Is over-leveling your character cheating in your opinion?

  • 71 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

44942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

90

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll Is over-leveling your character cheating in your opinion? (81 votes)

Yes, it’s cheating! 2%
It’s not cheating, but it’s lame. 19%
Nah man, happy gaming! 79%

I’m playing Xenoblade 3 and right now I’m at least 10 levels above the enemies in the main campaign. I’m pretty much steamrolling through all of the bosses in the campaign at the moment. Does this constitute cheating in your opinion, SW? And what is your approach to leveling?

 • 
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64037

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#51 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64037 Posts

Play however you like.

It depends on the game. If I end up over lapping the game because of upgrades by simply playing the fucking game well, you know if the depth is there, I can see trying to figure out a way to stay within a few levels of the right spot. But generally that's never the case, so you just roll with it.

Avatar image for Maroxad
Maroxad

23807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 Maroxad
Member since 2007 • 23807 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:
@warmblur said:
@with_teeth26 said:

It makes games pretty boring, but no its not cheating.

I usually try to be the at/just under the suggested level in RPG type games for maximum fun but a lot of the time if you are a completionist you end up being over-leveled for a lot of stuff anyways

Agree I miss when games didn't have a leveling up system.

It's ridiculous in alot of ways too. For example in the game Mirror's Edge Catalyst you had to unlock moves that you could already do in the first game which didn't even have a leveling up system.

Yeah I never understood the whole "You're an elite badass soldier that's part of a really cool squad of epic badasses...now go play the game so you can unlock really basic skills like accuracy and stamina"

I think for RPG's it's fine because you're often starting from scratch as an initiate or whatever, but in action games I never really understood it.

This is something that bothers me in most sequels where you play as a previously established character. And you lose past abilities and have to reunlock them via an upgrade system.

Where the **** did all my powers go? It is not just RPGs either, other games also had this issue. When I first played Wario Land 3, I wondered why Wario lost access to the ground pound move he had in Wario Land 2. Turns out I had to unlock it after playing a few levels. It was weird, but thankfully that was the only move he was missing. Loved the game, but that gave a bad first impression.

Banjo Tooie did it right (Banjo started off with all the moves from Kazooie, and only built from there).

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
ConanTheStoner

23706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53  Edited By ConanTheStoner
Member since 2011 • 23706 Posts

Yeah it's crazy to think there was a time when level up shite was almost exclusive to RPGs. Well before every other game had to do a little of everything. Do miss the days when pure genre games were more common.

As for "losing" powers, depends on the game really. Like Metroid, remember joking with Champ about keeping everything from each game, where it would be at now. But I mean, obviously the design considerations to keep that interesting would be absurd lol. Level design chaos, enemy design headaches, crazy redundancies in your kit, say goodbye to new players, etc.

When that stuff is married to the games progression in interesting and entertaining ways, it's fine. Though in a longer series, over time, probably best to let you start with a bit more kit every now and then. Kinda silly that we still have to unlock bombs in Metroid.

When it's not really intertwined with progression and just serves as a way to drip feed power fantasy, does kinda suck. Very annoying in action games like Bayo, NG, DMC, TW101 etc. Newer DOOM too. It's like ok, guess my first play is just to unlock everything so I can start doing the really cool shit my next play. Stifling. Extra egregious in some titles. Having to unlock enemy step in DMC? Unlocking your dodge and block mechanics in TW101? So stupid.

Not that I don't understand. New player could be overwhelmed if you drop them into something like DMC with full kit. Though I wish these games came with a "I know how to play these games" option. Warn me, test me against a stupid hard boss to earn it, whatever. Rather that than spend my first run earning the right to play the game proper.

Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

10360

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#54  Edited By Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 10360 Posts
@Maroxad said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

Yeah I never understood the whole "You're an elite badass soldier that's part of a really cool squad of epic badasses...now go play the game so you can unlock really basic skills like accuracy and stamina"

I think for RPG's it's fine because you're often starting from scratch as an initiate or whatever, but in action games I never really understood it.

