Infinite leveling or locked leveling?

[Francis H]

Fun? Okay, maybe in MMOs and/or ARPGs.

Have to disagree on the arpgs part. Imagine Deus Ex, Vtmb or Alpha Protocol letting you have as much experience as possible. It would break the game, considering that arpgs are as much a RPG as an action game.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

LOL this should not even be a question. I don't think any RPG fan likes infinite leveling.

I was level 35 in Fallout 4 just from doing the procedurally generated Brotherhood quests. It's dumb and just another example of games made by idiots for idiots and is further proof that Fallout 4 is an offline MMO and not a Fallout RPG.

Bethesda wants to blow all of its content in one playthrough because they don't actually like RPGs so of course they have infinite leveling now.

 

[Black Angel]

Have to disagree on the arpgs part. Imagine Deus Ex, Vtmb or Alpha Protocol letting you have as much experience as possible. It would break the game, considering that arpgs are as much a RPG as an action game.

I beg to differ. Especially since the example you gave lean more toward cRPGs, rather than Action games. ARPGs are actually Action games, first and foremost, with the RPG aspect being, well, aspect (or elements in a very simple, basic form). Best examples of ARPGs are obviously Diablo, Titan Quests, Grim Dawn, Torchlight, and to some extent, the Soulsborne series (Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne). In those games I mentioned, infinite leveling ARE fun, and somewhat a must. I haven't played all the games you mentioned, and you most likely mentioned those because they have infinite-leveling, but did you play those games in a grindy fashion? Would you? With a completionist mindset?

I assume those games has choices and consequences, where content would be locked out based on your actions or inactions, so....

 

[Francis H]

I beg to differ. Especially since the example you gave lean more toward cRPGs, rather than Action games. ARPGs are actually Action games, first and foremost, with the RPG aspect being, well, aspect (or elements in a very simple, basic form). Best examples of ARPGs are obviously Diablo, Titan Quests, Grim Dawn, Torchlight, and to some extent, the Soulsborne series (Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne). In those games I mentioned, infinite leveling ARE fun, and somewhat a must. I haven't played all the games you mentioned, and you most likely mentioned those because they have infinite-leveling, but did you play those games in a grindy fashion? Would you? With a completionist mindset?

I assume those games has choices and consequences, where content would be locked out based on your actions or inactions, so....

I guess we just have a different meaning of arpgs. I think of them like the fusion of the two genres, with the number-crunching, story driven and C&C of rpgs, with the fast pace and quick satisfication of action games. Considering your take, yeah I can definently agree on you there.

 

[Black Angel]

I think of them like the fusion of the two genres, with the number-crunching, story driven and C&C of rpgs, with the fast pace and quick satisfication of action games.

Well, I DO want something like that! Thing is, it doesn't really exist. You should've mentioned Fallout: New Vegas when talking about ARPGs, because

Title: Fallout: New Vegas
Genre:Action, RPG
Developer:Obsidian Entertainment
Publisher:Bethesda Softworks
Release Date: 22 Oct, 2010

Fortunately New Vegas IS comparable to the games you've mentioned before, i.e it leans more toward cRPGs rather than being an Action game.

Unfortunately, the combat wasn't fully in control of the character, but rather by the player, which means instead of combat fully rely on character's skills, it still rely on player's skills despite the fact there's weapon STR requirement and swaying if skill requirement wasn't met. This is the dilemma of making a series which rooted in a turn-based, top-down isometric format, into one with real-time and FPS/TPP perspective. Really, New Vegas was the closest thing to an actual Fallout game in an FPS/TPP perspective, but remember also that Troika had an engine ready that NOT only let us to play in a top-down, isometric perspective, but also in an first person perspective (dunno if the combat would be real-time too). It's sad that the IP falls to the hands of Bethesda, who no longer make a proper RPG since Morrowind (or arguably Oblivion).

 

[Mr Fish]

Well, the exp could be increased to the point that it would take for fucking ever to level up at some point and that'd be a soft cap. But I prefer a hard cap. And quite frankly I'd prefer it if we started at level 5 or level 10, why do we always start out as someone that is inept and suddenly, magically, just get adept at various stuff within mere ingame days? Starting at level 1 feels good so that you can level up quickly and shit but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

[Black Angel]

Well, the exp could be increased to the point that it would take for fucking ever to level up at some point and that'd be a soft cap. But I prefer a hard cap. And quite frankly I'd prefer it if we started at level 5 or level 10, why do we always start out as someone that is inept and suddenly, magically, just get adept at various stuff within mere ingame days? Starting at level 1 feels good so that you can level up quickly and shit but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Huh, now that you say it that way, I remembered Dark Souls have the same character creation system, where different classes would start from different level. Can't think of a cRPG that do that, too. Interesting.

 

[lolpop109]

Don't see the problem with finite or infinite leveling, However with massive RPGs no level cap can be good as its keeps you doing something for XP e.g I still kill stuff in fallout 4 for XP but FNV and FO3 theres no much point so I don't bother and that kinda closes the game for me. However I do think infinite leveling can get board doing same sort of quest just to get XP. And also it gets to a stage where you no longer want perks anymore as this makes you two op and starts to make your character less special but more has everything in the game witch is less rpg and more like a cod unlock system.

