I can't tell if this is a joke or not. Morrowind has been mentioned at least a dozen times by as many people. And it did have level scaling, just not as much of it. Same with F:NV. Literally hundreds of http://www.truancyfactory.com/images/misc/fonvll.png http://www.truancyfactory.com/images/misc/fonvll2.png. Just goes to show you how good the lists are, I guess.

the map is too small to not have level scaling. people like to explore so unless skyrim was 10 times the size scaling will be needed, that said it needs work and i think its stupid how the same bandits in fail fur armor get stronger and stronger, at least in oblivion they would go from fur, to glass armor to get tougher

People are talking nonsense

Nothing will ever get changed regardless..

THE LEVEL SCALING IS FINE, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!

:shrug: That's your own problem if you completely refuse to listen to reason.

Scaling is an awesome idea keeping gameplay in a middling difficulty. It's why competitive online games can be so fun.

You lose.

Hmm...Actually, the person you knocked down has a point.

Imagine a world where everything is level 1-3. Hurray! You now have your sense of achievement!
Not good?
Imagine a world where everything is level 25+. Hurray! The scale is set way too high! But guess what, there's some challenge
Not good?
Hmm how about easy in the begining and harder in the out rims. More or less your High and low areas. Hurray! That's still a scale (distance and level) But wait, it's not realistic
Not good?
Oh, how about something like Skyrim with "locked locales". Now you'll have some strong and weak where you go, and when you come back, they'll remain fairly the same.

But

The thing is that each of these scenarieos presents a form of scaling. Some are rediculous; some are more feasible. But each will have someone who hates it. What folks are missing is that level scaling is a nessecary evil, especially on a computer game. Level scaling was in the old PnP games (Hit Dice, Random Monster and Treasure Supplement, etc.) and it's still around in computer games. The difference is that in PnP the DM can break out of a program if it's not working, or the DM can just throw in something off-scale to keep it fresh to meet the players' needs. A computer can't do this. It's just that some implimentations of it aren't as good as others, and that when it's set in stone, or coded in a program, it will always fail since it can't adapt to meet the player's needs.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!
well, until my wife tells me otherwise

I hope they get rid of level and loot scaling and replace it with geographical scaling like New Vegas has.

New Vegas only had limited geographical scaling, mostly it was just a bunch of deathclaws or those deadly wasps that prevented you from going into certain areas too soon. Other than that, FNV had level scaling for most other mobs, granted they had lower caps on how high some of the mobs/npcs would scale but they still scaled none the less.

Skyrim uses the exact same system, if you go into certain areas too soon you can be one shot by bears, frost trolls, spriggans etc. Its no different, its just that the monsters are more random in Skyrim and more spread out where as in FNV most of the high level critters spawned only in static locations.

Personally, I think there's room for both systems. I do think that Skyrim needs more "oh [censored] there's no way I can take this... RUN!!" moments to make progression feel more purposeful. I had a few from levels 1-10, but since then, I haven't had any and I'm level 40 now. So at least in my experience, Skyrim needs a bit less level scaling (or just more sensible). As others have said, scaling is fine as long as it doesn't create too many absurd situations. A bear should never defeat a dragon, for example. Scaling should always have a fixed range as well, even if it is large. I've been thinking that it really wouldn't take much to make both parties happy with some well-designed DLC.

Personally, I'd love to see a DLC (or mod when the CK is out) that adds static boss mobs to the game, with a number of tiers. Make sure there is lore that explains their immense power and also their power relative to each other, and hopefully give the player a decent idea of what level they are without saying it explicitly. You might ask the expert on the topic if he thinks you could take it. For example, he might reply with "hah, not a chance in hell" if it's more than 20 levels higher, "you might with enough planning and skill" if it's 10 levels, etc. There wouldn't have to be many and it wouldn't have to be a major feature of the game. Just knowing there are ultra-high level bosses out there that you won't stand a chance against until your character level is much higher would make a huge difference, at least for me. Hell, you could even put in one that is level 150 or something insane like that so those of us planning on spending 100s of hours on one character will feel like our progression means something. Because unfortunately, once you pass level 40/50 or so, progression is meaningless. You've reached the lower end of the level scaling range for every mob out there, and from there on out everything will either be scaled to your level or 1-hit trash mobs.

I can deal with it since I still enjoy exploring, but I would definitely enjoy it more if I felt that all the combat I'm doing and subsequent power increases might eventually come in handy for something.

Cearly I'm not a game designer, but I can't figure out why this is so hard.

I think a lot of the problem comes from what sorts of challenges different gamers like. Personally, I hate the bland, middling challenge of heavily scaled games. Everything is just tough enough, but not too tough. I would much prefer a difficult world with difficult challenges to overcome, and a sense of accomplishment when your character has grown more powerful and is able to crush enemies that would have destroyed you at the start. Maybe others like having the same level of kinda sorta challenge all the way through. I dunno.

In my ideal world things would kind of be scaled based on location. I mean, that would make the most sense, wouldn't it? Easily accessible areas around major cities would be low levels, because they're heavily populated and have soldiers and guards. Your character would be able to build strength in these areas, gaining skills and levels off of basic creatures like wolves or weak goblins, or whatever.