This is something that bothers me in most sequels where you play as a previously established character. And you lose past abilities and have to reunlock them via an upgrade system.

Where the **** did all my powers go? It is not just RPGs either, other games also had this issue. When I first played Wario Land 3, I wondered why Wario lost access to the ground pound move he had in Wario Land 2. Turns out I had to unlock it after playing a few levels. It was weird, but thankfully that was the only move he was missing. Loved the game, but that gave a bad first impression.

Banjo Tooie did it right (Banjo started off with all the moves from Kazooie, and only built from there).

agreed.

protag is billed as some highly trained warrior type in the intro but then game starts with so many basic skills locked away behind skill trees. ubisoft game design 101. instead of the souls "prepare to die" moniker these games should be honest and just say "prepare to grind"

and slight variation of maroxad's point, the whole "lose your weapons / skills" mid way through a game schtick is nearly always groanworthy. metro exodus is the last offender of this i can think of, but there's been plenty of them over the years

Avatar image for Maroxad
Maroxad

23807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55  Edited By Maroxad
Member since 2007 • 23807 Posts
@ConanTheStoner said:

Yeah it's crazy to think there was a time when level up shite was almost exclusive to RPGs. Well before every other game had to do a little of everything. Do miss the days when pure genre games were more common.

As for "losing" powers, depends on the game really. Like Metroid, remember joking with Champ about keeping everything from each game, where it would be at now. But I mean, obviously the design considerations to keep that interesting would be absurd lol. Level design chaos, enemy design headaches, crazy redundancies in your kit, say goodbye to new players, etc.

When that stuff is married to the games progression in interesting and entertaining ways, it's fine. Though in a longer series, over time, probably best to let you start with a bit more kit every now and then. Kinda silly that we still have to unlock bombs in Metroid.

When it's not really intertwined with progression and just serves as a way to drip feed power fantasy, does kinda suck. Very annoying in action games like Bayo, NG, DMC, TW101 etc. Newer DOOM too. It's like ok, guess my first play is just to unlock everything so I can start doing the really cool shit my next play. Stifling. Extra egregious in some titles. Having to unlock enemy step in DMC? Unlocking your dodge and block mechanics in TW101? So stupid.

Not that I don't understand. New player could be overwhelmed if you drop them into something like DMC with full kit. Though I wish these games came with a "I know how to play these games" option. Warn me, test me against a stupid hard boss to earn it, whatever. Rather that than spend my first run earning the right to play the game proper.

Iirc, there was a game where if you played on the highest difficulty, you pretty much had everything unlocked from the start.

In Fire Emblem 7, if the game detected that you had played Fire Emblem 6, the game would let you skip the tutorial (tutorials are always skipped on higher difficulties).

And yeah, progression can be tied to a game in interesting ways. It can lead to dilemmas. Especially in more tactical games. And especially those with *finite* resources. Either because you are working against the clock, or because there are a finite amount of enemies and/or drops.

In a game with low scaling like Mount and Blade, progression feels more fun, because even at the start of the game, you can face off Knights, Mamelukes and Berserkers (and win). The battlefield remains the same, but what your role in said battlefield becomes increasingly prominent. As a result I feel progression far more in a game like Mount and Blade, than I do in most games with progression systems, where they just replace enemies with ones with higher stats. It becomes more of a progression system than an arms race (except the player dictates the pace anyways so what is the point?).

@hardwenzen said:

See you in Ragnarok, and if you don't start on gmgow, i will call you casual, and this might hurt you.

Why waste my money and time on Ragnarok when I can instead play actually action games that are actually competent?

Avatar image for omegamaster
omegaMaster

3450

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 omegaMaster
Member since 2017 • 3450 Posts

Not really. You put hours into over-levelling your character. But it does kill the fun or challenge when you progress the storyline.

