Level scale main quest content, keep everything else in the world locked. How hard is that? People explore because they want adventure and challenge, no reason to take that away.

Everyone seems to talk as though no scaling would make the game impossible, or linear. I suggest that all scaling does is to make that part of the game easier. I would say that a level 4 character could beat a level 30 character, it just takes far more time, preparation and gameplay. Want to beat the level 30 guy easier? You level up. Isn't that what we wish for, a non-scaled world where things are not impossible just because they're a higher level, they're just very difficult?

You need to stop using absolutes. Having scaling does NOT make EVERYTHING pointless. Having no scaling does NOT make EVERYTHING linear. These arguments are ridiculous and pointless at this point. This is like watching people smash their faces into concrete walls. You call people simpleminded but i see you being just as simpleminded. You make the absolute claims and will take nothing inbetween. There is a middle ground you can make it all work together to be a good experience. Otherwise you'll get your mod soon enough and these pointless arguments can be done with.

There's a reason people loved Morrowind.

It wasn't because of the horrible combat.

Nor was it because of the horrible graphics.

It most certainly wasn't because of the robot animations.


Was it because of level-scaling?
No, Morrowind didn't have it.

Ok I understand what your point is. The game works differently which is why you play it. Fine. But let's say my system was implemented BUT the content was scaled up. So instead of an open world consisting of 100 quests that can be completed at any time you have a game that gives you 200 quests but you can only do certain pools at certain times. Now this isn't strict. You can do them in any order but you will likely die in the higher level ones. Is this not something that would appeal?

I mean even if you still had 100 quests the system could still work. It's not level locked. And if you complete the first two quests of easy pool you would be slightly stronger, which means you could move onto the start of normal quests. It would be tough yes but you could do it. Ok this would mean the easy quests would then be very easy but is that really a problem? If you've stopped fighting bandits and moved onto trolls would you not expect to go back and clear up easily? Would this not give you a sense of growth?

The problem with a static world in a TES game is simply outlined in this example:


- I am exploring the world, and as it's static, there's places I can survive and places I don't. Till here, fine - in fact, on paper, this scenario is preferrable and more believable to level scaling.

- now, in order to access those places, I need to level up

- but to level up, I need to tackle doable content, so I need to pick one of the areas/quests I can actually survive

- long story short, I'm now railroaded in my progression/exploration. I do a quest hub after the other. I may have several options for quest hubs, but in short, I'm playing an MMORPG at this point

- to add insult to injury, since content is static, by doing the Companions quests, I leveled up - and this makes me too strong to get some excitement and decent rewards from other quests such as the Dark Brotherhood. Not only the game is forcing me on a subset of paths, but you're also forcing me to pick between different adventures YOU have pre-selected for me



We do see what a static world entails. It's an awesome thing that works in hundreds of games. But TES is about freedom, and freedom is a delicate thing. You tamper with it too much, and you ruin it. So yes, we see what the static world would bring to TES, and we say "no thanks".

The irony here is I HATE level scaling. It was unsufferable in Oblivion. But I appreciate it in Skyrim, because it complements the strengths of the game, and those matter more than an improvement in RPG progression - expecially when there's multiple games already doing it on a level Skyrim has no hope to match. Don't ruin what's good about it in order to imitate what you can get elsewhere.

I believe it did, but it was more to do with the random wilderness creatures. I certainly experienced more diverse and dangerous creatures as I levelled up, no doubt about it. Was it limited to wilderness creatures? Can't really say, but level scaling certainly existed in MW no doubt about it.

Why do certain areas have to be concentrated difficult levels in a static system? Just make every quest a random difficulty everywhere. That way you have to wander around and try to find the things that are doable and avoid the ones that aren't. Better still, with Radiant Questing, the game can change it up every time you start over.

I think some people have an overly concrete perception of what a static non-leveled world means. It does not mean "Pokemon Style."

Going back on my previous point, once again what you're suggesting sounds awfully close to how MMOs work. Which is fine, and I sympathize with you if this is what you'd prefer for the game. Personally I feel like the cons of level scaling are massively outweighted by the pros in a TES game - being able to enjoy everything the game has to offer on every character at my own pace and in the order I choose is more important to me than issues with loot and some lackluster late game fights.

But here we're talking preferences.

Could you not utilize the save function and save before you do a big quest line? That way you could do the companion quest line at it's correct difficulty and the dark brotherhood one at it's correct difficulty too

I do think we're just not going to agree because we're looking for different challenges. You are looking for a game you can enjoy in whichever way you see fit, while I want to feel like I'm progressing because of my efforts.

