» Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:47 am
Leveling's based off your skills. Once they're all at skill 100, how do you propose to get more levels?
(I also don't see the difference between leveling to "100" or to "81".... either way, it's a really high number. Okay, 100 is a more even, round number, but that doesn't mean anything real, it's just an appearance/emotion thing.)
...beyond that, I've never understood the desire for "moar levels". if the game mechanics support a need for a bunch of levels (like Skyrim, with wanting to slowly gain a large number of possible perk points), then lots of levels is fine. But otherwise.....
example: Fallout 3. I could take it's 20 level cap, divide the amount of XP needed per level by 5, divide the amount of HP you get each level by 5, make it so you just get a perk every 5 levels, and make the cap 100!? And it won't mean a thing. You still need the same exact total XP to get to the cap, still get the same exact amount of HP, and the same exact amount of perks. Only thing that's changed is that you can say "The level cap is 100!" instead of "The level cap is 20!" Nothing has been gained or changed, gameplay wise. Nothing. You just get to pat yourself on the back that you heard that "level up" noise 80 more times.
(Worse, is when they just add more levels after the fact, increasing the cap. This tends to mangle game balance. Again, Fallout 3's a great example. The extra ten levels you get from Broken Steel just screw things up. The game's better with just the 20 levels it was designed/balanced around.)