This is the first poll of a series of polls discussing design decisions for the next Diablo game of the series.
The first one, entitled How Many Hours It Should Take To Reach The Level Cap In Diablo 3? intends to discuss one of the Core Design Decisions of games nowadays.
How long do you want to reach the level cap? How long do you want others to be able to reach the level cap? What do you think will be better for the game in the long term? What type of crowd those such design decision will gather?
Feel free to add your thoughts on this matter and dont forget to vote on the poll.
It will expire in one year and half, so we are sure to be discussing it for a long time.
Keep in mind that
regardless of how long the journey is,
we want it rewarding and meaningfull all the way,
from the start to the finish,
gratifying at all levels,
not just the end game.
Also, keep in mind that
regardless of how much time and effort we spent,
be it a hundred or a thousand hours,
we want to feel gratified constantly,
in a relativelly short time frame.
If it takes me 50 hours of grind for my next level,
I want those 50 hours to be meaningfull,
rewarding, and gratifying when I indeed level up.
I want to feel satisfied and glad that I finished that level,
because the juice was worth the squeeze.
Mods, dont delete it, I will be adding the poll shortly.
How many hours does it take someone to reach 99 now in Dialo 2? I just dont like being able to beat the game at level 70 and then having to do baal runs and everything else to reach the 90's. In Diablo 3, I should be beating the game when im in the 90's (assuming that the lvl cap is 99)
i picked the almighty one. lol. well ok if you plan on lvling till you are blue in the face and trying to reach the max then that isnt a real fun way to play. the reason i picked the max limit. is because if it takes that long. then there will be alot of gameplay. which in terms means more fun. so instead of playing till lvl 70 and balaing for the rest to lvl cap. you would be able to play and keep doing new things. and still trying to reach that lvl. but still have fun.
I could put a Sorcerer in the Ladder, level 86-88 after some condensed days (80-100 hours) rushing with the help of my clan. Beating Normal, Nightmare, Hell with the help of your clan, then getting XP boosted through Cow level up to 67 or so untill I could handle.
But if people didnt got rushed, and didnt had the Cow level one could argue that it would take over 2000 hours, going from Normal, Nightmare and Hell all alone up to level 99.
Off course, in the new Diablo 3 its quite likelly that we wont have the rush mechanics, so people wont be able to rush to the most efficient XP/time area from the beggining and due to the quite likely random nature of the game, there also wont have a static "most efficient XP/time" area either. We still might see a comeback of the Cow level, but not for the "end game".
At the point where the Cow level didnt gave any more meaningfull XP I had to have a set of equipment with good resists to do Diablo/Sanctuary runs. I remember that after that point it took days to get another single level and dieing was so harsh that it set me back for many many hours.
Who remembers Silver_Arrow the first character to reach level 99 in the Diablo II Softcore General Ladder?
I didnt played the Diablo II LOD a lot, but I knew it was much easier and faster to reach max level than pre-LOD.
It needs to stay appealing though and not be a form of punishment when trying to cap the level. It should not be required to unlock features in the game that everybody will want to use, it would however be a rewarding experience to unlock something not important to gameplay that will still leave people the feeling of having earned something extra. The difference between a Capped and noncapped character shouldn't be too big, so that people with less play time don't feel out of the loop. I will add more later, but its 5am here and I'm tired.
There needs to be a difference, why is everyone striving for a communistic approach to in game worlds, why must the ones who hardly play for whatever reason be at the same level as the hardcore who play a lot. The hardcore are a minority anyways, and the casual gamers will have plenty of players at their own achievement level to play with.
Hardly any difference between those two groups would cause the game to die since no body will want to do anything since they are as good as the next guy even though he's done a lot more and has better gear and such than you.
On topic though, if blizzard can pull off endless content I think a no level cap system would work very well. Would get rid of the grind since there won't really be an end to it. But a more realistic number would be 1000-2000 especially if there are more effective ways to level other than grinding. If the quests are fun enough, people will do them. But that is hard at times it seems these days.
Well, if the level cap is still 99 then i would say around 500 hours. I want the gaming experience to be not too easy. I don't want to reach lvl 50 in one day. That would take the fun out of it.
I just want the game to be REAL long and REAl hard. Then id be ok.(NO RUSHING NO DRUNS TO GET EASY LEVELING)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
www.myspace.com/mpotatoes for all your Trans Siberian Orchestra listening pleasure
If you want to arrange it
This world you can change it
If we could somehow make this
Christmas thing last
By helping a neighbor
Or even a stranger
And to know who needs help
You need only just ask
well im hardcore pvp...so i like getting to max lvl, or a high enough lvl so that i can compete. but look back to d2 and notice that the lvl after like 80 something didnt really matter...it counted on the items and builds, i prefer for that to remain the same.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember the String of Ears
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
I think the poll really is too early, we have no idea how Diablo III will be structured and what the end game will look like. However, I selected 300-400 because that's how long it took for me in WoW. I felt that was a pretty nice time spent, so since I really have no other point or reference, I selected that here as well.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
Pre-LOD times was a nice system. 90+ in softcore was really cool and got all the respects from others. 80+ in hardcore was extremly nice and 90+ in hardcore was something unrealistic. There was no lvl 99 in hardcore before lod.
