Yeah, I know, Skyrim is going to be "more like FO3 than Oblivion !".
So what ? FO3's level scaling was still horrible and prone to terrible metagaming.
New Vegas at least was able to hide its own much better.

Someone did it in a better way, Bethesda, can't you get a hint ? Can't you just take lessons ?


Let's say it again : level scaling is flawed by concept, by nature. It's just counter-productive in its entirety. There is no point in putting leveling, if you're going to counter it by putting level scaling. If you're going to put "partial" level scaling (like, if someone get 2 levels, then level scaling only goes up by 1), then you can do the EXACT same thing by simply halving the speed or power of leveling. No level scaling required whatsoever.
Level scaling is the exact same thing than giving more money to someone and ramping up inflation at the same time. Just diminish the money gain and remove inflation, same result, no stupid and pointless mechanism, much more believability and immersion.

Isn't "immersion" the point of a huge world open to exploration and of a RPG ? Isn't the POINT of leveling to get stronger ?
Why then use an inherently stupid mechanism that bring NOTHING (like said above, power curve can be adjusted to get the same "challenge" result without involving any amount of level scaling) and goes completely opposite to two of the pillars of the game ?

A world has much more personnality when it actually has a life by itself, with logical distributions of population - people and mosnters alike -, logical scales of power and not revolving around the level of the player in absurd's way. Level should affect how other creatures REACT to you, not how they EXIST.

Please Bethesda, understand this. ANY amount of level scaling is bad.
New Vegas was more successful than Fallout 3, and it had much less of it (still some, so still not perfect, but isn't it a sign when the less of something there is, the better it's for the game, invariably ?). Take the hint, and stop the lazyness of level scaling. Make your world unique, a world to explore and discover and enjoy, not some randomized crap where everything feels the same everywhere and reminds the player more of Diablo than a real world...

It's not being changed. It's like Fallout 3's. Sorry.

It's a necessity of a free-roam game.

this

also its already in and its like fallout 3's i dont have at least its better than OB's. if you dont like it then don't play it

Level scaling is actually good anyways when done right, which Fallout 3 was.

.......backward reasoning as level scaling is, on the contrary, WORSE for free-roaming game than for a linear one.
I actually pointed one reason for this, and also gave an explanation about why it's useless, but I'm pretty sure you didn't even bother to read the post and just copy-pasted it from the get-go when you saw the title, so no surprise that you missed it.

Edit : actually it also applies to several posts made, that obviously didn't bother to read the reasoning made and just went with repeating the same false mantra we can see since the invention of level scaling - funnily there was the exact same ones in Oblivion, and we all know how true they were.

Because it keeps the game challenging and gets rid of the boring part of being a high level. I may be alone in saying this but when I hit level 30 I don't want the game to be essentially broken by the simple fact that I can 1 shot almost every monster in game and can take insane amounts of damage

Level scaling is bad, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4_tOiLB_Ko

Level scaling in the way Skyrim is doing it will be absolutely fine - for the first playthrough. There'll always be a challenge, it'll always be one you can do, and you'll still get to progress. It's certainly not a bad thing, it's just a different kind of game. I don't want to say "mainstream", because that has a lot of negative connotations, but it's certainly *much* more accessible than a system where simply walking into the wrong area can end up with frustration as your only reward.

Much as I enjoy things like OOO, if that's what I'd been playing on my first playthrough, I may not have made it. At least this way, people can experience both - assuming areas can have limits on how far they scale, making a static levelling mod should be a task of balance and testing, rather than technological hurdles.

Look at any MMORGP. WoW, FFXI, EQ, these games are more-or-less free roam, but they have no scaling at all. And what happens? You end up with large areas of the game that are rendered useless, because of lack of relevance or challenge. An entire WoW expansion was built off that concept (Cataclysm) so you obviously have no idea what you're talking about, in terms of actual game design.

Scaling allows a natural, but unshackling difficulty curve to exist in a free roam game, and at the same time, it can keep some frequented areas relevant, and not pointless to run through.

Not at level 30.
But if at level 50-60 you cant do as you just said something is wrong.
Im also not a fan of level scaling. I would prefer dangerous areas, and ones more easy. I would like the occassional surprise of stumbling into a lvl 50 vampire ancient lair at lvl 25.

But well, things are what they are.

Obviously here is your problem.

Partial level scaling doesn't mean that other's will have half your level, or it will be subtracted in any way.
It means that areas will have a minimum and maximum level, and things will scale between these levels. Also if you entered an area with a set level and later return with a higher one, everything else will still be scaled as the original level.


Funny you mention huge world open to exploration. It's hard to be open to exploration, when you can't get to the next city because on the road there are higher level monsters. You have to follow a pre-made path if you want to progress normally without getting eaten by enemies that are too strong for you...


A world feels much less real when you can say "this is a town for people over level 20 only!".

With the different level scaling, there still will be areas that are more dangerous than the norm.


