![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
And, more importantly, why do they too often make them so absurdly low?
For example, I'm currently playing through The Outer Worlds, which I got on sale a month or so ago. With all the DLC installed, the maximum level you can obtain is level 36 (with only the first DLC, the cap is 33, and without either of the DLCs, the cap is level 30). Which I just hit, while in the middle of doing one of the DLCs. And yet, I still have the rest of this DLC, the entire other DLC and the endgame bits of the main campaign left to do. I haven't done any grinding or anything like that. Not that it really matters so much, in this particular case, because I'm already basically all but invincible, unless I just, like, stand there like a moron and let enemies kill me or whatever, but, even so, just on general principles, I wouldn't have minded being able to continue to level up for the rest of the game. Hell, even a cap of level 40 for this game, rather than 36, probably would have been sufficient to get me through the rest of the game without hitting the cap too early, or at all. If being level 40 instead of level 36 would have just made me even more "god-like" than I already am, that would have been perfectly okay with me.
Basically, video game developers, I'm asking you... don't put level caps in your game. Or, if you must do so, put them at the traditional level 99 or whatever (and don't "balance" your game such that the player will hit level 99 only three-quarters of the way through your game). What I'm saying is... don't make it so that your players reach the level cap when there's still probably several hours left of playtime. I'd rather get to the end of a game several levels away from any level cap, with the option to grind to meet it if I wanted (which I usually don't bother to do, assuming the game is still easily beatable at a lower level), rather than still have a ways to go in the game, but no longer being able to get stronger, even if I may already be "too strong" as it is. I'd rather have the option to be "too strong" and possibly "break the game" by making it "too easy," than being potentially forced to be "not strong enough" through an arbitrary level cap and having the game be "too difficult to complete" at which point I'd probably just "stop playing and uninstall it" as I have with so many other games, for similar reasons.
TL;DR gist: Numbers going up in video games is good. Numbers arbitrarily ceasing to go up for no good reason in video games before said video games are actually finished is bad.
Aside from that, however, I have to say that The Outer Worlds has been pretty great, so far. Kind of like a mix between Fallout and Borderlands (funnier/more ridiculous/less serious than Fallout, not as funny/less ridiculous/more serious than Borderlands, which is kind of like baby bear's stuff in the Goldilocks fairy tale), maybe with a dash of Mass Effect thrown in.
For example, I'm currently playing through The Outer Worlds, which I got on sale a month or so ago. With all the DLC installed, the maximum level you can obtain is level 36 (with only the first DLC, the cap is 33, and without either of the DLCs, the cap is level 30). Which I just hit, while in the middle of doing one of the DLCs. And yet, I still have the rest of this DLC, the entire other DLC and the endgame bits of the main campaign left to do. I haven't done any grinding or anything like that. Not that it really matters so much, in this particular case, because I'm already basically all but invincible, unless I just, like, stand there like a moron and let enemies kill me or whatever, but, even so, just on general principles, I wouldn't have minded being able to continue to level up for the rest of the game. Hell, even a cap of level 40 for this game, rather than 36, probably would have been sufficient to get me through the rest of the game without hitting the cap too early, or at all. If being level 40 instead of level 36 would have just made me even more "god-like" than I already am, that would have been perfectly okay with me.
Basically, video game developers, I'm asking you... don't put level caps in your game. Or, if you must do so, put them at the traditional level 99 or whatever (and don't "balance" your game such that the player will hit level 99 only three-quarters of the way through your game). What I'm saying is... don't make it so that your players reach the level cap when there's still probably several hours left of playtime. I'd rather get to the end of a game several levels away from any level cap, with the option to grind to meet it if I wanted (which I usually don't bother to do, assuming the game is still easily beatable at a lower level), rather than still have a ways to go in the game, but no longer being able to get stronger, even if I may already be "too strong" as it is. I'd rather have the option to be "too strong" and possibly "break the game" by making it "too easy," than being potentially forced to be "not strong enough" through an arbitrary level cap and having the game be "too difficult to complete" at which point I'd probably just "stop playing and uninstall it" as I have with so many other games, for similar reasons.
