Let's clear this up: level scaling is a necessity in TES : V - Skyrim

» Fri May 18, 2012 9:51 pm

And you're wrong.

Uh, no... YOU are wrong. Remember the Towers of Dawn and Dusk?

NOTE: I said GATE, not ghostFENCE.

» Sat May 19, 2012 12:05 am

Didn't morrowind not have level scaling? I can't remember so maybe I'm wrong, but I still went wherever i wanted at the start of new games.

It had, but it was not designed to go above level 20 or so. Like Skyrim they simply gave stronger versions of the enemies(bandit thug instead of bandit for example), but aot of the caves had names NPCs with a set level.

» Sat May 19, 2012 10:15 am

I've read time and time again that Skyrim's level scaling is limited. Some of it better implemented (ie:Giants,wolves, rabbits

) than others (ie:Dragons,Loot) and does still need refining.
I do like the idea of shops being more or less likely to have high/low level equipment chance depending on location.

Is it really so bad where the world evolves with you?

» Sat May 19, 2012 12:30 am

I can see both sidea of the argument being viable.

One on side you have what we have now, which really doesnt bother me too much.

On the other, if done right, you'd have no level scaling, more powerful creatures in different parts of the world where it would likely have better loot, harder dungeons...many old school RPGs are like this. I have no problem with it, again, if done correctly. But it's a bit too late now for Skyrim, no?

The issue is how it affects freedom versus how it affects difficulty.

A typical MMO such as WoW doesn't have level scaling. You walk into a level 40 zone at level 10 and you are going to be dead, quickly. And this forces you into relatively narrow sets of choices for leveling up your toon. The same goes for the end game, where gear rather than level enables you to complete content.

Skyrim on the other hand is designed to give you almost complete freedom in the quests you take and the path you choose. That is the joy of these games. At the moment I am still only a couple of quests into the main questline, and only just joined the imperial guard. And I am level 25. I WoW it would be as if I were running a level 10 questline at level 85. Where as in skyrim it is as if I am running a level 25 quest at level 25.

The problem with level scaling is in the freedom. Rather than some dungeons being impossible to complete and having to come back with better gear or stats (or friends in an MMO) you know that if you hit most dungeons at level 1 they will be as hard as if you hit it at level 50. The names of the creatures just change. This can feel like there is no real challenge because you know that whatever level you are the dungeon will scale for you.

IMHO WoW works well in how it is designed without level scaling. But so does Skyrim. Rather than wishing WoW was more like skyrim, or vice versa I am happy with seeing them as two different games, with different challenges. In WoW the challenge is to get the gear and skill to see and do as many things as possible. In Skyrim the challenge is slightly different, sure, there are challenges with mob difficulty, but the point of the game is the freedom. After all combat is pretty much "hit 1 button over and over", the complexity is most certainly not in the difficulty of combat. The complexity is in the freedom to do whatever you want. And for that to work you have to have level scaling.

» Sat May 19, 2012 9:55 am

Called out by whom? You?

Selective reading much ?
Let's see...

This guy :

Nope, sorry. Except if linear means x% paths on a tree are locked. (tree being progression and exploring).

Yes, me, and you've ignored the points made here :

That's not a good point, that's caricature and fallacy. It's not because the entirety of a game is not doable from the get-go that a game is linear.

Again, you're using stawmen and caricatures, which is the reason why I'm extremely irritated at such kind of argumentation and used strong words to describe it.
It's not because there is (logical) harder places in which you stand no chance to success, that the game is "linear" with "only one path". Stop overusing this word and stop using reductio ad absurdum.

Also this guy :

Why would we be forced into linear progression without level scaling? You never gave a reason, probably because there isn't a good reason. Why can't dungeon X next to Riverwood spawn high level mobs and dungeon Y next to Riverwood spawn low level mobs?

Oh, and this one :

And the argument that such changes would make the game too linear is [censored]. There has to be some linearity, otherwise the game completely fails as an RPG. Just because you can't beat everything at every level doesn't stop you from going where you want in the gameworld. It just means you have to think more and be a lot more careful.

Do I need to continue ?