Other areas would be more difficult. "Cutthroat Hill" may be a location with slightly more difficult bandits, while "Dark, Evil Forest" might have even tougher trolls. Other areas, like inaccessible mountain ranges or caves, farthest away from civilization, would have the foes that pose the most threat. Ancient vampires and powerful liches who enjoy their seclusion and dominate everything around them.

How is this method bad, aside from requiring a great deal of hands on work by the development team? It provides a clear path of progression, from combating lowly wolves to deadly lich lords, but in a natural way that would further the feeling of accomplishment, and still provide a realistic world.

I mean, I can get along just fine in the city. But drop me in the middle of the Australian Outback? Not so much. Isn't that how scaling challenges should work within games like this as well?

Replay value is already butchered =]

I don't agree with that. What do we have to look forward to when all areas is accessible from the start? My opinion is that leveling your character is to get strong enough to go to and explore those nasty areas of the map where you know the real nasties live and where there surely is chests with more that 4 gold and a carrot. (You also level to meet the requirements of the later parts in the main story, at least in most other rpg's you do that...) Level scaling for me is not the best way. It takes away the joy of building a character.

this place is brilliant.
people want a challenge throughout the game, but they don't want level scaling.
people want their character to become a demi god, but want a challenge throughout the game.

If I was Bethesda I'd just lean back and not care about the whining, the game has, or is, breaking several records, on steam and in sales, and recieving fantastic reviews. so I'm guessing they can't've botched this game so badly eh?

It is necessary, however there is nothing worse than fighting through a dungeon where you can pretty much one-shot-kill ANYONE in your way, and as soon as you see the "last boss" he kills you with one strike of his sword..

in short, dungeon-wise the scale of difficulty between the "normal" mobs and the very last in dungeons is just to ridicules.

A German developer published a game (Gothic 3) which also featured an enormous world, and that completely without level scaling.

The game itself wasn't very good though, but that was because of many technical bugs and bad quest design. Form a world-designer's perspective, it was just awesome.

So yes, it is absolutely possible to have a big game world and and no amount of level scaling in it.

Of course, some 'random' encounters scales with you.
If you had played Skyrim without scaling - it would be like 'no challenge'.
The issue is there're too few timeline quests - most are involved around the protagonist, a quest will never trigger unless u are involved.
It would be nice if some events in the world triggered based on exact date/time.

Players are supposed to be able to screw themselves by focusing on the wrong skills. That successful concept dates back to Dungeons & Dragons. The core game in a role-playing game is problem solving through your character. Enemies that are stronger than you are just one of numerous standard problems to solve. Deal with them. If your class is focused on combat, then your strength will be fighting, but you will be weak at sneaking, at picking locks and pockets, and at persuasion. If you focus on things other than combat, then your strength will be in those things, and fighting will be your weakness. If you play your thief like a warrior, then you will fail, as you should.

Im not a huge fan of level scaling, but have to say, in my opinion, Skyrim handles it pretty well. Oblivion was a disaster due to level scaling, I never felt powerful, never had the urge to ever go exploring (cos you just knew you wouldn't find anything of worth) and got bored of bandits in stupidly good armour!! Skyrim is different however, so far low level mobs are just that, whether im lev 1 or 20. I like the fact I can go exploring, find a cave and end up fighting an extremely powerful baddie (and having to run away!) Maybe find some decent equipment, ok maybe not earth shatteringly great but still good stuff. I love sneaking up on some old ruined fort, bow in hand and one shoting all the occupants just to be ripped apart by something much bigger than me 10 minutes later!
I do feel more powerful when I level in this game, maybe thats just down to the perks - I dunno. But for me it works. And Im a huge CRPG and tabletop rpg geek. So there!!

I despised level scaling in Oblivion, but I really haven't noticed it being a problem in Skyrim. It has honestly felt like I've got steadily more powerful as the game has progressed; it seems as though problems only really arise when people play as a mage with Destruction as their main damage output.

I support level-scaling when it's done as elegantly as it is in Skyrim. Bravo Bethesda! I think you've found the balance.

^^^^

10 minutes of hack block hack slash block repeat. Absolutely terrible, and killed the game for me at higher levels. Just... killed it.

The combat in Skyrim, for all its flaws, is far superior.

These are pretty much my thoughts exactly. I've been pretty harsh on Skyrim since it came out, but really it's a fantastic game plagued by a small number of absolutely dreadful design choices.

The reason I've been so harsh is because it could've been so, so much more with just a few changes. Level scaling is absurd and makes absolutely no sense. I remember when I was heading to Riften and saw a dragon I completely ignored it. Then I saw a bear on the road and was 20 times more scared of it than the dragon.

Thank you for validating my hypothesis -> http://j-u-i-c-e.hubpages.com/_esforum/hub/wellappointedbandit.

I've been playing the game extensively and to it's limit. I agree with the OP. Even though I haven't been one shotted (not even close) the scaling is still completely broken. I've never played a game with this severe of a problem before.

I should of just stuck with Bioware games.