On that note, would it not be an idea to just allow an option to switch level scaling off? Best of both worlds that way

how is keeping the rest locked providing a challenge? essentially you will run into 3 scenarios. impossibly difficult, challenging, and piss poor easy.

so with locked world 1/3 the time you will get a proper challenge, 1/3 the time you will die horribly with no hope, and 1/3 the time you will strolll thru the enemies yawning along the way.

so 1/3 the time you get to have fun.

im not inherently for or against level scaling, i see the pros and cons of both.

but the only way to have a leveled game with static enemise is to make leveling mean very little, so while the level 20 boss is hard as nails at level 1...you can beat him without ai exploits or glitches...and at level 20 hes merely a good fight.

that means 20 levels would make fairly small difference in power.

ior you can go the way i described closer to the top where 1/3 the time you get to have fun.

people say level scaling removes the incentive of leveling, and the point...that depends again on opinion, of what your opinoin on leveling means, and how they scale the enemies.

if your sole thought on leveling is getting more powerful, then skyrim already fails miserably for anyone who specializes in anything aside from combat skills. in truth leveling has had a far greater reason for existing then you becoming more powerful, its you being able to customize your char.

Just htink in a actual fantasy world still largely guided by general principles of reality...just because you get stronger doesnt mean a sword cant cut thru flesh and a arrow cant pierce it as well...(not talking about armor here, but flesh) so in this isntance it would make sense to largely (but not completly) scale the damage of these attacks dependant on the wielder, the weapon, where your gettin ghit (ah location based damage already we advance past skyrims limits it seems) etc.

unless your armor stops teh attack...its going to hurt relatively the same at level 1 and at level 50 in terms of how much % of your health should be damaged.

now say a enemy is good with a blade and gets a "lucky" or "skilled" hit in slipping it between the armor...more damage!


now what woudl realy stop tehse attacks, your skill and your equipment...daedric armor is gonna deflect/lessen these weapons damage on you, your skill (those things you gain while leveling) can allow you to better avoid the damage again.

so if you want to look at it from a more reality based perspective...scaling within reason makes sense...because a bandits a bandit..sure his iron sword may bounce off your daedric armor...but if it slips past....its gonna hurt just as much as if you were level 1.

Called out by whom? You?

As for your points later, once again they'll have a merit once you properly confute these 3 problems:

1. Skyrim has what you suggest, i.e. areas that are only accessible from a certain level onwards

2. if quests are level scaled, you're forced into a path.
Basically what you're advocating is that since scaling could make some of the content easier (are always doable), quests should be level-locked in order to make sure that it's GUARANTEED that some of them become trivial and pointless as you do others. Once again, either you force a STRICT sequence of properly tuned quests, or you're asking the developers to force people to choose between quests (because if for example all the "class" chains - Companions, Academy etc - are accessible at the same level, completing one will level you so much that the rest will be trivial/pointless). You want to completely poison the game with what you dislike.

3. As explained above, the assumption that all there is to leveling and character development is numbers is hilarous. I've detailed in several places how scaling doesn't affect the power of a character in a significant manner, while skills and perks do. Address that, because it invalidates your point.

MW had level scaling, and it did it right, caves were somewhat scaled, but had hard ranges which you could come across too soon, or too late.. Oblivion did it VERY wrong(Scale all the things!), and Skyrim seems to be almost just right(some scaling, but that giant is still going to take your face off until you're a higher level, similar to MW), I would prefer a little less scaling, but whatever. Its a fun game.

The pitfalls to the Oblivion way, is entering a Deadric shrine at level 4. And happily fighting nothing but imps, this is horribly, horribly broken. I should not be able to fight my way to the center of a Deadric shrine, and loot the place dry because the level scaling only spawned imps.

I've noticed that this argument almost always misses the point. The real issue is loot scaling, not enemy scaling. Enemy scaling, when applied correctly is generally a good thing. As long as there are peaks and troughs in the difficulty level that allow you to feel as though you're growing in power.

Where Oblivion got it DEAD wrong was with the levelled loot lists. This was the real immersion wrecker, what with only Elven and Orc loot being available at leve range x - x etc. the enemy scaling was awful too but there is definitely noticeable improvement in Skyrim. Morrowind was again levelled but in a more subtle fashion. It also had the advantage of providing plenty of powerful unique items to find in exciting places/ways.

