Open World vs. Non-Level Scaling

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:19 pm

I know Skyrim is pretty much done, but I'm still curious to see how people feel about level/loot scaling and how "open" they like their "open world" games.

Personally, I'd be okay if there were certain areas of the map I couldn't explore right off the bat because the enemies are too tough. In other words, I'd be happy to sacrifice some accessibility if it meant getting rid of the way enemy difficulty and loot is scaled. There's a good amount of reward that comes with getting to a level where you can explore an area you couldn't survive in at an earlier time. Something about being able to access every square inch of the map as a new character doesn't sit right. I'd be happier if the plains, roads, and valleys were all accessible, but just certain POIs and their immediate surroundings weren't scaled.

I've heard the scaling model is going to more closely resemble FO3's - I didn't play much FO3 - can anyone clarify how it was different from Oblivion?
User avatar
Stacy Hope
 
Posts: 3391
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:23 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:57 pm

I don't see how open worlds affect level scaling.
User avatar
maddison
 
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:22 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:55 pm

I believe that level scaling can be done right.The hard areas should have enemies that level with you,but are stronger,like if you are level 5,enemy is level 9,etc etc.
User avatar
scorpion972
 
Posts: 3515
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:20 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:52 pm

I don't see how open worlds affect level scaling.

User avatar
Dan Stevens
 
Posts: 3429
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 5:00 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:04 pm

Open world should be relatively sacrosanct. I wish they'd keep it open AND get rid of level scaling. So if I want to enter the Perilous Cave of Mortal Peril @ level 1, and my body is blasted to ash at the very sight of the Thrice Cursed Hell Fiend of Perilousness, lesson learned for me. :)
User avatar
CORY
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 9:54 pm

Post » Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:12 am

Well I actually like level scaling. Not the "unique item" scaling, nor the oblivion overall scaling of course, but it's really a good feature. And to fix it do not require any sacrifice on "openness" so there is no problem for me. As long as we can find powerful monster in high level zone at level 1 and weak monsters at level 70, everything is ok.
User avatar
Jennifer Rose
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:54 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:23 pm

I don't see how open worlds affect level scaling.


No scaling means some areas you get slaughtered in while at lower levels, in other words those areas aren't "open" to you.
User avatar
Sheeva
 
Posts: 3353
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 2:46 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:00 pm

There really should be places you can't fight your way through until your the proper level.
User avatar
Latino HeaT
 
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:21 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:53 pm

I'm all in favour of no level-scaling at all. Sure, it might mean that I have to think twice about exploring certain places early on, but as long as such places aren't physically sealed off until I reach a certain level, I still consider the gameworld to be open. It would be much more dangerous, exciting, and believable that way.
User avatar
Love iz not
 
Posts: 3377
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 8:55 pm

Post » Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:40 am

i think skyrim will hit the nail on the head
User avatar
Jamie Lee
 
Posts: 3415
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:15 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:48 pm

I guess "open" doesn't necessarily explain it properly. I game that lets you explore the entire map at any time (even if you might get slaughtered) would still be considered open.

What level scaling did in Oblivion was make it so your level 1 ass could walk fearlessly anywhere he damn well pleased without much recourse. Going to a dungeon at level 1 provided the same challenge as going to the same place at level 20, which, for me, negates any sense of reward for gaining a level.

How did FO3 differ from Oblivion as far as scaling goes?
User avatar
Rusty Billiot
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:22 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:40 pm

I don't see how open worlds affect level scaling.


That's because of your creepy as hell reptile eyes. I kid! I kid.. I love argonians, especially the ones that...know.... :whisper:
User avatar
Meghan Terry
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:53 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:02 pm

No scaling means some areas you get slaughtered in while at lower levels, in other words those areas aren't "open" to you.


We probably have differing views on what "open" means. In my world, open != risk free. I identify "closed" with arbitrary barriers. I'd much rather have a system that allows me to risk life and limb taking a shortcut through really dangerous territory, rather than slamming me into an invisible wall and telling me to come back when I'm grown up.
User avatar
Jodie Bardgett
 
Posts: 3491
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:38 pm

Post » Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:30 am

I'm fine with how Fallout 3 did it, which means I'm probably fine with how Skyrim's doing it.

I get enough "linear RPG" from other companies... I play Beth games for the "wander anywhere you want" thing. So, yeah - wouldn't sacrifice that.

I don't see how open worlds affect level scaling.


An "open" world divided up into areas by hordes of monsters far above your level that kill you the instant you enter their territory, is just as linear as a series of rooms & hallways. You still have to go through the areas in order, as your level increases.
User avatar
Doniesha World
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:12 pm

Post » Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:33 am

I would imagine level-scaling only for specific monsters / quest-related spawns.

As far as the "living" open world is concerned, I prefer without any scaling, so I learn to explore and see the limits of where I can go or not. Also gives more purpose to be stealthy if you want to try and go for that chest in an area with monsters that can pwn you in the blink of an eye.
User avatar
Czar Kahchi
 
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 11:56 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:21 pm

I'm fine with how Fallout 3 did it, which means I'm probably fine with how Skyrim's doing it.

I get enough "linear RPG" from other companies... I play Beth games for the "wander anywhere you want" thing. So, yeah - wouldn't sacrifice that.



An "open" world divided up into areas by hordes of monsters far above your level that kill you the instant you enter their territory, is just as linear as a series of rooms & hallways. You still have to go through the areas in order, as your level increases.