I thought so. Let's then go with the rest :

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

So does that mean Skyrim is linear then ? Or do you recognize that the existence of limitations don't imply linearity ?

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.

This is exactly the kind of abuse of "linearity" that you've called out on. "requirements" don't imply "linearity". Yes, some quests should be danger-free (someone asking you to find his puppy in the city), some should be extremely dangerous (getting back an artefact from Daedra Lords), and they should not adapt to your level (how logical it is that a bear is stronger than a dragon ?). I don't see the problem here.

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.

You're the one claiming that I assume that all there is to leveling and character development is numbers, I've never hold this position, especially considering that my main point is about immersion and concepts, not numbers. You sure show a tremendous hypocrisy by putting words in my mouth and then gloating how I did not answer things you made up yourself...

» Fri May 18, 2012 10:37 pm

I give up! Every thread on this Forum ends up with bickering, can't there be a grown up debate on here without it ending up with childish "You're wrong, no you're wrong"

You all make politicians seem like advlts

I like it the way it is, that doesn't mean I am wrong , it also doesn't mean I am right, it simply means I like it the way it is. I liked the levelling in FO3 and didn't like no or little levelling in New Vegas. In Fallout 3 I wouldn't have liked to meet Overlords at level 1, I liked the fact that they came into the game at a point where I had a chance.

Again, that doesn't mean I am right or wrong, it's just what I like!

» Sat May 19, 2012 3:03 am

Level scaling is ok if done right. When used as a blanket catch-all substitution for good design it's horrible.

» Fri May 18, 2012 11:28 pm

Morrowind had enemy leve scaling. I don't see why people seem to forget or deny that.

» Sat May 19, 2012 10:28 am

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

actually it requires less. its very simple.

too easy...meh loot fest

too hard...go grind a bit...combe back...meh loot fest

how is that more interesting then allowing for a challenge at all times?

» Sat May 19, 2012 3:59 am

Level-scaling is awful and should be removed from the series almost entirely.

What Bethesda should do is:

Make the quality of items being sold in shops static. So one shop might permanently sell iron/steel weapons regardless of how much my level increases, while another shop in classier area might sell high-tier, expensive items right from the moment I start out in the gameworld. You might say "what's stopping someone from typing in a money cheat so they can afford the expensive items right away?" THAT'S THEIR CHOICE. The gameworld's uniqueness and believability shouldn't be undermined just because some idiots choose to find quick ways to become all-powerful early on. Just make the good items expensive, stick a master lock on the door at night, and if players still decide to try and get the items early, that's their loss.

Give every creature / NPC in the game a fixed level right from the start. Yes, this means you aren't going to be able to beat every enemy you bump into - and early on in the game it'll probably mean being very cautious and using evasive tactics a lot of the time... but this will make the gameworld so much more exciting, and progression so much more rewarding.

Don't scale loot to the player's level at all. Just stick high level loot in a dungeon with high level enemies, and if a fairly low-level player somehow manages to fight their way through without having to turn back, then they deserve the reward.

Don't scale quest rewards either. The rewards should simply be relative to the difficulty of the quest. If someone tries to rush through a questline at level 8, they should fall flat on their [censored] once they attempt the harder quests.

Awesome post. Beth should take note.

» Sat May 19, 2012 9:33 am

Remove scaling but introduce randomization. It solves everyone's problems, but I don't see anyone mentioning it http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1283904-lets-clear-this-up-level-scaling-is-a-necessity-in-tes/page__view__findpost__p__19383606. What's going on here?

» Sat May 19, 2012 12:39 am

Remove scaling but introduce randomization. It solves everyone's problems, but I don't see anyone mentioning it http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1283904-lets-clear-this-up-level-scaling-is-a-necessity-in-tes/page__view__findpost__p__19383606. What's going on here?

Heh, yeah like my various attempts at explaining gameplay:

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?

I think we should start a separate thread where the proponents & opponents don't exclusively address each other

» Sat May 19, 2012 12:01 am

Remove scaling but introduce randomization. It solves everyone's problems, but I don't see anyone mentioning it http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1283904-lets-clear-this-up-level-scaling-is-a-necessity-in-tes/page__view__findpost__p__19383606. What's going on here?

