No scaling, period. If there is a super strong bad guy somewhere nearby the start of the game, then so be it. If there is a weak bad guy after 10000 hours of gameplay in an area that took 100 hours to find, then so be it.

I've been playing a game with no level scaling. It's tough at low levels, you really have to baby your character and use a lot of strategy. But, when I go back to that area after my character has gotten stronger, the enemies are easier, and eventually I'm mopping the floor with foes that used to pose a large threat. It's a great feeling to see my character getting stronger and to have that clearly evident during gameplay.

Like the GI said the scaling is like fallout 3 in some ways. so yes ull have easyer time killing some enemys once u get higher in lvl but there will be some enemys that can still pose a challenge at higher lvls. Witch to me doesnt take away from the gameplay but rewards those that still want a challenge and for those that want to keep playing the game with there main charater long after the main quest is done and over with ,witch adds alot to role-playing and replay value.

In FO3, that applied to almost all indoor locations. Once you visited, they were locked at that level. Outside levelled with the player character.

A few low-level creatures appeared throughout the game, but I can't recall ever seeing a molerat outdoors after about level 12 to 15. Some creatures were "replaced" by stronger versions: radscorpions by giant radscorpions, then by giant albino radscorpions, etc. The same held for feral ghouls and some other creatures.

Incredibly easy? did you play on easy? The first time you meet a cougar around lvl 13, it can kill you in under 5 hits if you are anything other than a warrior. You have to min/max your leveling after the 5/5/5 in order for you not to meet a challenge somewhere...on normal difficulty.

I like it most when there are stronger, weaker and equall enemies around. For diversity in the game.

I'm with you on this and yes, it is a problem.

I usually do some Qs then explore, do some more Q's and more exploration etc. Thinking back to Fo3 there was a town and a small valley that were tough but the rest of the game, once I got a few levels under my belt, was little more than a single circuit trek around the map. Don't get me wrong, there were a few very interesting places to visit but not once did I have to run away and leave a location for another day - maybe I just got lucky, I could never find a reason for a second play through.

FoNV probably uses the same lock the level idea (?) but uses higher level outdoor mobs to limit access to certain areas until a few levels have been gained. This certainly makes for a more interesting experience than Fo3 allows but, with the exception of a few 'legendary' creatures, the challenge is still fixed. Luckily, NV does provide a number of reasons for a 2nd, 3rd etc play through, it's about more than combat, a nicely made RPG.

I have started to reply through Oblivion in anticipation for this release. I completed the game with a thief character the first time. I am now a mage, and the flaws if anything are more noticable the second time around. Dungeon exploring and treasure hunting are terrible. It's absolutely obvious there is some logic that says 'if your level is 1-5, equal 1-100 gold, if 5-10 25-250 gold' etc etc, it just feels so false. You can also go literally anywhere from the word go, as because the world is levelled, nowehere feels out of bounds, which sort of takes away from one of the natural benefits you should have of creating a stronger character and feeling you can venture out.

I am also carrying out an experiment by not doing the Kvatch quest until level 10+. I want to see if the levelled monsters will wipe out all the guards, which I am pretty certain will happen.

On the other hand, its still fun to play and better than 95% of games out there, so I need to be fair on that point!

Here are my thoughts about Level Scaling or other Level Systems. This will be a big one but its a far more complex theme as many would expect, I try to see the things NOT from my point of view, but what I have to tell comes directly from my heart.

Most people write whether they wanna have a level system or not. Try to see it from the point of view of Bethesda. They are a profit oriented company, thats a fact. Yes, its true, playing is fun, developing also, but their maingoal is not to please you as an individual. Their goal ist to make the highest possible profit. To achive that, their goal is to please the majority of players to achive a big turnover. Or to say it harder: Level scaling is a lazy way of making a poorly populated game world. But when it comes to the majority of players, you have to understand what groups of players there are:

• Completists
  
• Storyliner
  
• Casual Player

The difference of these Groups are not only their playstyle, its in their charakterism how they live.

The Completist
...wants achive 100%. For him the Volume of a game is the richness of featurs, items, borderless freedom to do things like he wants to do it. Storyline and Characters are nice, graphic too, but they spent much more time on achivements and possibilities than on storyline. In RL, these People leave their home and write their own stories.

The Storyliner
...relies heavily on the storyline and charakters. Graphic and Environment is important too, because it strenghtens the volume of the story itself. And they dont have a problem if there are restrictions (limited scripted ways) how to progress. These People like to read a book or watch a movie.

The Casual Player
...doesnt need anything of this. True, graphic, features and storyline are a nice bonus, but they dont rely much on it. For them interacting with others or sharpen their skills for competition, even against AI, is more important. These People like to stay at home, invite friends an besides play a board game or a beat-em-up on the console.

Its not the genre who decides whether you are one type or another, its the art of playing. Shooter for example:

Completist = FarCry, Stalker
Storyliner = Crysis, Wolfenstein
Casual Player = Counterstrike, Battlefield

Or think about racers:

Completist = Grand Theft Auto, Test Drive Unlimited
Storyliner = Need For Speed
Casual Players = Formula 1

I think you got the clue. Now since you know the group of players you have to find out who is the majority. Nobody is hardcoe one or the other, there are no strict borders, and everyone like to play different styles. I am a completist, but somtimes I also like to play Battlefield. But ever, one group in you dominates. Sad but true, during the time of PC Games the majority changed.