Funny thing: A lot of people complained how New Vegas is more linear than Fallout 3...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Skyrim's level scaling features higher base levels and lower maximum levels for most monsters. So there will be areas that are far too dangerous to adventure in at level 1, and areas that will be easy at level 30+, but they're never as deadly for low levels as they would be in an unscaled game (which is a good thing, gives you a chance to escape), and never as easy at high levels as an unleveled game (which is a good thing, keeps areas interesting).

This may just be a fantasy of mine though. Is that how it works in Fallout 3?

it is the word 'some' that I have the problem with. the more area's you explore at low lvls the less you will have to explore at higher lvls because the ones you explore at low lvls are locked to their lowest lvl range....and hence become obsolete at high lvls. so, do i limit exploration early on or have much less area to explore at higher lvls that is actually challenging? that is why level scaling can be bad.

You CAN stumble into a level 50 area. You guys are obviously not understanding the way the level scaling is working. There will still be 40-50 level dungeons at level 1. The way it works is that say the dungeon is level 45-50, once you walk in at level 1 it will lock in at level 45 since it's the closest to your level.

I want to know what the OP thought of Morrowind, cause Morrowind had level scaling too.

I honestly hate level scaling with a passion. I am very disappointed it is back in Skyrim, i hope it is implemented much better then before. :spotted owl:

No scaling = linear game.

You have to fight the low level monsters in Zone 1, until you're tough enough for the next stronger monsters in Zone 2, until you're tough enough for the next stronger monsters in Zone 3, etc, etc, etc.


This is the main reason I didn't like FO:NV - it wasn't an open-world, free-roam game, until you'd progressed the linear story far enough. Until you were tough and well equipped enough, the game was linear. No just ignoring the main quest and going off wandering, like you can in FO3 & OB.

(But yeah.... the OB level scaling was terrible. I've only played the game using a modded system. Luckily, they're using something like Fallout 3's system, which was fine.)

Well level scaling is BAD when done in absurd way like it was in Oblivion, level scaling is GOOD, when done in proper way, it will be done in FO3 style what is on cross of Oblivion and Morrowind, anyway we will have CS so making Leveling Overhaul mod possible.

No more knowing the location of a dungeon that has the best weapons in the game, and exploiting that in future playthoughs.

Diablo is one of the greatest action rpgs of all time...comparing any rpg to it isn't exactly insulting...

i also agree that NV was too linear, i had to follow the path set down for me at the beginning for a while lest i be eaten by a wall of giant bees and deathclaws that split the starting area from Vegas

Nope. There are massive amounts of free roaming games that don't have level scaling. Level scaling is a relatively uncommon feature.

I don't mind level scaling in TES because I feel that procedurally created content is integral to TES, however I think it would be just fine without scaling at all.

There's nothing wrong with telling the player, "You may travel in that direction if you wish, but you will find it very challenging and will probably die."

Telling others to "get over it" and calling them and/or their suggestions "ignorant" is flaming, rude and unacceptable. Now either post and discuss in a civil manner or stay away from the thread. I won't spend any more time editing, just deletion and take action if it happens again.

Thanks for understanding guys.

Though I see what you mean (I actually liked the initial punishment, made the come-uppance a little later all the sweeter, but that is personnal preference and I can perfectly understand why other could dislike punishing start), I'd like to point that this flaw is about "difficulty tuning", NOT level scaling. Just expand a bit the "easier" areas, or slightly hint a new character to easy starting quests (and logically easy I mean, not just "these Ogres are statically lvl 1 because they are in a low-level quest", which is just as bad) and it all flows naturally.

Except I didn't diss your opinion, I dissed your flawed reasoning. That you wish to keep challenge even at high level is your opinion and a respectable one. That level scaling is actually required for that is false, and I explained why in the OP - and if you actually read it like you claim, then how did you miss this explanation ?

Let me then reiterate it :

"If you're going to put "partial" level scaling (like, if someone get 2 levels, then level scaling only goes up by 1), then you can do the EXACT same thing by simply halving the speed or power of leveling. No level scaling required whatsoever."

Either you have a "total" level scaling ("1:1" level scaling, that is each time you gain a level, monsters gain one), then you can just remove entirely the leveling system as it serves not purpose but to inflate number for nothing. Or you have a "partial" level scaling, in which case my quote above applies : just tone down the power you gain in leveling and voilà, same result without needing to make the whole world goes up with you.

Additionnally, even without these explanations, it seems pretty obvious to me that not everything is (nor should) be equally dangerous in the world. It seems obvious that a Goblin lair should me much more trivial than an Ogre one. So why do we need level scaling ? When you're more powerful, go explore the Ogre Lair instead of the Goblin one. Here is your challenge, no level scaling required.

A lower level npc reacting differently when I'm a higher level doesn't make it anymore challenging. While it may be more realistic it is certainly not more fun. Bottom line is: reaction doesn't matter if I can still kill you with 2 hits. A game without scaling is a game without challenge, a game without challenge is a game without fun, and a game without fun is a game without replayability. While realism is good to an extent, too much realism will only take away from the experience. Realism =/= fun.

Actually I think Howard said in a recent interview that it'll be more like New Vegas's..either way I don't care. As long as it's not Oblivions crappy "You can only find certain enemies after a certain level." That's stupid. Gives you no reason to try to get stronger.