Randomization would probably still involve some kind of scaling, though. Otherwise, you would just get a chorus of complaints - "I went through this really hard dungeon and all I got was an iron dagger! This game is broken!". Or "I went through this really easy dungeon and got a majorly overpowered sword at the end, and now the game is easy!"

Same for random enemies. So while there's a place for randomisation, it still has a degree of scaling just to work.

» Fri May 18, 2012 11:40 pm

No, I'm talking "progression" and "immersion", you answer "difficulty slider".

Yes they are about exploration, no it doesn't make level scaling a necessity, it makes it a liability.

You're mixing "level scaling" with "tuning". A game can be extremely challenging with fixed levels, and extremely easy with level scaling. Don't mix totally different concepts.

Talk about throw your toys out of the pram. All I'm hearing is 'waaa waaa this game won't let me win mummy', 'It's ok dear just let mommy go tell teacher and make all those naughty monsters play fair'.

You mean other games have a difficulty curve? You think? Maybe that's what makes them better then...

And how does training yourself up amount to cheating?

Jesus Christ don't any of you level scaling [censored] go play Dark Souls, you'll all be swinging from your bedposts within 48 hours. If you're not good enough to beat a challenge then go away and get better until you are. If you don't fancy that there's always Spyro the Dragon

Pick one.

A ) Level scaling is bad because I can't become a god.

B ) Level scaling is bad because it doesn't have a minimum level.

You really don't seem to care about the difficulty of the game or your options at a high level, you just want Daedric shrines to be level 81. B is already in the game. If it's not enough, go make a mod and fix it yourself. In an ideal world level scaling would keep hard things hard and stop the world from falling behind you and becoming worthless content. I don't have much play time at higher levels but it doesn't sound like either you 2 do either.

/e

Your only suggestions to getting around your non scaling content becoming irrelevant hasn't been anything but backpedalling on the issue that scaling is needed in some form.

» Fri May 18, 2012 7:43 pm

Remove scaling but introduce randomization. It solves everyone's problems, but I don't see anyone mentioning it http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1283904-lets-clear-this-up-level-scaling-is-a-necessity-in-tes/page__view__findpost__p__19383606. What's going on here?

That's even worse.

So for one player is glad because he can enter the first city he founds, but the next one is not beacuase a giant bear is in the way, barring the path...

This only leads to save-scumming.

» Fri May 18, 2012 10:49 pm

Randomization would probably still involve some kind of scaling, though. Otherwise, you would just get a chorus of complaints - "I went through this really hard dungeon and all I got was an iron dagger! This game is broken!". Or "I went through this really easy dungeon and got a majorly overpowered sword at the end, and now the game is easy!"

Same for random enemies. So while there's a place for randomisation, it still has a degree of scaling just to work.

I have to presume that a system that rendomises a difficult enemy would also use the same scale for the loot. One randomisation seed per randomisation area, and all stuff within that area is the same level(ish)?

» Sat May 19, 2012 1:47 am

So the problem becomes with level scaling you frequently remove a lot of reason behind a lot of those advances, health, if it is 3 hits or 3 hits all you did by putting points in it is keep up with the level scaling.

Not picking on you in particular. I just wanted to address the people who say that with level scaling there's no point of leveling.

Actually there a point for leveling but it's not the usual reason it is in most RPGs. In Skyrim, each time you level you get a chance to customize your character. At level one all the characters are the same except for race. As we level we choose to concentrate on some abilities and not on others, makeing us more spcialized for the playstyle each of us prefers.

For example, I like to play an in your face melee warrior type with a big bad 2-hander. Preferably a greatsword. Wearing heavy armor. However, at level 1 I'm no better with a sword then I would be with spells. As I level and use 2-handers and accumulate heavy armor I get better and better at those things while other things I don't enjoy fall by the wayside. I choose perks first in the 2-hander tree and then specifically in greatswords.

After awhile I'm getting pretty freaking specialized. The things I really love to do --- gut enemies with a massive greatsword -- I get to be pretty good at. In fact nowadays I can often decapitate them which is a bit gross but really cool. Meanwhile, the things I don't care about -- such finger twiddling spell casting (except a little healing) -- I'm pretty bad at.