My favorite level system was oblivion even though I didn't play too much of that game. Skyrim was annyouing as you could't level up certain skills as enemys would start to get to tough (Dam dragons). Then the old fo3 stsyle systems I liked alot i just probably wanted no level cap though. Fo4 system was good as you could get to high level and feel really powerful however I don't get why they made it so you could upgrade your special skills ? This defiantly made characters OP and think this ruined the whole perk system for me

 

[Black Angel]

Fo4 system was good as you could get to high level and feel really powerful

Huh, I heard the opposite. Due to shitty level-scaling, no matter how high your level is you would still be dealing with bullet-sponges anyway, and to the point where some average raiders wield Fatman.

 

[lolpop109]

I would't say thats true at all. Some legendary raiders get good guns but the normals will never get that much better. But yeah if you pay on higher levels certain enemy are massive bullet sponges. On normal mirelurk queens take so many dam bullets its just so dam annyouing. I rember fireing round after round doing just nothing.

Fallout 4 system is not new as the where leveled creatures in fo3 and FNV and it pretty much works the same as that however there are more level creatures and area so therefore it can defo feel like enimeys are bullet sponges. When you get the right perks though you will get over powered. Killing legedarys can get stupidly easy like two shot kill if you using right modifiers. So yeah I think the whloe systems a bit more complicated that it needs to be. Tbh for me I don't mind all that much if I go into areas and enemys are easy I don't mind all that much cuz there still plently ot time to make places are harder and introduce new factors into combat such as ammo. However in fo4 you get so much ammo and have so many caps ect you will literally never have to worry. Sometimes fighting low level enemys with limited ammo can be tougher than fighting high level enemys with tons of grenades ect

 

[Cooldawg86]

Locked of course. The lack of cap kills character development. Unless like playing God hiking simulator

 

[Deleted member 93956]

SoulsBorne levelling system snip

Actually the series is in the middle term, as it is locked on insane levels, relative to the amount of stats to get up to 99, but Softcahps/Hardcaps are really important. Usually it's fruitless to go beyond 50 in most stats, but some weapons/spells require further, and that means some wise stat allocation. After around 20, the HP stat will increase it at a lesser amount, same goes for the Stamina one and maybe Agility...
Besides, at the NG endgame it's better to invest on improving your gear rather than levels.
To not mention low level builds, for challenges or PvP (not Twinks)

 

[Black Angel]

Actually the series is in the middle term, as it is locked on insane levels, relative to the amount of stats to get up to 99, but Softcahps/Hardcaps are really important. Usually it's fruitless to go beyond 50 in most stats, but some weapons/spells require further, and that means some wise stat allocation. After around 20, the HP stat will increase it at a lesser amount, same goes for the Stamina one and maybe Agility...
Besides, at the NG endgame it's better to invest on improving your gear rather than levels.
To not mention low level builds, for challenges or PvP (not Twinks)

Yeah, and kind of like Fallout 4 where the level is actually capped at 11 all SPECIAL and all perks fully leveled, but without the balance that's in the Soulsborne.

Now, if only someone would make an RPG with some presets of skills, level beyond 1 at the start, kind of a mix between classical Fallout and Arcanum character presets and Soulsborne classes.....

 

[Francis H]

Well, I DO want something like that! Thing is, it doesn't really exist. You should've mentioned Fallout: New Vegas when talking about ARPGs, because

Fortunately New Vegas IS comparable to the games you've mentioned before, i.e it leans more toward cRPGs rather than being an Action game.

Unfortunately, the combat wasn't fully in control of the character, but rather by the player, which means instead of combat fully rely on character's skills, it still rely on player's skills despite the fact there's weapon STR requirement and swaying if skill requirement wasn't met.

I didn't mention New Vegas mostly because it uses skill in a more action way than the other games I mentioned. While in those games it requires skill not only from the player but of the character in a combat situation in a (sorta) realistic matter (ex: Alpha Protocol. If you didn't focus on the required weapon tree, you might as well consider any weapon from that tree trash, because your character can't use it properly(at least compared to someone who did invest at least 5 bars into it)), NV just increases the damage, so your character could have 10 in Guns(doesn't know anything about ballistic weapons), but because he has 10 Per, he can shoot like a master sniper with any weapon.

 

[Deleted member 93956]

snip

So kits, stat and gear wise, right? XD
There is a small issue with Soulsborne classes, that everyone had for a longer or shorter time: The classes aren't restrictive, and the character progression is all up to you, BUT if you picked the Sorcerer, 'couse the classic "mages are cool", you are actually restricted, and won't be able to melee until you get skilled on combat fast, or level up for using another weapon.
Happened to my friends, i had to explain them that becouse they were going crazy with weak-ish sorceries.
This actually might be one of the things From really should tell you.

EDIT: Actually, the instruction manual on DS1 tells you that, but it should be stated ingame anyway.