TL;DR gist: Numbers going up in video games is good. Numbers arbitrarily ceasing to go up for no good reason in video games before said video games are actually finished is bad.
Aside from that, however, I have to say that The Outer Worlds has been pretty great, so far. Kind of like a mix between Fallout and Borderlands (funnier/more ridiculous/less serious than Fallout, not as funny/less ridiculous/more serious than Borderlands, which is kind of like baby bear's stuff in the Goldilocks fairy tale), maybe with a dash of Mass Effect thrown in.
no subject
Date: 2022-05-02 07:09 pm (UTC)From:However after that, you're able to go through the game again keeping all your stuff. I think there's an alternate ending or the chance of getting a better ending if you can complete it again this way. However the enemies and bosses all have a power up so that they're level is going over 99. At first you can struggle through it but it then becomes pretty clear you're getting outclassed. On the PS3 version there is (or at least were) level cap dlcs you could buy that raised your max level by 100. You'd still have to earn those levels of course, but your max would be higher. And you could buy that 3 times.
Once I saw the level cap dlcs I just filed the game away as 'beaten' and haven't looked back. I think I bought it on steam at some point back when flash sales were a thing. Would have been just a couple dollars or something. Still haven't actually played it on steam though. *checks* Actually according to steam I played it for 1 minute. That means the game auto-closed/crashed as soon as I ran it. A typical result for a lot of console ports I've tried on steam on my hardware.
no subject
Date: 2022-05-02 07:32 pm (UTC)From:There were 3 DLCs called "Surpass your Limits" on the original PS3 version, each one increasing your max level by 300. Apparently it also unlocks an extra dungeon that'll make full use of it. Apparently redoing the new game plus won't need more than a mere lv120-130. (with the max at 99 without it.)
On the original Fairy Fencer F on steam, that DLC is still there, but a bit cheaper. Costing only about 1 dollar to get all 3 of them. It was more expensive back in the day on PS3. But I wouldn't have bought them either way. Even if they do supposedly unlock a bonus dungeon that makes it necessary. I'll try booting up the ps3 and checking it in the store there what the dlc issue is like if I remember, in the morning.
no subject
Date: 2022-05-03 05:01 am (UTC)From:But then, as you've noted before, people probably buy the shit because such games are otherwise too much of a chore to play normally, such that you'd either have to buy the DLC for exp/gold or else grind for months in real time to get the equivalent. And the devs fully know this is the case when they put the DLC out there for sale to begin with.
In any case, for any game that I think might look interesting on first glance, I look at the DLC, and if it has even a whiff of that type of DLC, I almost invariably auto-Ignore the game immediately and never give it a second look.
no subject
Date: 2022-05-03 07:28 am (UTC)From:It's why I went from buying virtually every jrpg I saw at the store in the PS1/PS2 era to barely ever touching them. The start of the boycotting begain with the Hyperdimension Neptunia and Ar Tonelico 3 DLC choices, but yeah I passed on a lot of jrpgs. Most of the ones I bought in the ps3 era after that ended up being for specific reasons or just because I saw it on sale for less than 20 bucks.
In the later PS3 and PS4 eras I just don't touch them unless it's a 'complete' edition that has most/all of the DLC included and still costs under 20 bucks. (And have gotten several as a result of that because occasionally with the PSN+ discount you'll find the occasional title that has everything included for 15 or less. I picked up Shenmue III for less than 10 bucks I believe as an example.
I think devs started backing off on some of the DLC choices like stat bonuses/exp bonuses/etc since it's pretty much evidence that they didn't try to balance the game (or if they did, deliberately tweaked variables for the DLC) but that's more for the japanese devs. I see american devs still doing it with the triple A titles now and then. Not that I buy'em.
Most of the DLC whoring these days include bonus costumes (That use to be just something you'd unlock) and item packs (Some free, most cost $$$, and I'm sure the games are designed to make you really want to have that special sword or those super high heal potions, etc).
Long story short, Devs and Publishers pushing DLC crap like this has saved me a LOT of money over the last 12 years. That I promptly put into other hobbies.