Previously, we'd heard that it was like Fallout's level scaling, which I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) set the level of enemies once you reached an area and then kept them the same for the rest of the game, which is still better than Oblivion. However, I thought it was notable when TH was retelling the radiant story idea for the 3rd time and he said that it would "choose a dungeon near you, a higher level dungeon" (paraphrased) which made me think that they wouldn't do that, and that dungeons would be preset levels. If so, this is good IMO, because it means we will have places where we have to go back later once we are more powerful to get rarer loot, and give a greater sense of accomplishment to leveling up. The less your environment bends to suit you, the better IMO.

Your thoughts?

It just implies that some dungeons have static levels if you ask me, not that all of them do, which is kind of similar to how Morrowind did it. In Morrowind, random spawns were generally leveled, but hand placed enemies and loot were not. This was particularly noticable with bandits and other humanoid foes, as they were generally hand-placed, thus bandit hideouts were often some of the more dangerous dungeons at low levels.

Alternately, it could mean that leveled enemies and loot will sometimes have a minimum level, so that if you have, say, a dungeon populated by level 10 enemies, even if you go there at level 1, you'll still face level 10 enemies, but if you go there when you're above level ten, the enemies might scale up to your level. This is actually something I'd hope to see for level scaling, not for every encounter, of course, I want some encounters to have static levels, and obviously, there needs to be enemies that even a level one character can survive an encounter with. By implementing minimum levels for certain locations, one can adress the issue of level scaling making almost every location in the game safe to explore at level 1 like in Oblivion, while still maintaining some enemies that can be a threat to high level characters, and having the threat level of dungeons still be somewhat variable.

Whatever the case, if Bethesda decided to do away with level scaling entirely at some point during development, I'd think that would be something they'd mention, so I doubt they've decided to do so.

It doesn't even imply that if you ask me.

Game needs dungeon for quest -> Game picks nearby as-yet-unentered dungeon -> Game then sets dungeon to a level scaled slightly (or greatly) above PC. This dungeon is now "a higher level dungeon" compared to the PC.

I hope that they leave the dungeons, let there be some challenge in them and DON'T level-scale them.

From what I understand, it works like this:

There's a dungeon that's level range is 7-10. If you enter it at level 5, it locks to a level 7 dungeon and it will remain that way until you hit level 11. Once you hit level 11, it switches to a level 10 dungeon.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

I have a question... since dungeons lock they respawn don't they? But didn't it say somewhere that all npcs are named? Please don't be somekind of stupid namegenaretor... if not doesn't this mean that humans don't respawn?

What's wrong with having layered dungeons with multiple levels? The ones up top are for lower levels and as you get deeper, enemies become more fearsome. I would much more enjoy it like that, plus it gives some uniqueness to each dungeon, never revealing it's final layer until you are powerful enough.

Dungeons will most likely respawn, it's just that the dungeon will be locked at the level in which you entered it at.

On the one hand I agree, but on the other- Morrowind was the last Elder Scrolls game where I found a dungeon deep enough for more than about two "level divisions." :shrug:

Last game I played with much level differentiation in a single dungeon was back in the "early days" when entire games were built around exploring a single 15-20 (or more) level deep dungeon.

What's stupid about a name generator? They probably use one to create the static NPCs anyway. A name generator can be pretty complex and deep, depending on the effort put into it.

And it sounds to me by "Higher-level dungeon" they mean one you haven't explored and locked at a lower level. But a modifier to the dungeon's level relative to the PC's would be fine too.

yes, this is how I understand it, it level ranges and locks to your level within it's range.
the upgrade from 7 to 10 then you reach level 11 was unknown to me, but makes some sense, at least if the dungeon respawn.

Oblivions Dungeons were fine, the only problem they had was the level scaling was overdone. Personally I don't see anything wrong with that type of a system and I think Skyrim maybe going in a sideway direction with Dungeons but we'll just have to wait and see.

That's still a set, leveled dungeon. If that's the case, it means I'll never be able to walk into a dungeon and wipe the floor with the bandits inside, nor will I be able to get my own ass kicked by the bandits.

sounded like, imo, that dungeons you have not visited will be set at your level but one we already visited will be set to our level from when we first entered it.

If thats the case ,Ill be trying to avoid going into dungeons as long as i can to make sure i get the best out of it.All that aside we dont really have hard info to go on besides ppl throwing out that its going to be like fallout 3.Witch i dont believe it will be.

I think min/max type scaling to be a very good idea.

This man has it right, it's pretty much exactly how Todd describes radiant story in the podcast.