My thoughts exactly. There might be some areas in Skyrim that are too hard at times, but I still want to be able to exploring the whole world even if it means risking facing off against a Dragon at level 1 or stumbling into a cave full of high level creatures. I don't want to be confined in an area until I have leveled up enough to move on to the next without getting slaughtered, like how it was in Nehrim. Neither do I want the slowly-unlocking open worlds like in Arcania: Gothic 4 where there was one big world but it opened up area by area as you progressed through the main quest.
User avatar
Thema
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:36 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:04 pm

I don't see how open worlds affect level scaling.


Dark souls is technically open world, but its completely linear, you have to go to area A then B then C, because if you try to go to B or C first, or God forbid D or E, you will get slaughtered because your stats aren't high enough. So while it looks open world, it plays the same as a linear RPG.

Personally, I prefer Dark souls the way it is, Skyrim I would prefer to go wherever I want. Level scaling is a good thing, it was just implemented poorly in oblivion.
User avatar
Ashley Clifft
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:56 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:27 pm

I prefer range based scaling (encounters scale according to your level but have various minimum and maximum level cap depending of the areas and of the creature's type) for open world because:
- If there is no scaling, you will kinda have to explore each areas in the same order during additional playthroughs due to each area fixed level difficulty.
- If everything scale without restriction, you end up with something like rats level 100.
User avatar
Connor Wing
 
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:22 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:16 pm

An "open" world divided up into areas by hordes of monsters far above your level that kill you the instant you enter their territory, is just as linear as a series of rooms & hallways. You still have to go through the areas in order, as your level increases.

That's a bit of an exaggeration.

The player didn't get attacked that often while walking around in the open in Oblivion... and attacks are apparently even less frequent in Skyrim. So even if there were regions containing high level enemies, it's not like you'd have to avoid those regions entirely or die the minute you enter them. You could also use stealth to get around enemies, or simply run away from them. It's not as if they're an obstacle you must kill to proceed further.

Basically, there would be nothing stopping you exploring high level regions at any level - it would just feel more dangerous.
User avatar
Mrs Pooh
 
Posts: 3340
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:30 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:08 pm

I've heard the scaling model is going to more closely resemble FO3's - I didn't play much FO3 - can anyone clarify how it was different from Oblivion?


FO3 was very similar to OB overall, but there were a few hand-placed static items, and occasional "random" spawns of things that might be way above or below your level. The other item was that if you entered an interior, it locked to your current level, so if it was too hard for whatever reason, you could go back to it later and it would still be at the earlier level. That at least prevented a "flawed" character from being unable to complete a quest.

FO3 was "better" to a degree, but still suffered from the excessive levelling and scaling to some extent. A few levelled spawn points, such as the one in front of Megaton, resulted in higher and higher level monsters attacking the static-level guards as your own level increased, until your mere presence in the same game cell spelled all but certain death to the residents in the various settlements.

On the other hand, I recall my low level (2?) character encountering a bunch of well-armed and armored mercenaries who were running toward something over the nearby hill, which turned out to be a Deathclaw. It tore them to pieces one by one, then came after me, while I ineffectually emptied my feeble pistol at it.....for the rest of my character's brief life. It was a "nothing you can do" moment, but the very fact that it was POSSIBLE in the game made me play a lot more cautiously, and I believe it was a better game because of it. It's something that works well if used with caution, and sparingly, but works badly if overused or misused.

I believe that SR will use less levelling and scaling that OB, but still have some, which COULD be a good thing. We won't know how that turns out until after 11/11/11.
User avatar
Brittany Abner
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 10:48 pm

Post » Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:14 am

I think it has to be a mixture of both.
This is a game, sure allow certain areas to be more difficult than others, but also allow some scaling as well.

More importantly would be advanced AI. Like if you level up to be a fearsome warrior with a blade you enter a cave and are attacked by enemies using ranged attacks to make things more difficult for you.
User avatar
Emily Graham
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:34 am

Post » Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:42 am

I don't like the idea of level scaling items myself, but I think that if the only way of preventing a level 4 wielding a really powerful weapon is the slaughterish capability of NPCs, it won't be enough so somewhere in between got my vote.
User avatar
Brιonα Renae
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:10 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:37 pm

No.

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither" -Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Monika
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:50 pm

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:52 pm

I thought Morrowind handled it perfectly...with the sole exception that it ended too soon. I believe that if Morrowind had continued its leveling to accommodate players well into their 40s and 50s its system would have been as close to perfection as any I've ever heard of.

Morrowind had one region-based high-level area: Red Mountain. This made sense in that game. There was a logical reason for that particular area to be harder than the rest of Vvardenfell and I think it was a good choice to make it a harder area. But I am opposed to arbitrary MMO-style "zones."
User avatar
bonita mathews
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 5:04 am

Post » Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:01 pm

I think what bugs me more than level-scaled enemies, is the level-scaled loot. You get to a certain level and suddenly brigands discovered on the road are carrying glass weapons and armor? I'd prefer to keep that stuff harder to get or tied to quest rewards or as a loot drop from a named quest mob.

This was such a monstrous complaint in (vanilla) Oblivion that I'm sure they've made a concerted effort to balance it better in Skyrim.
User avatar
Crystal Clarke
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:55 am

Next

Return to V - Skyrim