing the game.
I like the approach that Bioware tends to take. In Kotor 1 & 2 (barring the Hsiss exploit), you can complete every quest in the game and kill everything that isn't nailed down and still only make it to right around level 20. As stated above, you CAN'T max everything in a single play, so you have to decide on what ROLE you would like to play, and go with that.
I got an idea from some of the level-up messages Morrowind threw my way. After about level 20 or so, the messages started turned into variations on the theme of "Your best days are behind you, you're getting old."
I would still like to do a game at some point that features that sort of mechanic. Sure, you might gain a ton of Skill Lore, magic spells, and crafting recipes, but at the same time you are getting older... your injuries are adding up, your joints are getting stiff.
I would love to see a game where you had to evolve your play style as your character grew and changed. Just like a 55 year old Batman fighting the Mutant Leader in a mud pit (operating table). When you get older, you can't afford to fight like a young man anymore.
UPRC
5516
I was just thinking about level caps today and decided that I would have 50 as the level cap in my game.
I think 50 is a good cap for character levels because, in a lot of games I've played, characters never go above that level. I mean heck, Final Fantasy games for example are always very beatable in the 40s. Throwing in REALLY high level caps pretty much just forces completionists to tirelessly grind experience to reach the caps just for bragging rights, which is a crappy way to prolong the life of a game.
Having only 50 levels as opposed to 99 also makes stat growth much more noticeable with the numbers making larger jumps. When you have 99 levels, some stats only go up a few numbers per level but, with 50 levels, it's not uncommon to see stats jumping by more than 10 in a single level. Seeing bigger numbers like that upon a level up has got to have a positive effect upon a player. I would assume that it would make them feel like they're really accomplishing something since the growth in stats is much more obvious.
I think 50 is a good cap for character levels because, in a lot of games I've played, characters never go above that level. I mean heck, Final Fantasy games for example are always very beatable in the 40s. Throwing in REALLY high level caps pretty much just forces completionists to tirelessly grind experience to reach the caps just for bragging rights, which is a crappy way to prolong the life of a game.
Having only 50 levels as opposed to 99 also makes stat growth much more noticeable with the numbers making larger jumps. When you have 99 levels, some stats only go up a few numbers per level but, with 50 levels, it's not uncommon to see stats jumping by more than 10 in a single level. Seeing bigger numbers like that upon a level up has got to have a positive effect upon a player. I would assume that it would make them feel like they're really accomplishing something since the growth in stats is much more obvious.
