What was the point of the level 60 cap?

[Kiroptus]

It's a sad state of affairs really. Like watching a train crash in slow motion.

The train has already crashed, even after warning of so many people about it. Its not time to salvage and try to reconstruct the train so it gets moving again.

But there is so much on the horizon now, I dont think its going to do anything to the state of that wrecked train.

[TheBigClown]

Was it at Blizzcon last year? I don't recall exactly when they said that but if it was at Blizzcon, can you imagine all the shocked faces in the audience? People must have been thinking "not fun? lvl 99 was why I played D2 for so long." I do not recall any uproar about that statement so people must have thought "ok, we'll wait and see."

I think it was earlier, but I'm not sure. Anyways, I'm pretty sure it was at a Blizzcon. I think you're spot on. I don't think I've ever heard people saying that lvl 99 was lame - very hard to achive, but not lame. Go for lvl 99? Don't go for lvl 99? Either way: Good for you!

[nessah]

Lol, of course that there was a throng of ppl saying this.
On this site, just browse comments on articles posted before the launch.

As for levels issue.
It wasn't as much about high lvl cap as it was about ladders.
Blizz is against ladders since like mid 00ies. SC2 got some retarded ladder system, D3 got no ladder whatsoever.
A complete turnaround from what have been before, when ladder system was one of the selling points of their games. I blame WoW for that ;F
That it's not fun and that ladder resets were crap system, blablabla.
That's what blue was constantly saying, and there wasn't much opposition to that in community (at least not here on diii.net).
Maybe it's true in theory, but in reality we got no ladders, no resets and we should just farm items that don't drop (because they can't be erased from the market by ladder reset when ppl get full of high-end stuff).
It's just a game without purpose, like a neverending sports cup.
Instead of providing us with a better system they just removed that and said 'it's gonna be cool, we are blizzard, we know'. And vast majority of ppl bought it (see sales figures and comments once again).
It seems as stupid as it did before the release, but large part of that clueless horde of ppl that is bashing blizz now were just pissing their pants discussing how great experience it's gonna be.

It's kinda sad but it can't be helped that most of ppl don't have a clue why they are enjoying certain things. That's why hyping is such effective.
"What's funny about D2? It's fun to hunt for items and test various builds" they said.
"Rushing ladders is for geeks, pvp is even worse."
"What you don't like about D2? I don't like to redo my chars especially if I misclick some skill button on lvlup selection, I don't like that attribs are all about vit (which is complete bull**** but hey some folks got D2 experience limited to enigma hammerdin in 1.10 farming pve). Also doing baalruns is boring and way too easy (thanks to duped stuff I'm wearing but I'm not aware of this/I won't mention it)"
Voila.
No ladders, no pvp on release, neverending itemhunt and easy to do respecs.
Extremely hard last difficulty unless you are great geared (and you can't gear easily -> see above).
Are we happy?

No because, it wasn't why D2 was hooking.
They were just a signs, aspects of gameplay that could be easily described, but they were not the reasons why D2 was that long lasting (or even still is).
It was about first and foremost randomization of pretty much every part of gameplay and complete lack of balance.
Because of that there was always some new things to do/test mainly thanks to itemization -> ****loads of affixes and mods that were of various utility, there was ****loads of viable (you can beat game with it) builds thanks to game being rather easy, there was a lot of mechanics working behind the scenes (imagine frames thresholds in D3 :F) not just stuffing few mods on multiplicative returns.

Whether D3 devs done like that because of 'presumed' fan feedback and lack of their insight in the game mechanics or just because it was easier to develop it like that and just put more shiny things in front to impress reviewers (D2 got pretty ****ty reviews, SC1 afaik as well) I dunno honestly.
Imo it's not the latter, because of RMAH, they wanted this game to fare good in the long run, but they just ****ted that.
And I'm not blizz north fanboi, I enjoyed blizz irvine games as well, for comparison Warcraft3 was awesome, screw that it wasn't as balanced and "skill" demanding as SC, I enjoyed it a lot more.

PS: nah :P

[sacridoc]

Yeah, it's pretty simple. The reason people enjoy ARPGs is because of the customization. Beyond that it's the competition and grinding.

The most important thing that Blizzard needs to change about this game is the skill system / item affixes. Though I understand why it's necessary to put in the endgame part first to keep people around. It seems like they're already working on improving item affixes... even if the Legendaries are probably too gimmicky at the moment.