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
ConanTheStoner

23706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57  Edited By ConanTheStoner
Member since 2011 • 23706 Posts
@Maroxad said:

Iirc, there was a game where if you played on the highest difficulty, you pretty much had everything unlocked from the start.

In Fire Emblem 7, if the game detected that you had played Fire Emblem 6, the game would let you skip the tutorial (tutorials are always skipped on higher difficulties).

See that's some cool shit.

So many games are finding ways to ease in new players and provide real accessibility options, which is great! But damn, on the other end of that, maybe throw a bone to more experienced players while they're at it.

Ninja Gaiden Sigma and DMCV seemed to be soooo close to getting it lol. Both games have you face bosses that you're supposed to lose to early on, absolutely get wiped. Though if you beat them, you get to access the higher difficulties straight away... but screw that man. Higher difficulties should always be available from the jump and those "impossible" fights should grant you full kit.

Mang.

I'll take another look at Mount and Blade at some point. Heard similar things about it years back and some of the things you've mentioned recently sound interesting. Don't know if it'd be my jam, but I think at the very least there's some stuff I could appreciate.

Avatar image for Maroxad
Maroxad

23807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 Maroxad
Member since 2007 • 23807 Posts

@ConanTheStoner said:
@Maroxad said:

Iirc, there was a game where if you played on the highest difficulty, you pretty much had everything unlocked from the start.

In Fire Emblem 7, if the game detected that you had played Fire Emblem 6, the game would let you skip the tutorial (tutorials are always skipped on higher difficulties).

See that's some cool shit.

So many games are finding ways to ease in new players and provide real accessibility options, which is great! But damn, on the other end of that, maybe throw a bone to more experienced players while they're at it.

Ninja Gaiden Sigma and DMCV seemed to be soooo close to getting it lol. Both games have you face bosses that you're supposed to lose to early on, absolutely get wiped. Though if you beat them, you get to access the higher difficulties straight away... but screw that man. Higher difficulties should always be available from the jump and those "impossible" fights should grant you full kit.

Mang.

I'll take another look at Mount and Blade at some point. Heard similar things about it years back and some of the things you've mentioned recently sound interesting. Don't know if it'd be my jam, but I think at the very least there's some stuff I could appreciate.

It is cool indeed, and what makes it insulting, is that Fire Emblem 7 was a Game Boy Advance game. Saves in that game were stored on the game cartridge. If they could figure out a way for the player to prove they dont need easing in with those limitations, there is no excuse for modern action game devs.

Letting players use them against "impossible" boss fights, is a good way for modern games to let players prove they can use them. Which brings me up to,

@Macutchi said:

and slight variation of maroxad's point, the whole "lose your weapons / skills" mid way through a game schtick is nearly always groanworthy. metro exodus is the last offender of this i can think of, but there's been plenty of them over the years

I would argue that depends on how far you mean in midgame. It can be a good remedy, if it is done really early on. Allow a player to prove they can use them. At which point they can keep them, since they wont need easing in to them. But if it is done halfway through the game, it is pretty bad unless there is a damn good reason for it.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

38127

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#59 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 38127 Posts

@Maroxad said:
@hardwenzen said:

See you in Ragnarok, and if you don't start on gmgow, i will call you casual, and this might hurt you.

Why waste my money and time on Ragnarok when I can instead play actually action games that are actually competent?

Because your competent games are garbo and Rangarok is not. But you already knew the answer to that question.

Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

10360

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#60  Edited By Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 10360 Posts

@Maroxad: not 100% sure what you mean bud.

i mean a good 50-70% into the game and there'd be some cliche scenario where you get imprisoned and escape or, in exodus' case, the train falls off the tracks in the taiga level. when you emerge from the wreckage your backpack and weapons are gone, locals have taken them, which means a long and excruciating scavenge and stealth section to retrieve them. this comes at a point in the game where you've only just built up a useful arsenal and appropriately varied gear to make combat interesting(ish), so it's particularly frustrating to lose it all. plus doesn't serve any real purpose in the plot

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

7977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#61 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 7977 Posts

People who have a problem with this should take it up with the game developer and not the players.

