Why is the level cap level 90?

[Stataclysm]

I know for cataclysm, with all the old world changes, blizzard didnt have enough time or space to make 10 new levels of content, but for MoP, they are only building one continent. So why not 10 levels?

When I leveled from 80-85 for the first time, it didnt feel like levelling. It felt like doing one really big quest line to be able to get to the level cap. I think 10 levels is just a better number for an expansion pack.

Anyone else feel the same way?

[Eggowaffles]

I Dont like odd numbers for a max level, and I don't think they do either, so I think they are using MoP to round out the numbers.

[snuzzle]

Because they stated long, long ago that they didn't want to continue WoW over a cap of 100. Though that might have changed, giving us new caps every five levels instead of ten helps stretch that out so they can tell more story before they hit that milestone.

[Endtime]

Blizzard originally posted they were slowing down leveling in an effort to not reach level 100 too soon.

[Racthoh]

Yeah, because it'd be too hard to make new content for level 100s instead of raising the level cap every 2 years.

[DBZMerciter2005]

Blizz stated before Cata that the reason why they were slowing down the levels is so that they didn't have to add another ten talent points. Mind you that was before they remade the talents to what we know today on live. They've since stuck with it because it gives them more control over the leveling process.

[Sliske]

This has been posted time and time and time and time again, please now. Just read:

The 5 cataclysm levels were the equivalent of 10 levels

[beanman12345]

Because they stated long, long ago that they didn't want to continue WoW over a cap of 100. Though that might have changed, giving us new caps every five levels instead of ten helps stretch that out so they can tell more story before they hit that milestone.

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3424796717 pretty much proves everything you said as not the case.

[Rendia]

This has been posted time and time and time and time again, please now. Just read:

The 5 cataclysm levels were the equivalent of 10 levels

And you're right, but to that end, levels 1-70 are the equivalent of 70-85... just sayin'.

EDIT: Spelling is hard.

[Zeek Daniels]

I know for cataclysm, with all the old world changes, blizzard didnt have enough time or space to make 10 new levels of content, but for MoP, they are only building one continent. So why not 10 levels?

When I leveled from 80-85 for the first time, it didnt feel like levelling. It felt like doing one really big quest line to be able to get to the level cap. I think 10 levels is just a better number for an expansion pack.

Anyone else feel the same way?

wrong wrong wrong and even more WRONG!

60-70 takes the same amount of time as 70-80 which takes the same ammount of time as 80-85.(pre boosted exp via guild levels and heirlooms)

All this "omg only 5 levels is less content" is wrong. Its just as much content, just as much time spent leveling, just as many quests.

They do not want to get to ridiculous levels. with 2 more expansions planned if they had done 10 levels we would be at 100 right now and by the end of wow we would be at 120. Blizzard has stated b4 they want to cap at 100. With 2 expansions left 5 each we will cap at 100.

Stop saying 5 levels equals less content because it doesnt. If it takes you 24 hours worth of play time to go from 70-80 when wrath was released and it takes you 24 hours to go from 80-85 and takes you 24 hours to go from 85-90 then blizzard is putting enough content out. Stop looking at number of levels and look at time played.

Geez you people annoy me.

[beanman12345]

wrong wrong wrong and even more WRONG!

60-70 takes the same amount of time as 70-80 which takes the same ammount of time as 80-85.(pre boosted exp via guild levels and heirlooms)

All this "omg only 5 levels is less content" is wrong. Its just as much content, just as much time spent leveling, just as many quests.

They do not want to get to ridiculous levels. with 2 more expansions planned if they had done 10 levels we would be at 100 right now and by the end of wow we would be at 120. Blizzard has stated b4 they want to cap at 100. With 2 expansions left 5 each we will cap at 100.

Stop saying 5 levels equals less content because it doesnt. If it takes you 24 hours worth of play time to go from 70-80 when wrath was released and it takes you 24 hours to go from 80-85 and takes you 24 hours to go from 85-90 then blizzard is putting enough content out. Stop looking at number of levels and look at time played.

Geez you people annoy me.

I've shown proof that's a lie. Show me proof it's not plz.

[Eggowaffles]

I've shown proof that's a lie. Show me proof it's not plz.

That is not proof, proof is when some one plainly states "The level cap will be over 100".

[Wromthrax]

No one said that there will be only 2 expansions more, I don't know where you're getting this from.

They said they ALREADY have plans for the next two.

Pretty sure next one will be till 100.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

I think Blizz wants to extend the time they have to work with. If they did 10 levels we'd now be hitting 100, and while that's not the end of WoW, it's usually a sign you've come to a turning point.

[beanman12345]

That is not proof, proof is when some one plainly states "The level cap will be over 100".

Lol, for a second i thought you were serious, but then I realize no one is that stupid. I've posted my proof.

[Video Games]

This has been posted time and time and time and time again, please now. Just read:

The 5 cataclysm levels were the equivalent of 10 levels

Yeah, no. Not even close.

[Eggowaffles]

Lol, for a second i thought you were serious, but then I realize no one is that stupid. I've posted my proof.

Not yet, but consider that 100 is just a number.

Proof? Of what?

[beanman12345]

Proof? Of what?

If you can't figure it out, then I'm not going to bother. I guess you proved me wrong about that stupid thing...

[shocktopuslol]

I know for cataclysm, with all the old world changes, blizzard didnt have enough time or space to make 10 new levels of content, but for MoP, they are only building one continent. So why not 10 levels?

When I leveled from 80-85 for the first time, it didnt feel like levelling. It felt like doing one really big quest line to be able to get to the level cap. I think 10 levels is just a better number for an expansion pack.

Anyone else feel the same way?

The reason it probably felt like one massive questline to you is because all of the cataclysm zones were so linear, blizzard has stated that they do not like this, and are designing to mists zones to allow more freedom in how you quest.
also, nice avatar, AOTP is awesome.

[Eggowaffles]

If you can't figure it out, then I'm not going to bother.

Oh I see you have no proof because you can't even explain your own "Proof".

Got it.