My bad if this has been recently discussed.

Here's a breakdown of Fallout 4's https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jggte7H33ug

Here's a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6Fksao5P2E opposing the idea.

I definitely was not a fan of New Vegas 'do not go North of Goodsprings' punishment for early off rail exploration. I don't mind running into high leveled enemies, though New Vegas early game felt more 'on rails' as it limited true freedom of exploration, unless you had a few stealthboys to spare.

What are your thoughts on this new rubber banding scaling system?

I find its a intestine hybrid of level scaling and set levels, spontaniously I like it, as much freedom of movement as pure level scaling gives it kinda also makes it feels like your character never really grows, because everything around you just catches up as you level, with the set level ranges you get that extra depth to the world.

I dont really care what system they use I'll still enjoy the game. nv wasnt as hard as some people make it seem the only thing I couldnt get into was that deathclaw cave and that was because of the [censored] load of deathclaws that came charging at you when you got near though I hope beth dont do that I'll still enjoy the game though.

It's my favourite kind of levelling system so I'm pretty happy.

Good. The entire world shouldn't be handed to us on a platter from the start.

Earn your corn and all that.

...? All we officially know about the level scaling system is http://www.gameinformer.com/games/fallout_4/b/playstation4/archive/2015/06/17/19-new-details-fans-need-to-know-about-fallout-4.aspx: "We call it rubberbanding; we'll have an area [where enemies scale from] level 5 to 10, and then this area will be level 30 and above," Howard says. "You'll run into stuff that will crush you, and you will have to run away."

People have been taking the phrase "rubber-banding" and running with it, but this description is exactly how Skyrim works. So far I haven't heard anything revelatory about Fallout 4's level scaling system - if you thought the scaling in Skyrim was fine, you'll probably be fine with the scaling in Fallout 4.

I'm ok with the idea.

Some areas really should be harder to get into, for various reasons. A place like the Glowing Sea, I expect to run into some nasty stuff.

Agreed, but many players abhor such a sentiment and would rather just pick their corn on one of their many leisurely excursions.

I'm not trying to disparage Bethesda, but their games are "stroll playing games" rather than anything redolent of traditional RPGs.

I personally embrace the notion of a rubber banding system but we have to play it before we can offer anything more than conclusory speculation; but I appreciate the premise.

Edit:

I also have to disagree with the canard that New Vegas was linear at the beginning. An expansive pathway with intermittent obstacles doesn't equate to a limited or a linear path (with FONV being the former).

Skyrim had it to. I was playing Skyrim the other day and and my ass handed to me by a centurion and gloomluker at level 13 in one of the caves near Whiterun

I actually really liked it in Skyrim so I'm looking forward to it. The enemy level range was enough to keep things interesting and there were still the enemies you would want to leave alone until higher level and if you found them early running away was always an option. Honestly I'd have to try hard (and be pretty stupid) to get myself into a scrap I couldn't win or escape from in Skyrim. Not that I didn't die ... many times ... but that's where the stupid part comes into play.

While I did die many times to Deathclaws in New Vegas, that ~made sense~. Having every critter and foe scale with me all the time means I never face anything weaker or tougher than me --- it's always the same old, same old boring fights. But having creatures so powerful I feel the need to run away, or sneak past them or just come back later... that feels -right-. Likewise, when I am toting around a minigun while wearing an unlicensed nuclear reactor on my back, covered in battleship steel, I do not expect a Mole Rat to even give me pause.

Well I just watched the 'Rant' vid and I have to say I couldn't disagree with the guy more. What he wants apparently is a game world that constantly level's with him so that no matter where he goes the challenge is an exact match to his current level. Not only is this much less realistic, it takes away all major challenges from the game. I'd much rather go into a cave full a Falmer at low level and get my butt kicked than have every enemy just level to me so nothing is a major challenge anymore. Being able to figure out how to kill a Dragon Priest when you're 8th level is a great feeling. Getting your butt kicked by it and having to run away to come back another day just makes sense. Having the Dragon Priest just drop levels so you can take it on is just stupid, unrealistic and not challenging at all.

The "everything levels with you" was the bulk if Onlivion's system. To the point where the rarest loot in the game was a humble iron dagger. No thank you!

Was generally satisfied with Skyrim and FO3 in this regard, so happy to trust Bethesda has learned what works.

I believe that people are misinterpreting Howard's explanation of the system and missing the whole point of referring to it as 'rubber banding'.

Howard said: "We call it rubberbanding; we'll have an area [where enemies scale from] level 5 to 10, and then this area will be level 30 and above. You'll run into stuff that will crush you, and you will have to run away."

He's clearly not talking about two different areas, but one area at two different times. He didn't say "we'll have an area [where enemies scale from] level 5 to 10 here while this other area over there will be level 30 and above". He used "and then" indicating subsequently and he said "this" area, indicating the one we were talking about which had previously been level 5 to 10 now being level 30. Hence, the whole 'rubberbanding' term, which is describing the area of a level as malliable, stretching two and fro over time.

If each area just has a set level range that doesn't vary over time, then the term 'rubberbanding' doesn't make sense.

