here it is:



http://www.jeuxvideo.fr/jeux/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/preview-test-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim.html


no translation yet sorry

Hello everybody,

I just read an article and it made me frown a little. I don't know if you guys know this, or even if the article is true. If it is, it would mean that the level-scaling should not be like Fallout 3 (as previously said) in which you have ennemies with fixed levels in some areas. On the contrary, they adapt to the player's level in a special way.

Article: http://www.jeuxvideo.fr/jeux/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/preview-test-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim.html
It's in French so I translated the paragraph in question:

"What upsets us in the end is the return of a system of adaptive difficulty: areas of fixed level, which were planned for a moment, won't be included. Bethesda opted again for an adjustment of the difficulty level of areas with the level of the player, according to a range from -2 to + 2 level. This system, which should still provide a minimum resistance in the +2 areas, would be the only one compatible with a world totally open for exploration.

Conversely, a system with fixed XP would be, according to Hines, contrary to the approach of "going where you want" desired by developers, as it would force the player to stay away from high-level zones. For our part, we can not help thinking that their system is not favorable to a real role-player experience, where each zone is associated with a real difficulty, and not a moving and soft one, because of its adaptivity . Too bad ... but even this small complaint probably won't prevent Skyrim to be a long and exciting game."

I think we posted the same article few minutes apart :mellow:

they said to be wary of foreign translations. this also seems a bit suspect since they have been saying fallout 3 forever and ever now and have gone out of their way to say that oblivions system was bad.

Yup. Now you are One. :ahhh:

That would be really bad news if true.

They've said it similar to fallout 3, but I wont put too much thought into this until we get a clear agreed upon translation.

So, what in the end? level scaling, no level scaling or a mix or both (as it was planned)?

IMO, if the article is correct, Pete's excuse is lame, I'm sorry to say. High level zones doesn't discourage players to go there, but the opposite: it'd be a reward in itself to go in there, survive, and get a nice reward for accomplishing that. Even casual gamers could enjoy them.

The only ones who would feel discouraged are 13 year-old whiners who tries to go though a difficult part doing EXACTLY the same every time, and not planning the minimum strategy or gathering the minimum resources to go though them.

thats how they did it in fallout 3 as well, New vegas was different with its Fixed level Zones. I mean at low levels in Fallout 3 you get small rad scorpions and the odd rad scorpion, then come back at lvl 10 and you would have to deal with rad scorpions and giant rad scorpions. Super mutants were the same as well, however the areas where they spawned actually had them at lvl 5, as they were challenging fight at lower level ( due to poorly repaired equipment and low weapon skill). the only set high level areas were Old Ony and the deathclaw sanctuary.

However once you hit lvl 18-20 you start to find deathclaws all over the wasteland.

how did you even read that article anyways? its in foreign.

I'm going to assume this is just a translation/communication issue. I can't imagine that Bethesda would go back to Oblivion style level scaling, which was almost universally hated, instead of sticking to a Fallout 3 style level scaling, which pretty much everyone thought was a big improvement.

This is one of the reason i never felt i was getting stronger in oblivion

Maybe they know French?...

Anyway, I'm a little confused. Could someone please simplify it for me?

they could just completely unlevel the game so that you have a chance to encounter anything at any level just like the TIE mod for oblivion did. made the game much more dangerous and interesting. obviously roads and cities would be kept safe but if you wandered off the beaten path and went into a ruin or cave you could encounter anything from level 1 rats to level 40 lichs. thats how it should be done.

Oh dear god...

French is a pretty common second or third language.

total deal breaker. damn you bethesda, I wanna play a new game, not Oblivion with slightly updated graphics and worse gameplay!

What's the point of leveling if everything around you levels with you? The only rewards you will get are perks and new loot, but you won't feel any more skillfull.

lol ok so thats why i could not refresh my topic ^^

As i posted already in this thread, thats exactly how Fallout 3 worked.

I share your faith, let's hope it's true. Non-fixed level zones is disappointment enough for me.

I hope that article is false.

someone should send that article to eidos montreal. those guys sounded very frenchy on their youtube interviews.

Yea, I'm forced to wait on the official word,....wish there were more of those out there...

I can only hope this is not true. Not wasting my time with vanilla Oblivion 2.0. If they didn't learn from this really stupid, silly, unbelievable 'mistake' called level scaling in Oblivion then Skyrim will not be a good game for me and I will only buy it after I'm sure there are quality mods already out there that fix the mess Bethesda caused (once again). EDIT: If at all. I can't say how annoyed I'd be if this was true. Merged armor, no choices and consequences, console UI etc etc are all small details that I don't like. But if this was true I'd say bye bye to Bethesda and their (in that case) crappy ES games.

But since I can't believe they could possibly be that stupid I still hope for the best.