Allow me to phuck you all with this fact:

In morrowind, which apparently had level-scaling herpaderp (which is not what skyrim svcks at, SKYRIM svckS AT CONTENT SCALING), you could actually just run to the ghost gate and meet all 'dem non-essential people with glass armor.

In oblivion/skyrim, you would run to the ghost gate at level 1, and find a bunch of kings and queens, their legendary champions and notice that they're all wearing fur and leather armor.

I agree that it's not binary, and it depends on the amount involved - though if you're going to deal with guy that speak in absolute, you should perhaps try to talk to the one who drop the "IT MAKES THE GAME LINEAR" at the drop of a hat.

Where I do hold the "absolute" point, though, is that the VERY PRINCIPLE of level scaling is bogus and goes contrary to the VERY PRINCIPLE of leveling, and as such there is no logical reason to have both of them in the same game. Level scaling only reason of existence is as a crutch for easier (lazier ?) design, allowing the designer to handwave a variable amount (depending on the intensity of level scaling) of the consistency of the world and just let the computer autogenerate the "appropriate" content. Immersion being the first casualty, and game mechanisms a second (look at how many tweaks are proposed to the system so that it doesn't break when someone level up in a different way than the "good one").

Morrowind was a bit more extreme yes but it also had level scaling, the mobs themselves didn't level as such, they were simply replaced by stronger versions at certain points, you could still enter a cave near the first town and get your face torn off if you weren't ready. Oblivion had terrible leveling scale, and that seems to have ruined most people's perception of level scaling, the fact of the matter is Skyrim's level scaling is fine, it's MUCH closer to Morrowind's style than Oblivions in more ways than one, but it'll never be exactly how it use to be, that doesn't automatically make it bad, or wrong.

The hell are you talking about?

I prefer the scaled leveling system, even at it's so claimed imperfect form. RPG without out scaled leveling is nothing more than a grind fest IMO, and any battles can be won not because you have good planning and strategy, all you need to do is grind your levels until you are so ridiculously outclass them you can pretty much one shot everything the whole quest. I simply don't see the fun in that.

....and to the guy saying that it doesn't make sense that bandits with elven gear will try to rob you for your sub par gear. FYI, at my level I am still looting apples from barrels and stealing small amount of gold pieces from people. Which makes everything that everyone ever does in this game doesn't make any sense.

Level scaling is a must and I use New Vegas as an example, I didn't find the start of New Vegas gave us the same freedom from the moment we left Doc Mitchell's house as Fallout 3 gave the moment we left Vault 101. For example in New Vegas the main quests wants us to go to Primm . If you don't and go say east you get inundated by a group of Cazadors, impossible to beat at level 1 with only a pistol. If you go South or West you get either Giant Radscorpions or Ghoul Reavers so you are pretty much forced to go North towards Primm. With better level scaling like in FO3 or Skyrim you can go where you like and have a choice how to play.

That choice wouldn't be there if Skyrim wasn't scaled and people would be going mad if at level 1 you came across Draugr Overlords or something similar, mind you I came across a Sabre Cat at level 2 once or twice, so I would say the balance is pretty much spot on

I disagree. No level scaling makes the world much more interesting and it requires thought and some preparation from the gamer.

Yes level scaling is necessary but not at teh extent that Oblivion and Skyrim does. Loot is especially bad to scale and breaks one of the best things about TES..

If there was a ghostgate equivalent in skyrim/oblivion, duuuuh....

Now that I've got your attention!

"level scaling is a necessity in TES" is blatantly wrong.

I.E. YOU are blatantly wrong.

And you're wrong.

You could enter ghostgate in Morrowind, only to find a couple of corpus stalkers, ash slaves and maybe a few lame corpus. Can they be though if you are low level? Of course, but if you return on higher level, suddenly Ash ghouls, ascended Sleepers and a lot of Deadra appear with those corpuses.
SKYRIM HAS THE EXACT SAME THING.

Enter a Dwemer ruin, you'll meet with spiders and spheres everywhere. THEY ARE NOT SCALED, only their number is raised and you'll probably find more spheres on higher level alongside an improved version of them, like a spider with shock spells.
At the end you'll always find one or on higher level, two Centurions, that on lower level just kill you in one hit.

And don't let me start on the named Dragon priests...

And the cohorts of kings and queen won't just wear fur at the beginning, they will always wear fur.