Uh, I don't think it's as clearly as you think. The first way I read "and then this area" I read it as a completely different area - and then it reads oddly if he were talking about the same area, since he probably wouldn't reiterate "the area". "Rubber-banding" probably just means that the area "stretches" within a set range, a la Skyrim, instead of everything being static, or everything scaling forever - of course, "rubber-banding" isn't a precise technical term by any means.

Besides, why would they do that? Have a beginner area from levels 5-10 suddenly snap to a tougher level 30 area? Seems to defeat the purpose of having narrow ranges instead of just open Oblivion-style scaling.

Sure, you could be right, but it seems more likely to me that Todd Howard was talking about two separate areas and it's the same basic system as Skyrim.

I was not a fan of Oblivion's leveling, personally. I like having areas I have to work harder at or advance my character and prepare for.

Otherwise arent we undermining the Hero's Journey? If Frodo could have just walked to Mount Doom and dropped off the Ring without needing help or developing along the way, it would have been a much shorter and less interesting story...

Well it could have been anyway *cough* the eagles *cough*

Oblivion's scaling made it almost unplayable for me, but they've really improved this with every game. Skyrim did it pretty well, so I have no concerns.

The first time I heard about "rubberbanding", I also thought that it sounds very much like Skyrim's Encounter Zones. But at the same time I am wondering why they renamed it. Is it just some informal name they use in internal discussions, or did they change so many things that they think it deserves a new name?

I also agree that it does not make much sense that Todd referred to the same area. It would mean that an area that was no problem for the player before is now suddenly inaccessible to him. How will they explain that? Immersion-wise it is implausible that suddendly different creatures appear just because the player leveled up (it could make sense though, if it is the result of some quest, but then it is better handled in quest scripts and not with a new sub-system).

Ok....there is nothing in NV stopping you from traveling North other than the challenge of powerful enemies. There are a variety of ways to overcome / avoid them and still get to your desired destination. If you can't handle the challenge, do not take it. Very simple. Note that this option actually gives players MORE options to challenge themselves at whatever point they choose. The criticism for limiting player freedom would be valid if there were actual invisible walls blocking early access to certain areas, but only the player's willingness to face potential danger at early levels blocks this access.

Also, while that video is well done, everything after the actual quote from Bethesda is just pure speculation (which is pointed out multiple times) and arguing about what is good or bad in a game nobody here has played yet is pointless. Let's have this discussion in a month or so when we have something to actually discuss.

Except there WERE invisible walls, if you managed to get clever and say, try to scale the mountains to avoid the cazadors. It was possible to get on top of the mountains, but not progress due to invisible walls and be forced right back down into the cazadors.

And regardless of whether or not you COULD somehow make it through to the North (which I did on my first playthrough), it kind of breaks the main story. Or at least cuts a big chunk of it out. It felt oddly restraining to be forced South, then around in a loop across the bottom to go back North, encountering a series of story quests along the way. And you couldn't just head East and avoid the loop that way either, because, again, invisible walls on the tops of the mountains.

Bethesda games basically allow you to do anything at any time. This removes any feeling of character progession or difficulty from the game, it just feels like a big amusemant park and you're the one to be amused. It doesn't matter how you specialize, because you can use any weapon at any time and get away with it perfectly.

I'm sick of browsing mods for Skyrim and Fallout 3 for hours straight just to make it not repetitive and challenging. It just feels shallow with level scaling.

Seems fine to me. I believe that is how Skyrim did it as well, and i honestly never felt like i was shoehorned into a small area. Sure every now and again i'd wander into a cave and quickly realized the enemies were of a different league entirely. But honestly i found this a preferential system by far over Oblivion and i never had to many problems with it. The wandering into certain death really only happend rarely.

Just because you are a lower level doesn't mean you can't do it either. Sure it will probably be difficult to deal with lv30+ enemies at lv1. But i highly doubt the levels will be so tightly balanced that you'd be utterly incapable of doing a lv10 area at lv2, it might be challenging but i highly doubt it will be flat out impossible.

And then of course there are difficulty settings. That can be freely adjusted at any time to increase the range even further. If you dial down the difficulty to super easy for example you could suddenly bring down an area that was previously "impossible" to "doable but difficult". And later you dial it up again when you get to lower level areas.

The invisible walls were an issue in and of themselves. Those were everywhere, not just in place to corral you into a certain path.

As far as story goes I've 'started' the MQ for Skyrim a dozen different ways. Go to Whiterun first or not. Get the claw first or not. Go to Riverun first or not. Etc. But there wasn't a creature barrier keeping me from starting the MQ when I wanted to or how I wanted to. It'd be different if there was always a level 40 Dragon Priest guarding the stone tablet. Seriously judging by Skyrim's system I don't see there being a problem with this in FO4. I have concerns elsewhere (like a voiced PC killing replay value) but not this.

I quite liked Skyrim's scaling model. But then I liked Oblivion's as well. Fallout:3 didn't bother me. I was not a fan of NV scaling. I guess as long as Bethesda's style of being able to go the direction I want to go without it being near impossible I'm fine with it. I just don't like it used to control my choice in where and when I go somewhere. And I like for the final boss to be difficult at high levels so I'm not able to swat them like a mosquito and it be over in a blink of the eye.