Bashiok posted on the Battle.net forums for the first time this week to tell us a few things we know and a few things we didn't on Blizzard's reasoning behind Diablo III's level cap.
Official Blizzard Quote:
Good discussion! It's an old topic I know but there's a lot of good points and counter-points being brought up.
So just to reiterate some things and maybe draw it back to more specific bullet points of why a lower level cap is (we believe) better for the game:
We want each level to feel like a significant boost in power. You can think of the amount of power a character gains through leveling as a bucket of orange soda, and each level as a glass. We have to have an end-point and so we can only scale player power to that point. By having fewer glasses they can be filled more, and each one has more delicious thirst-quenching orange soda. Spread that same bucket out over 99 or 200 glasses, and each level is less satisfying (if not downright unnoticeable).
We want level benefits to be as clear as possible. Some people have suggested "Well, let us hit level 60, but then keep giving us points after that." which isn't a solution, it's the same problem except worse because there's no actual tracking mechanism built in (ie levels). We also want to avoid providing level benefits at irregular intervals (although this may be unavoidable for trait points), as some people suggest "Let us level to 99 and just give us the rewards every few levels". This goes back to the first point: We want each level to feel like a significant boost in power. Trait points may not come every level, but the sum of the other increases from leveling, we feel, are still very significant and maintain our intent.
Because of the extreme leveling curve in Diablo II, balance really couldn't be adjusted around level 99 characters. This meant that the last 15 or so levels were not just minimal increases in power, but in most cases provided absolutely nothing to a characters ability to effectively complete Hell difficulty and get items, which did significantly improve their character. Instead, leveling to 99 became a status symbol more than anything.
We can have long term status symbols people can go for that are extremely visual, show to others the effort you've put in, but not attach that to something like a character level. Along with artisans, achievements, gems, runestones, and all the other various character customization progressions, we still have some surprises left in store on this front.
Balance isn't a main point for a tighter level system, but it is one side benefit. With the sum changes and improvements to all of the core designs, we believe that we can have a more reasonably challenging game throughout (as we can fairly clearly know how strong someone should be at any point in time) without attempting to create "challenge" through cheesy tactics.
The game paces out progression very well through all of the various customization systems, which are far more interesting and important to an end-game character, as opposed to chasing a number.
I'm sure I'm leaving out a good point or two. The real bottom line is that we understand people like having those long term goals, and those feel good to chase and eventually achieve, but we do not feel one needs to be character level, and in fact making character levels a long term goal brings a great many negative effects with them (keeping in mind our goals for how important each level should feel). We do not doubt that people will feel good about chasing the long term goals of building the perfect character, getting a playtime intensive achievement, leveling up an artisan to max, or any of the other many individual long term progression systems the game offers.
Clearly Blizzard has many longterm achievements lined up for us in Diablo III, and we can surely look forward to many status symbols to work towards. The post is pretty self explanatory, so there really isn't much else to say other than feel free to revive (or rather semi-revive) the discussion about Diablo III's level cap.
It's nice to get a glimpse into the mind of the team like this every once in a while. Just in this short post we can see the depth they think things out in. I agree with what Blizzard choose to do with this, and am very excited to see what things they have in store!
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
Definitely agree with these points. People will always keep complaining that 'this isn't WoW', but the bottom line is that if you find a solution in WoW to a problem you were having with another game (D2), it would be downright stupid not to learn from that. Both are RPGs, there will always be some kind of overlap. I really can't see the point of people complaning about low level cap as a WoW thing. Some people apparently fail to realise that this isn't D2.5. And for those claiming that Diablo always had level cap 99 and now suddenly they go for this, D1 had level cap somewhere around 50 and nobody seems to mention that.
The only thing that worries me about this news is the achievements, because most likely, that will mean you'd always have to be online in order to get them as it is in SC2. People with unstable connection will not be happy about this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head!
@ Marcus - To solve this you could have single player achievements and multiplayer achievement so people only playing singleplayer with unstable connections can still get them.
@ Luckmann - Who cares if it's the same as WoW? Bashiok has stated all the reasons why it's good for Diablo.
And I am certain that the fact that the cap is exactly 60, similar to the original World of Warcraft, is a mere coincidence.