 

[Black Angel]

I didn't mention New Vegas mostly because it uses skill in a more action way than the other games I mentioned.

Huh, really? I didn't remember much of the skills being used in such way, except all of the combat skills and that is. The way you're saying it, doesn't that mean New Vegas is the better example you should've brought up, i.e "I think of them like the fusion of the two genres, with the number-crunching, story driven and C&C of rpgs, with the fast pace and quick satisfication of action games", which also means the example you mentioned REALLY lean towards cRPGs rather than a harmony of two genres?

I really need to start finishing up the games I'm playing right now, so I can get to Deus Ex, Alpha Protocol, and Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines.

So kits, stat and gear wise, right? XD
There is a small issue with Soulsborne classes, that everyone had for a longer or shorter time: The classes aren't restrictive, and the character progression is all up to you, BUT if you picked the Sorcerer, 'couse the classic "mages are cool", you are actually restricted, and won't be able to melee until you get skilled on combat fast, or level up for using another weapon.
Happened to my friends, i had to explain them that becouse they were going crazy with weak-ish sorceries.
This actually might be one of the things From really should tell you.

EDIT: Actually, the instruction manual on DS1 tells you that, but it should be stated ingame anyway.

Yeah, the classes weren't perfect, but it fits well for Dark Souls as a mix of JRPG and ARPG. I remembered watching ENB's video where he described an idea of having us start in a tutorial area exclusive to the class we chose, so we can learn of the mechanics important to that class i.e if we choose a Knight, that means shield Stability and Poise are important and, thus, we learn about it in the Knight's kingdom.

But the way Mr Fish described starting level, I guess some traits/background that affect stats and eventually how you fare in throughout the gameworld (like how Arcanum did it), theoretically could be a good way for character customization in a cRPG.

 

[Francis H]

Huh, really? I didn't remember much of the skills being used in such way, except all of the combat skills and that is. The way you're saying it, doesn't that mean New Vegas is the better example you should've brought up, i.e "I think of them like the fusion of the two genres, with the number-crunching, story driven and C&C of rpgs, with the fast pace and quick satisfication of action games", which also means the example you mentioned REALLY lean towards cRPGs rather than a harmony of two genres?

I really need to start finishing up the games I'm playing right now, so I can get to Deus Ex, Alpha Protocol, and Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines.

Searched up the meaning of cRPG (should have done that at the start, but what can you do) and I´m a dumbass. Yeah, those games are more of cRPG´s than arpgs.
If you are going to play them, I suggest Deus Ex ->Vtmb -> Alpha Protocol. This is just because of how much easier it is to go into each game.

 

[NotAcasul]

Well, the exp could be increased to the point that it would take for fucking ever to level up at some point and that'd be a soft cap. But I prefer a hard cap. And quite frankly I'd prefer it if we started at level 5 or level 10, why do we always start out as someone that is inept and suddenly, magically, just get adept at various stuff within mere ingame days? Starting at level 1 feels good so that you can level up quickly and shit but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Maybe when your level 1 you're actually level 5, but the game starts your levels based on what you've done as a player.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

I think most actual RPG developers would laugh at the idea of infinite leveling and assume it was just a joke. And then there's Bethesda...

Then again, I think the idea of turning Fallout into an FPS crafting MMO with infinite leveling would have gotten you laughed out of the room at any other RPG studio. But then there's Bethesda...

Infinite leveling has its place and that place is boring MMOs. But Bethesda's goal seems to be to make a game where you have to experience all its content in a single playthrough so even if you're a Mage you become head of the Fighters Guild and even if you are a Fighter you become head of the Mages Guild in the same playthrough (making stats/character builds utterly meaningless). It's utter nonsense.

Actual RPGs, on the other hand, have this thing called replayability because you don't generally see all of the content in a single playthrough. So while idiots are spending 20 more hours on boring MMO quests with their infinite leveling, you're spending 20 more hours enjoying entirely new story content in an actual RPG.

 

[NotAcasul]

I think most actual RPG developers would laugh at the idea of infinite leveling and assume it was just a joke. And then there's Bethesda...

Then again, I think the idea of turning Fallout into an FPS crafting MMO with infinite leveling would have gotten you laughed out of the room at any other RPG studio. But then there's Bethesda...

Infinite leveling has its place and that place is boring MMOs. But Bethesda's goal seems to be to make a game where you have to experience all its content in a single playthrough so even if you're a Mage you become head of the Fighters Guild and even if you are a Fighter you become head of the Mages Guild in the same playthrough (making stats/character builds utterly meaningless). It's utter nonsense.

Actual RPGs, on the other hand, have this thing called replayability because you don't generally see all of the content in a single playthrough. So while idiots are spending 20 more hours on boring MMO quests with their infinite leveling, you're spending 20 more hours enjoying entirely new story content in an actual RPG.

I don't think Bethesda just said one day "Hey guys! Let's make our game as dull as a butter knife!" I think it's more likely that they just had a slippery slope moment and didn't correct it before release. Now they're stuck with what they made.