But at some point they have to tackle the entire skills system, which will be a serious undertaking. Of course, they need to have base stats (mechanics) in place before they even do that.

This is why a lot of people say the game can't be fixed because they literally have to start at the very foundation... which as David Brevik noted is the fact that everything is based off your weapon damage.

Again, I hate to say it, but if you combined PoE with D3 you'd have a really good ARPG. PoE has a lot of problems, no doubt. But it has the basic customization needed for a good ARPG.

[zacheroog]

They took the level system and doubled it.

What will be doubled next...

[Angel_of_Wrath]

You're right Dacar, but with them adding stat gains with this new system, it would almost,(and I use the word almost carefully) make leveling in future expansions irrelevant. There are no skill points anymore so all we would get is more +stats, unless of course they add in more runes. So I figure this paragon system will work for the time being, but when it comes to an expansion, it should be interesting what the devs decide to do.

I think they pulled a number of ideas/systems off the shelves that were earmarked for an expansion in order to quell the uprising -- paragon levels being one of them. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Mystic NPC or the Talisman show up in v1.1.

[Dacar92]

I think they pulled a number of ideas/systems off the shelves that were earmarked for an expansion in order to quell the uprising -- paragon levels being one of them.

Interesting conjecture. It does make sense. We'll never be sure but I think it makes sense. But the only drawback to that idea is whether or not Paragon would have been done waiting for another 6 months for an expansion.

[mesafalcon]

what are the most expensive items on the RMAH? ones you need to be 60 to use.

i think they wanted everyone to cap out quick so they can go shopping. taking months and months to cap out won't speed up sales and bet Bluzz the bigger cuts.

thats my opinion. the answer to most questions in this world are answered by the involvement of money.

[TheDestructor]

They wanted the leveling experience to be meaningful and for each level to have some weight to it with each level giving you new skills to play with. They didn't see a point in giving you extra levels because of this design theory and because they wanted an end game that provided a permanent form of challenge. Letting you out level Inferno would make Inferno pointless, while out-gearing it is fine, obviously.

I think what they're mostly realizing is that people don't want a punishingly hard game. They want to explode things and have rewards showered down upon them for their non-effort. I think that's the overall change in dynamic we're seeing with the team's design sense in patch 1.04. I think making people really earn their gear was commendable, but in the end flawed, because I don't think it's possible to make an ARPG that is addicting solely based on challenging game play, it's just such a repetitive genre. I never played D2 because the game play was white-knuckled action, (though it was functional and satisfying), I played it because I just had to see if Mephisto would finally drop the item I wanted!

[sacridoc]

Indeed... ARPGs don't usually have that element of difficulty... that's not the point. It's one of many reasons the developers were apparently very confused about how this genre works. ARPG gameplay is usually the last thing people look at. I mean if you could incorporate a legitimate difficulty it would be awesome, but all the other expected elements should come first. And typically this just isn't a part of the ARPG genre.

I mean D3 has like none of the main elements that make an ARPG besides an isometric view.

The basics aren't hard to come up with... customization with skills / items, ladders etc and some kind of endgame grind.


It's like I've said before, if you're comparing MMOs to ARPGs... The main differences are that in ARPGs you should get fewer active skills but way more customization through items and builds. MMOs have more complex combat but the builds are more routine because it's difficult to mesh the build / item diversity with many more active skills. Also, one would expect the story / environments to be better in an ARPG since there's less to design from an isometric view.

MMOs are honestly superior in most areas simply because they're bigger in scope. But the selling point of ARPGs is the item / build complexity which is missing in MMOs.

If you don't get that element in an ARPG, why are you playing it over an MMO if you get more skills, more specs, the same or better items, and better everything else in the MMO? It doesn't really make sense. Maybe you prefer a lonesome solo grind over killing dragons in a guild?

Really... until they change (add to) the skill system and item affixes this game won't be good. The selling point of ARPGs is being able to have like 900 specs for your character with all kinds of skills. And to do that you need more complex base stat mechanics (ie not have everything work off weapon damage or have all stats do the same thing).

This is why it's hard to see how they can dig themselves out of this. Simplicity and ARPGs just don't mix, sorry. It works much better with an MMO to some extent because the combat isn't simple. And when I say combat I'm really talking about PvP. Obviously PvE combat in MMOs can be really basic, but the fundamentals are there to make it more difficult depending on how they develop the content. In D3 everything is simple... it doesn't work in this genre.