You're right, it's not a coincidence. Blizzard has said that they decided on 60 as the lvl cap because it worked great for WoW when it was there. I'd track down the quote but it's 6am, not gonna happen lol.
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
And I am certain that the fact that the cap is exactly 60, similar to the original World of Warcraft, is a mere coincidence.
Who in the world claims it's a coincidence? Like I said: "if you find a solution in WoW to a problem you were having with another game (D2), it would be downright stupid not to learn from that".
Level progression felt weak in later stages of D2, and if your character was slightly underwhelming, chances were gaining two levels wouldn't have helped the issue at all. Lvl 60 cap is better because then the levels will have more of a meaning.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head!
Completely agree with where they are comming from and are saying. Sasdly i think it just leaves ladders for pvp though9was kinda cool how d2 was a pve ladder instead of PVP). I would prefer pvp ladders though now that i mention it. Level cap sounded dumb at first like 5 years ago when I started wow, but makes so much sense now.
The only thing that worries me about this news is the achievements, because most likely, that will mean you'd always have to be online in order to get them as it is in SC2. People with unstable connection will not be happy about this.
You can get offline achievements in SC2 when you're playing the campaign. I would assume the same thing would happen in D3.
And as for the level cap being the same as WoW, chances are they tried a bunch of numbers other than 60. You think they wanted a bunch of people complaining that it was the same as WoW? Not to mention that the same complaints would've happened if it was 70, 80, or 85 now that those numbers have been "claimed" by WoW xpacs. Even if they just chose 60 from the beginning the reasons provided are good enough for me.
I like lvl caps, because of the meaning and because there are many other tools to use for those over achievers. in my opinion a level should be a source of scaling and balance for the game. Things like gems can be something that gives a minor benefit for the dedicated.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If that made sense to you, Bravo! I think I even confused myself...
I don't get why some people are upset about the level cap. It's a completely arbitrary number. The only thing that matter with the level is what you get with it. Unless people honestly think that if they changed it from 60 to 99 that their character would get 39 more skill points which isn't the case. If they did that, they would just make each level of skill that much less significant to adjust to this higher number. Either way, you get the same end result.
I think the one thing that Bash mentioned that I had not thought of was balancing is easier when everyone can reach cap. As he mentioned, with so few actually hitting 99, they couldn't balance monsters to the skills/power level 99 character would have. Therefore, this made making it to level 99 even less significant because the scale eventually leveled back out and made the last few levels worthless.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
I already mentioned this in one of the threads but I'll mention it again since it's brought back by a blue post that I would rather look for loots, craft, arena or do that end game that blizz has planned out for d3 than grinding for level 99. I'm pretty sure Diablo 3 will have hundreds of achievement at release (and more will be added through minor/major patches) that will be a long term goal for everyone and this alone pumps me up!
I bet it will only take 1 good achievement (that gives you a bragging rights) to replace peeps urge to grind for level 99.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I love all loot fest kind of game! I will be playing all of them for the next few years. Loot fest games I'm looking forward to: LotR: War in the North,Torchlight 2,Borderlands 2 and of course Diablo 3.
He wasn't saying it was impossible to balance 99 levels. He just said that the balance involved in 99 levels makes each level not as important. And as someone has to say every time this argument comes up, we have no idea what D3's endgame is going to be like. Its been said that it won't be just grinding for loot. Not to mention that plenty of games (D2 included) have high end loot thats more than a good enough reason to grind/kill bosses for.
And they'll have areas for higher levels. Their called expansion packs.
@Crusader: you'd rather grind for loot and crafting materials than levels? Well, you know what I'd rather do? Grind for loot without thinking of levelling, but then once in a while be pleasantly surprised because I gained a level. Playing a game without any hopes of real progression is the ultimate boredom. What's the point of grinding for loot if you're already max level (and, therefore, you have all the skills and traits you'll ever have)? What are you going to do with the loot that you find?
I am not going to argue much with you since we have a different view to it and the game isn't even released yet (meaning I can be wrong and also crave for more levels). What I said is based off what the common knowledge so far for d3 and level cap is the least of my concern. As a diablo gamer, did you really just asked me what I'm going to do with the loot I found, wow? Anyway just an fyi, what I meant grind for loot is to look for that right item for my current build...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I love all loot fest kind of game! I will be playing all of them for the next few years. Loot fest games I'm looking forward to: LotR: War in the North,Torchlight 2,Borderlands 2 and of course Diablo 3.