Avatar image for Maroxad
Maroxad

23807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62  Edited By Maroxad
Member since 2007 • 23807 Posts
@Macutchi said:

@Maroxad: not 100% sure what you mean bud.

i mean a good 50-70% into the game and there'd be some cliche scenario where you get imprisoned and escape or, in exodus' case, the train falls off the tracks in the taiga level. when you emerge from the wreckage your backpack and weapons are gone, locals have taken them, which means a long and excruciating scavenge and stealth section to retrieve them. this comes at a point in the game where you've only really just now built up a useful arsenal and appropriately varied gear to make combat interesting, so it's particularly frustrating to lose it all. plus doesn't really serve any purpose in the plot

Yeah then I definately agree with you.

Basically some games start with a set piece or level where you have all or most power ups. Before losing them afterwards. Sometimes this is done to show you how powerful you can eventually become.

@hardwenzen said:
@Maroxad said:
@hardwenzen said:

See you in Ragnarok, and if you don't start on gmgow, i will call you casual, and this might hurt you.

Why waste my money and time on Ragnarok when I can instead play actually action games that are actually competent?

Because your competent games are garbo and Rangarok is not. But you already knew the answer to that question.

Games you never played are "garbo". Do I need to bring up that Super Paper Mario meme again?

If Ragnarok is anything like its predecessor, it will put me off after 5 hours. Due to that atrocious camera, unnecessary RPG elements, cooldowns and boring enemy design.

Moderately fun game for a few hours, then I just wish I played something more competent. Now that there are so many games coming out. Why would I play the Weakest Link? Especially now that it drags on for 50 hours.

My plan for the coming future is

Mario XCOM 2 -> Bayonetta 3 -> Tactics Ogre Reborn -> Mandragora Beta/Demo -> Callisto Protocol -> Fire Emblem Engage -> Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom

Throw in Rimworld Biotech (whenever Hardcore SK is updated for it) somewhere in between there.

Got no time for mediocrity.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

58159

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#63  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 58159 Posts

I think the issue these days is that people have been trained to play for reward, and not for fun. I feel like in the past, games didn't need a lot of reward. A steady progression of new gun unlocks to compensate for tougher enemies, sure...but not experience-based skill systems or anything like that. Games these days are still fun, I'm not nostalgic at all really, but I think they might be more fun if we were badasses from the start and the game was maybe a bit more challenging.

Leveling adds the illusion of challenge and reward without actually providing either it's why a lot of people can go into certain areas undergeared and beat the enemies or achieve the objectives.

It'd be nice if they started offering a "new game plus" mode from the start in games that insist on leveling. For example, in The Witcher 3 you could load an old save as new game plus and start a fresh game at level 35 (or whatever level you happened to beat the game at) with your skills, equipment, and so on unlocked.

You still got xp and the equipment you got was level-appropriate (so it was balanced), but it was more fun because you actually start the game as the legendary monster hunter you're known as instead of this guy that has no power.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

38127

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#64 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 38127 Posts

@hardwenzen said:
@Maroxad said:
@hardwenzen said:

See you in Ragnarok, and if you don't start on gmgow, i will call you casual, and this might hurt you.

Why waste my money and time on Ragnarok when I can instead play actually action games that are actually competent?

Because your competent games are garbo and Rangarok is not. But you already knew the answer to that question.

Games you never played are "garbo". Do I need to bring up that Super Paper Mario meme again?

If Ragnarok is anything like its predecessor, it will put me off after 5 hours. Due to that atrocious camera, unnecessary RPG elements, cooldowns and boring enemy design.

Moderately fun game for a few hours, then I just wish I played something more competent. Now that there are so many games coming out. Why would I play the Weakest Link? Especially now that it drags on for 50 hours.