I remember the time when PCs were marching in our hobbyrooms 20 Years ago. Limited Hardware (20MB HDDs, 1MB RAM, wohooo) meant limited possibilities in development. There were no ressources for big storyline, filmsequences or animations. So the volume of a game depended on the features. So the majority of the PC Gamers were the completists regarding RPGs; the older ones like me But with the time, more households got PCs, they had more power and thanks to Windows were easiert to use for "easy going people". Games became more films than games. So the majority of players switched from the completists to the storyliner. Game developers had to react, and to change their art of developing.

I love RPGs. I remember my times with Might&Magic:Couds of Xeen, worth an entry in the hall of fame of RPGs. I didnt play weeks, I played months. Short after, TES came out and it was awsome. So was Morrowind, which I played for 2 months. Until this time, I didnt know anything about level systems. Then came Oblivion. I was looking forward playing this game because I loved Morrowind so much, but from the beginning I had the feeling anything is wrong, and I was not able to figure out why. So I continued. But no matter what I did, how long I played and how patient I was, this game was never fun. I quit a few days after the beginnning and never touched it again. Year ago I read someting about the level systems and I realized whats wrong.

But I didnt have this problem only with Oblivion. I played Fallout I + II till the end twice. For any reason, I didnt play Fallout 3 to the end. Dont get me wrong, its a great game; but I still feel that I am not playing the game; it feels like it playes me. It was later when I found out that Fallout also uses Level Systems.

So here we are, players like me (the Dinos), who are forced to play games with level systems. I understand the will and maybe the necessity to please the majority of players which want an easier and dynamic entry and progress in the game. But wouldnt it be cool to please both of us? Also for the developer and for the profit? Their way at the moment ist to make level systems, because for players like me its better to play a game with a good system as for Storyliners to play without one. But I tell you what; as long as they implement such crap, I never pay full price. Will I buy TES5? Yes, in 1-2 years when I can have it for 29,- because then the disappointment is not that big because I dont get what I want.

I only see one solution for this; give us all the possibility to DECIDE; give us the option in the option menue playing RPGs with or without level Systems, no matter which system. I am not in the position to tell the developers what or how they should to their work, also I dont know what techniques they use, but if I could make a wish, it would be something like:

Sub enter_dungeon_4711()   If LevelScaling = Off then      Put 20 Skelletons into the Cave      Put 10 Goldcoins in every Chest   Else If LevelScaling = On then      Select Playerlevel      Case 1         Put 10 Rats into the Cave         Put 3 Broncecoins in every Chest      Case 2         Put 12 Turtles...         ...     End Case	   End IfEnd Sub

It is just (a funny) example, but I think you got the clue. So all groups would be pleased. I would have my static world how its meant to be played. Storyliners could advance in their own speed and mood. Casual Players could slay whats in their way. No group of gamers would be forced to play it another way,

and we all would love TES5!!!

I wouldn't know about that, since I completed the main storyline at level 2 I think..... enough said.

No level scaling whatsoever. I don't understand why it's necessary. Just make some areas and quests harder than others, so you make progress by reaching the harder areas as you get stronger.

I really preferred FO3's to FO:NV's. FO:NV wasn't an "open world" game (at least until you were a good way into it and pretty tough and well equipped) because of all the un-leveled areas.

Given that a decent number of Beth's fans buy the ES games because of the "open world" aspect, turning it into a typical un-leveled "okay, you start in region 1; when you're tough enough go to region 2; when you're tough enough, go to region 3; etc" game would be a big disappointment.


That said, Oblivion's scaling wasn't good at all. I was pretty OK with how FO3 did it.

Not doubting you, but would you name one? (I can't think of any ~especially for level-scaled loot).

F03 had good creature scaling (always a sense of danger). Loot? I honestly don't even know what I want the game to do with that.

In Oblivion, I downloaded Oblivion XP ASAP. Hated the scaling . . . but hey, personal opinion. :foodndrink:

Did Oblivion XP actually do anything to the enemy and loot scaling? I thought it just changed how the character leveled up....


(I normally use Francesco's mod. Tried OOO & MMM once, if I recall correctly, but....)

Looks like majority of posters don't like scaling . I don't like it either , it is an RPG so your lily rear has to get beaten at start so you get the feeling of accomplishment later .
I understand people who like challenges but challenge is to beat Umbra at level 2 , defeat a Daedra at level 5 or plunder a vault at level 12 ; opponents that need 30 extra hacks because of scaling are very boring to deal.

"No scaling. It's much more satisfying to come back when your stronger and avenge your pride."
SRSLY, what other point is there in getting stronger?

I didn't play Fallout so my only references are Morrowind and Oblivion. I prefer the Morrowind scaling.

Fallout didn't have any level scaling or loot scaling that I am aware of.

(Though I believe Fallout 3 did).