@Scyber: why couldn't they balance D2 for 99 (or at least 90)? Few people reached it? Tough sh*t. At least there would've been a really challenging area/region/dungeon/whatever. Keep in mind that I never levelled a character to 99 (I think my max was 90). But if there was an area that was pretty much for lvl90 and above, who knows.
You yourself admitted to not getting to 99. How would you feel never being able to beat the game? I also feel that Diablo was never about level grinding, the game was meant to be completed in one continuous flow. If you played the game this way, you ended at around level 75-85. Which is the exact same as 60 in D3 except they changed the scale.
Again, I think most people that are upset with this change think that they are loosing out on content which is not true. If you really miss grinding levels then just grind away anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
Seeing as they've stated that acquiring high lvl gems are going to be extremely difficult, I'm sure it'll be worth it. It's not like how in D2 you get a 6 life leach, or some almost irrelevant lightning damage. Some gems might give us Exp bonuses, or added skill attributes. One thing is for sure, they'll be more useful than in D2.
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Official Blizzard Quote:
Good discussion! It's an old topic I know but there's a lot of good points and counter-points being brought up.
So just to reiterate some things and maybe draw it back to more specific bullet points of why a lower level cap is (we believe) better for the game:
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
The only thing that worries me about this news is the achievements, because most likely, that will mean you'd always have to be online in order to get them as it is in SC2. People with unstable connection will not be happy about this.
@ Marcus - To solve this you could have single player achievements and multiplayer achievement so people only playing singleplayer with unstable connections can still get them.
@ Luckmann - Who cares if it's the same as WoW? Bashiok has stated all the reasons why it's good for Diablo.
You're right, it's not a coincidence. Blizzard has said that they decided on 60 as the lvl cap because it worked great for WoW when it was there. I'd track down the quote but it's 6am, not gonna happen lol.
Level progression felt weak in later stages of D2, and if your character was slightly underwhelming, chances were gaining two levels wouldn't have helped the issue at all. Lvl 60 cap is better because then the levels will have more of a meaning.
Thanks Caniroth for the awesome sig!
And as for the level cap being the same as WoW, chances are they tried a bunch of numbers other than 60. You think they wanted a bunch of people complaining that it was the same as WoW? Not to mention that the same complaints would've happened if it was 70, 80, or 85 now that those numbers have been "claimed" by WoW xpacs. Even if they just chose 60 from the beginning the reasons provided are good enough for me.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I think the one thing that Bash mentioned that I had not thought of was balancing is easier when everyone can reach cap. As he mentioned, with so few actually hitting 99, they couldn't balance monsters to the skills/power level 99 character would have. Therefore, this made making it to level 99 even less significant because the scale eventually leveled back out and made the last few levels worthless.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
I bet it will only take 1 good achievement (that gives you a bragging rights) to replace peeps urge to grind for level 99.
And they'll have areas for higher levels. Their called expansion packs.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I am not going to argue much with you since we have a different view to it and the game isn't even released yet (meaning I can be wrong and also crave for more levels). What I said is based off what the common knowledge so far for d3 and level cap is the least of my concern. As a diablo gamer, did you really just asked me what I'm going to do with the loot I found, wow? Anyway just an fyi, what I meant grind for loot is to look for that right item for my current build...
You yourself admitted to not getting to 99. How would you feel never being able to beat the game? I also feel that Diablo was never about level grinding, the game was meant to be completed in one continuous flow. If you played the game this way, you ended at around level 75-85. Which is the exact same as 60 in D3 except they changed the scale.
Again, I think most people that are upset with this change think that they are loosing out on content which is not true. If you really miss grinding levels then just grind away anyway.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
Seeing as they've stated that acquiring high lvl gems are going to be extremely difficult, I'm sure it'll be worth it. It's not like how in D2 you get a 6 life leach, or some almost irrelevant lightning damage. Some gems might give us Exp bonuses, or added skill attributes. One thing is for sure, they'll be more useful than in D2.
So, I care about gems?