Imo it would be nice that you couldn't reach max level so quick like in diablo2, so that the exp gain would get very low at 95+ or something. This way you will always have something to do with your highest level characters. "arhh now I play my baba and will get him that one more level"
Depends on how high the level cap is. If leveling takes too much time, then it will turn ot something like wow, where you have only one or two highlevel characters. I wanna have a decent character of all classes
I think it will be 50-60.
Because if they do change that, it will be worse than changing the graphics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The first one, entitled How Many Hours It Should Take To Reach The Level Cap In Diablo 3? intends to discuss one of the Core Design Decisions of games nowadays.
How long do you want to reach the level cap? How long do you want others to be able to reach the level cap? What do you think will be better for the game in the long term? What type of crowd those such design decision will gather?
Feel free to add your thoughts on this matter and dont forget to vote on the poll.
It will expire in one year and half, so we are sure to be discussing it for a long time.
Keep in mind that
regardless of how long the journey is,
we want it rewarding and meaningfull all the way,
from the start to the finish,
gratifying at all levels,
not just the end game.
Also, keep in mind that
regardless of how much time and effort we spent,
be it a hundred or a thousand hours,
we want to feel gratified constantly,
in a relativelly short time frame.
If it takes me 50 hours of grind for my next level,
I want those 50 hours to be meaningfull,
rewarding, and gratifying when I indeed level up.
I want to feel satisfied and glad that I finished that level,
because the juice was worth the squeeze.
Mods, dont delete it, I will be adding the poll shortly.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Making Controversial points one post at a time!
I could put a Sorcerer in the Ladder, level 86-88 after some condensed days (80-100 hours) rushing with the help of my clan. Beating Normal, Nightmare, Hell with the help of your clan, then getting XP boosted through Cow level up to 67 or so untill I could handle.
But if people didnt got rushed, and didnt had the Cow level one could argue that it would take over 2000 hours, going from Normal, Nightmare and Hell all alone up to level 99.
Off course, in the new Diablo 3 its quite likelly that we wont have the rush mechanics, so people wont be able to rush to the most efficient XP/time area from the beggining and due to the quite likely random nature of the game, there also wont have a static "most efficient XP/time" area either. We still might see a comeback of the Cow level, but not for the "end game".
At the point where the Cow level didnt gave any more meaningfull XP I had to have a set of equipment with good resists to do Diablo/Sanctuary runs. I remember that after that point it took days to get another single level and dieing was so harsh that it set me back for many many hours.
Who remembers Silver_Arrow the first character to reach level 99 in the Diablo II Softcore General Ladder?
I didnt played the Diablo II LOD a lot, but I knew it was much easier and faster to reach max level than pre-LOD.
There needs to be a difference, why is everyone striving for a communistic approach to in game worlds, why must the ones who hardly play for whatever reason be at the same level as the hardcore who play a lot. The hardcore are a minority anyways, and the casual gamers will have plenty of players at their own achievement level to play with.
Hardly any difference between those two groups would cause the game to die since no body will want to do anything since they are as good as the next guy even though he's done a lot more and has better gear and such than you.
On topic though, if blizzard can pull off endless content I think a no level cap system would work very well. Would get rid of the grind since there won't really be an end to it. But a more realistic number would be 1000-2000 especially if there are more effective ways to level other than grinding. If the quests are fun enough, people will do them. But that is hard at times it seems these days.
Not just 200 hours for 1 leven and 10 hours for the first 50 levels.
It's the decisions you make when you have no time to make them that define who you are.
If you want to arrange it
This world you can change it
If we could somehow make this
Christmas thing last
By helping a neighbor
Or even a stranger
And to know who needs help
You need only just ask
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
Imo it would be nice that you couldn't reach max level so quick like in diablo2, so that the exp gain would get very low at 95+ or something. This way you will always have something to do with your highest level characters. "arhh now I play my baba and will get him that one more level"
RIP: Demon Hunter: lvl 50 | Barb: lvl 60 (plvl 5) | Monk: lvl12 & lvl70 (plvl 200)
it should be super rare to have a totally max leveled person
*btw good poll
Anyway, went for the last option
Ill never have a max lvl char
"Ahh, fresh meat!"
- The Butcher
It's the decisions you make when you have no time to make them that define who you are.
I think it will be 50-60.
Because if they do change that, it will be worse than changing the graphics.