So I've gradually customized my character for just the kind of gameplay I really enjoy. As are we all.

And that's what leveling is for in the TES series.

» Fri May 18, 2012 7:30 pm

IMHO , only the main quest should be level scaled , so that anyone can finish it when he wants whether it is a 12 years old kid or a working man with children and far less time to invest in skyrim , however i fully agree with sheogorath's great post , getting rid of loot scaling and much of the level scaling would make this game far more immersive and rewarding

» Sat May 19, 2012 10:38 am

Randomization would probably still involve some kind of scaling, though. Otherwise, you would just get a chorus of complaints - "I went through this really hard dungeon and all I got was an iron dagger! This game is broken!". Or "I went through this really easy dungeon and got a majorly overpowered sword at the end, and now the game is easy!"

Same for random enemies. So while there's a place for randomisation, it still has a degree of scaling just to work.

Well a difficult quest should have a valuable reward, clearly yes. Risk and Reward should always scale to each other. But by randomization I meant that you never know which quest or dungeon would be a challenge, and which would be a breeze.

At the start of the game, or even as the game progresses, Radiant Questing could easily generate random difficulties for any given dungeon or quest that you start. So you could walk into Cave of Horror today and find it to be a simple, level 1 bunch of rats and wolves.

The next character you create, however, would find that same cave to be horrifyingly difficult. "Static" doesn't necessarily actually mean static, as in always-the-same. It just means non-levelled. It just means that the game doesn't adjust to your level.

» Sat May 19, 2012 2:59 am

I give up! Every thread on this Forum ends up with bickering, can't there be a grown up debate on here without it ending up with childish "You're wrong, no you're wrong"

You all make politicians seem like advlts

I like it the way it is, that doesn't mean I am wrong , it also doesn't mean I am right, it simply means I like it the way it is. I liked the levelling in FO3 and didn't like no or little levelling in New Vegas. In Fallout 3 I wouldn't have liked to meet Overlords at level 1, I liked the fact that they came into the game at a point where I had a chance.

Again, that doesn't mean I am right or wrong, it's just what I like!

Well I made a mention that I think this is an impossible topic to argue about as it falls down to personal preferences. Check post 63 back at page 4.

It's kinda like Pepsi VS Coca Cola argument, neither isn't really "better" they are just different and people like different qualities.

What X + Y equals to can be argued about depending on what X and Y represent, but if the letter X looks better than the letter Y and likewise is impossible to argue about, same goes for if it's better to have level-scaling or impossible to beat areas for low levels.

» Sat May 19, 2012 8:01 am

That's even worse.

So for one player is glad because he can enter the first city he founds, but the next one is not beacuase a giant bear is in the way, barring the path...

This only leads to save-scumming.

That particular argument doesn't wash, Guards will surely chase the bear off, and any bear not close enough to worry the guards can be circumvented. You don't absolutely HAVE to fight every thing that you see, you use your cunning to solve the problem. That's the game

» Sat May 19, 2012 7:48 am

how about since you can buy potions that help you lock pick better or pick pocket rater, and smith better and enchant...

they supply more health potions!!!!

there is a war going on and dragons on the loose!!!

LEVEL SCALING RATIONALITY IS IRRELEVANT... the people cant even reallize what they need to apply more towards on a rational level.

A thank you

» Sat May 19, 2012 10:21 am

I think removing it completely would be a mistake, heavily/lightly tweaking it wouldn't be. As far loot-scaling, loot lists, leveled items, merchant lists, etc, I feel those should be static, I'm also patiently waiting for an Armory type mod, that hand places new and unique armor sets/weapons into the world.

What would be the point in having mobs past say 60ish, by that time your skills/perks for that particular character should be maxed, you don't grow anymore powerful, you just level up skills you've neglected to level past 50.

» Sat May 19, 2012 4:17 am

We have two arguments, one is in favor of scaling things through more powerful areas and monsters, one is in favor of scaling the areas and monsters with you so that you can rather go anywhere you like.

Is there anyone in this thread who would argue that Morrowind does not encourage you to play it in this order: Vanilla game - Tribunal - Bloodmoon ?