My plan for the coming future is

Mario XCOM 2 -> Bayonetta 3 -> Tactics Ogre Reborn -> Mandragora Beta/Demo -> Callisto Protocol -> Fire Emblem Engage -> Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom

Throw in Rimworld Biotech (whenever Hardcore SK is updated for it) somewhere in between there.

Got no time for mediocrity.

You enjoy garbage games, it is something i've noticed, so yes, you're more into waste of time titles that run at 5fps and have Xbox visuals than the highest possible effort put into a video game. I want this to change with Ragnarok, so see you there.

Avatar image for eni232
ENI232

998

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#65 ENI232
Member since 2020 • 998 Posts

How can that be cheating? you need the definition of cheating. In those types of games you usually have to grind to level up and it's not easy. So you find yourself studying enemies and defeating them with skill which is more rewarding over just leveling up 20 levels past them and beating them easily.

Avatar image for Maroxad
Maroxad

23807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66  Edited By Maroxad
Member since 2007 • 23807 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:

I think the issue these days is that people have been trained to play for reward, and not for fun. I feel like in the past, games didn't need a lot of reward. A steady progression of new gun unlocks to compensate for tougher enemies, sure...but not experience-based skill systems or anything like that. Games these days are still fun, I'm not nostalgic at all really, but I think they might be more fun if we were badasses from the start and the game was maybe a bit more challenging.

Leveling adds the illusion of challenge and reward without actually providing either it's why a lot of people can go into certain areas undergeared and beat the enemies or achieve the objectives.

It'd be nice if they started offering a "new game plus" mode from the start in games that insist on leveling. For example, in The Witcher 3 you could load an old save as new game plus and start a fresh game at level 35 (or whatever level you happened to beat the game at) with your skills, equipment, and so on unlocked.

You still got xp and the equipment you got was level-appropriate (so it was balanced), but it was more fun because you actually start the game as the legendary monster hunter you're known as instead of this guy that has no power.

I miss back in the days of say... Sonic the Hedgehog, your reward for playing well was speed. And being able to essentially launch yourself across zones felt so good. The games let you be good at the game, and being good at the games were the dopamine rush.

I miss old systems when exploration was rewarded with temporary moments of badassery.

In Old Doom, your reward was early access to new weapons, restocking in valuable ammunition, healing or overhealing, armor and other useful goodies.

In modern games temporary badassery rewards are really rare since everything has to be permanent these days >_>. But a notable exception in the AAA industry for this was Breath of the Wild. You found a secret sword, sure it would break after a while, but for those 5-10 minutes you would feel like an absolute badass, Just mowing everything down. Not some arbitary experience poitns to gradually turn you into a badass. It was instant badassery for a while.

Avatar image for onesiphorus
onesiphorus

5234

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#67 onesiphorus
Member since 2014 • 5234 Posts

If a game allows me to over-level my character, how can it be cheating? It is cheating if I use an unauthorized program to hack the game, allowing me to over-level my character.

Avatar image for speeny
Speeny

3357

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 34

User Lists: 19

#68 Speeny
Member since 2018 • 3357 Posts

Nah. That way, you can appreciate more of the story. Especially when it comes to JRPG's.

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

17875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#69 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 17875 Posts

Games are for fun - some people like different things out of a gaming experience (crushing challenge, "just the story", a feeling of godlike power, whatever) and tbh underleveling and overleveling seem like equally viable ways to help get the experience you want out of it (as long as it isn't something just unavoidable regardless)

Avatar image for lavamelon
Lavamelon

847

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 Lavamelon
Member since 2016 • 847 Posts

@uninspiredcup: haha very true, I am currently playing an overlevelled character in Bloodborne right now.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
SecretPolice

43933

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71  Edited By SecretPolice
Member since 2007 • 43933 Posts

Only Kramer's think it's cheating...

lolol :P