When I played Oblivion I really noticed the scaling, it was everywhere and cheapened the experience, in Morrowind I noticed the lack of level scaling because I was constantly using the difficulty slider, Fallout 3's system worked the best for me because I didn't notice it, not one bit.

Yea.





If the "level-scaling" is like Morrowind, it would be perfect...

I don't want rats to be strong, when we are at a high level...


But there should be REALLY STRONG opponents (like in some caves), where we must at high level to be able to kill...and with a warning infront of certain caves...a low level will not enter, because he sees that he wouldn't be able to survive...but if he want, he can enter.

It's a misnomer that level scaling has to be an all or nothing phenomenon. Even Morrowind had some degree of level scaling. The question is whether or not the devs learned anything from the failures of the level scaling system in Oblivion. There are several things that Skyrim can do better:

-remove unique item and spell level scaling. A badass ring is a badass ring, and If I can get it at a low level I deserve it, not the watered down level 5 version

-Even with non-unique items and weapons, they should have a certain degree of rareness to them, whether they are carried by bandits or monsters or found in loot containers. Daedric, Glass Ebony, Dwemer armor etc should be special, not common, not even semi common. The rarity of daedric armor in Morrowind is something that shouldn't have been changed.

-Finally, certain regions and dungeons should be harder and easier. So if you wander into a difficult zone and manage to get the loot from it, you get what you worked hard for, not something scaled to your level. If you can't beat a certain boss or a mob in a dungeon, you should be able to surpass them by leveling up and come back and trounce them. That feeling of progression was absent from Oblivion.

My ideal RPG would do some level scaling, out of necessity - but not everywhere. Elder Scrolls games are known for their large size and sand box nature. In this sort of environment, where the devs can't predict where you will go, there probably has to be some scaling just so that the player is not shoe-horned in doing quests or exploring in a linear A to B fashion, which is the same every time (and is something more like a Final Fantasy series RPG where your path is set in stone). But the whole world should not be just a mish mash of these randomized creatures thrown into whatever dungeons or locations are nearby, all out of some random quest generator.

It's not enough to simply have level scaling, even its randomized to sometimes spit out harder things and sometimes spit out easier things, in an attempt to give you diverse challenges.

You still need some places in the world that are static and made with a purposeful challenge level in mind. Monsters and how powerful they are need to match their surroundings in order for the world to gain some sort of feeling of legitimacy and logic. And for exploring to have meaning. Occasionally you should encounter a dwelling, dungeon, cave, whatever, that is specifically created with static threats inside that never change. These should be the most important places of the world, that are attached to lore, the main storyline, or to accomplishing a major goal in the world. For instance becoming the head of a guild or a faction, or killing a notable NPC, or becoming the champion of the Arena. Nothing such as this should be 'scaled'. If the player isn't ready to accomplish these things, then let him wander around the world doing more mundane (and randomly scaled) things until he is ready.

Imagine a grand, gothic looking, 10 story tall tower run by necromancers for instance, that dominates a region. There should be a slow build up to conquering such a location, perhaps first with rumors and preparation quests, that indeed themselves might be randomized. But eventually you work up a chain of connected quests to take down this necromancers tower, and when you do it is a level 35 dungeon - every time. Not simply you run there at level 4 and the necromancers are level 4, or even level 6 or 8. They are level 35 because that is what fits with the logic of them being powerful enough to dominate this region and to be doing the nefarious things such that they would do to become an enormously feared problem.

This was more like the design early in the series with Arena and Daggerfall, and this mix of scaled + static threats, created a nice balance of believability and challenge, but while also leaving the player to his own devices to explore and quest as much as he wanted elsewhere, to preserve the free roam and sandbox nature of the games.

In Oblivion it was not like this, there might be some ruins a few hundred yards from a main city. If you entered these ruins at level 1, you would face skeletons maybe. And if you entered them at level 30 you might face liches or whatever more powerful creatures spawned at that level. The problem with this is that liches should not be inhabiting the same type of location as lowly skeletons in the first place. They should never be popping up in some mundane looking dungeon right outside a town. If I enter a place with something so powerful as a lich, vampire, daedra lord, etc, it should be an epic and impressive looking dungeon, especially created for those creatures, not simply a template made of adjoining rooms and corridors basically the same as places I have already seen for the first 30 levels of my play through the game.

This is the entire problem with level scaling throughout the *whole* game world. It disconnects the design of the world from logic. Things just exist randomly and bizarrely with no rhyme or reason other than the level of your character when he choose to come to an area or enter a dungeon. It renders exploration pretty much pointless and useless.

I understand the current quest generation system they are using in Skyrim operates on some of these principles. That if you come into a town, the game will call up a quest befitting your character at the time, and then will select a random unused location in the nearby countryside for the place where the quest sends you. This might be ok for certain generic style random questing, but I most severely hope that this is not a snapshot of how the entire game works - even outside the main story.

Oblivion level scaling really was awful. When all the thugs you faced started using daedric armour, you know something is wrong. The poll is right, when you are weak at the beginning you are just trying to survive, but when you get strong and revisit the area, it is satisfying to easily defeat everything that was hard before. I understand some wanting to make it always challenging, but I say go old school and have different areas with different levels of enemies.