And is there anyone who can say it wasn't possible to do the Shivering Isles expansion of Oblivion on level 1 ?

Now it's just a matter of which one you prefer, are you the sort that would have liked it if Bloodmoon scaled with you so that you could start on Bloodmoon at level 1, and then perhaps do the vanilla content and finish with Tribunal. Or are you the sort who feels the Shivering Isles was cheapened by the fact that you could go and do it at level 1 ?

I myself must admit I fall into the group of people who prefer it the Morrowind way, where the game basically tells you "Nope, you are not allowed to go do Bloodmoon right now, you are too low level for Solstheim, come back when you're stronger." But I can see it from the point of view of those who would rather have more freedom and would prefer to for example start with Bloodmoon and still get challenged in the original vanilla content as a high level character due to level scaling.

I don't think we can discuss this as a topic of facts because as I see it, this argument is about personal preferences.

I like the above post and am quoting to bring it to the current page.

Also: A lot of misinformation in this thread. Level scaling in Skyrim works much like in Morrowind, but improved (and yes, it is an improvement). Every dungeon type has a base "range" of possible levels. Bandits encampments, for instance, are 1-20 in most cases. That means they top out at 20. Unlike Oblivion they have very specific bandit equipment lists, and a piece or two of Elven/Dwarven gear (usually weapons) is the highest rung of equipment you'll see on them.

Dwarven ruins and Falmer caves have high teens minimum levels in most cases. That means if you go to one at level 8, you'll basically always get trounced. There are dungeons and places with minimum levels around 30, and maximums up to around 60 (though most have much lower maximums). Giants are always in the low 30's. Wolves are always around level 8. Trolls are minimum level 25-ish, and tough for that unless you're setting them on fire.

What this causes is a clear "sense" of progress and strength growth as you level through the game. In addition to designing a character according to our desires, which is one of the most interesting and important parts of leveling in my eyes, you will find many insurmountable challenges at very low levels (if you walk off the beaten path). As you grow in level, you'll find more and more trivial content, but there will always be non-trivial content for you to find as well.

A lot of people in this thread are arguing basically about Oblivion's level scaling. Skyrim's is very different, and in my humble opinion it's done about as well as a game that has level scaling can be done.

To the people complaining about level-scaling being "immersion breaking"... your immersion sense is uptight. This game is done very well, and if you're not forewarned and hyper-aware of level scaling, you can go through the game without noticing it, it's really not slapping you in the face like it was in vanilla Oblivion. The only thing I'll generally agree on is dragons. It would have been better if they pushed back dragon fighting in the main quest, or made the first plot-centric dragon fight a scripted loss that you narrowly escape, or win by luck or with significant aid.

However, Bethesda is never going to make a completely unscaled game, and for good reason, even if you really wish they would. With a base game that's open world, completely fixed levels for every creature in the game would be highly frustrating for most players. Those of you who think it would be better that way are a vocal minority. It would also, in the end, really frustrate a lot of hardcoe gamers who play to very high levels and would then find a dearth of appropriate content.

» Fri May 18, 2012 8:34 pm

Well a difficult quest should have a valuable reward, clearly yes. Risk and Reward should always scale to each other. But by randomization I meant that you never know which quest or dungeon would be a challenge, and which would be a breeze.

At the start of the game, or even as the game progresses, Radiant Questing could easily generate random difficulties for any given dungeon or quest that you start. So you could walk into Cave of Horror today and find it to be a simple, level 1 bunch of rats and wolves.

The next character you create, however, would find that same cave to be horrifyingly difficult. "Static" doesn't necessarily actually mean static, as in always-the-same. It just means non-levelled. It just means that the game doesn't adjust to your level.

Thing is, it can end up really bad.

The randomization could make the entire starting area too difficult, so you are forced to go somewhere else, hoping there would be a low level area... somwhere... if you can actually leave.

Reminds me how Daggerfall's broken randomization and level scaling put an Ancient Vampire in one random main quest dungeon, near the target where I'm supposed to be going. I couldn't beat it head on, I couldn't sneak past it, no spell worked on him and I couldn't even make him kill himself with his own spells...I was stuck.
But then I reloaded, gotten another dungeon, free of vampires, and it was fine....