I prefer Skyrims level scaling over both Morrowind and Oblivion.

Don't see how Radiant story could possibly work if there was not level scaling.

Dragons could not possibly work if there was not level scaling.

I still see progression, I can 1 hit a lot of animals and things now. Also my skills/spells/abilities and in-game know how progress so enemies the same level as me get easier as I level up.

At level 24 I have rolled through a few dungeons/forts facing mostly weak enemies. And I've also had a couple of dungeons that seriously kicked my [censored] and I really had to plan out and strategise and reload a tonne to complete. If I find a dungeon that is obviously too higher level for me, I feel compelled to complete it anyway.

But most dungeons are fun and challenging with a mixture of mobs 10 levels above or below me. Some dungeons have fewer monsters that are higher level, some have lower level monsters but much more of them, most have a mixture.

I think Skyrim has a fantastic system, vast improvement over Morrowind which had too little level scaling resulting in a very dull game after awhile and Oblivion that had a little too much level scaling.

Also Skyrim is the most immersive game I have ever played. I don't consider classic "RPG" dungeon and dragons mechanics to really have anything to do with immersion or RP.

And then he goes back to town only to get his ass kicked by an old woman who's become a superhuman over night

Linear because you have hard time killing everything close to the starting point? Come on now.

But this statement can't be applied to Skyrim or TES games. Once again, level scaling is a merely numeric value, that is put in place in order to keep enemies' health and damage attuned to the player's.

However, there's a MASSIVE difference between a character who hits for 10 damage with his firebolt fighting enemies with 50 hp, and a character with perked stealth, enchanted gear, a selection of not-offensive spells to aid him, self-created potions, magical extraction tools, shouts and so on tackling 500 hp mobs while shooting for 100 damage.

The numeric aspect is absolutely minor. My reference to nonscaling PnP RPG systems was meant to exemplify how other media have successfully introduced static health and damage into Roleplaying Games before.

And keeping the enemies' health and damage attuned to the character (you accidentally typed "player" there and it is vital that the two are referred to as the completely separate entities that they are) is not an RPG element. In fact, by keeping a similar level of difficulty at all character levels, you remove the point of improving combat skills. When the enemies always have a relative amount of health and a relative amount of damage, you may as well be playing Halo or CoD because your stats can only hurt you and never really help you (if you level correctly, difficulty will remain neutral. If you level incorrectly, however, your enemies will actually outpace you making the game more difficult).

I think the discussion could be steered in a more productive direction if we considered the value of an hybrid system. For example, I feel like Skyrim's level scaling system suits the TES formula very well, but the game wouldn't be hurt by the introduction of not-scaled, "instanced" (ie dungeons) areas that are particularly challenging at their relative level but offer unique, nonscaling rewards.

Example: the game works exactly as it does now.

You know that there's a dungeon that becomes "possible" around level 15, whose content is fixed (not scaled, not randomized) and that rewards you with gear that is consistently amazing for 10 levels or so. Better stats than normally obtainable stuff, etc.
You're incentivated to take that dungeon at an appropriate level, if the devs balance things out by making sure it's a solid challenge if taken at a level when the rewards are worth it.

You could have 10 or so similar "instances" spread through the levels, and go from there as an experiment. See how people like them, how they interact with progression and freedom, and see if the series needs more "rails" and less scripted loot/enemies.

Saying that scaling is "necessity" or "must" is an just silliness.
It's like saying that unless you can successfully do everything in any level, then the game is linear and not free.
That's simply untrue.
The real world is not scaled according to me, yet it's perfectly nonlinear free sandbox.
I can do anything I want in real world, but it doesn't mean I can beat Brock Lesnar in wrestling match if I feel like it.

Scaling simply turns "freedom to pursue" into "freedom to succeed".
That might sound fun, but it has its setbacks. Lack of challenge, progression and realism to name a few.


:edit: typos

Can you please explain to me how Radiant Story is supposed to work without level scaling?

The problem with the hybrid system as I see it is that the player cannot know if a dungeon is scaled or not. This can only lead to immersion being broken. I've had some bandits scale and others not. They all look the same so I have no idea if I can kill them without actually hitting them. For a stealth based character this is incredibly annoying. I can one hit most bandits with a sneak attack but certain random and non named bandits just turn around an split me in two. This is the opposite of fun

So I wanna go to Riften, the city that's pretty secluded, to join the thieves guild.

Oh what gives, the Fall forest is full of really strong enemies.
No admittance, until you're level 10, noob!


FREEDOM!

It feels like you completely dismissed my point and simply reiterated the post I was responding too, so once again:

- there's much more about a character's power in a roleplaying game than numbers. If character A is level 1 and deals 10% of the average level 1 monster's HP with a sword swing, and character be is level 40, and deals 10% of the average level 40 monster's HP with a sword swing, except he swings at 130% damage thanks to perks, with extra damage due to his enchanted blade, is capable of stealthing behind his opponent and deal 6x sneak attack damage, while being able to power attack thrice as often as the level 1 character, for more damage, and block for proportionally thrice as much while slowing time during enemy's power attacks and having an arsenal of different moves at his disposal, the two characters aren't as powerful relative to their enemies.
There can be level progression even if the numeric aspect of damage and health is scaled.

- once again, this is proved by PnP RPG systems where hp don't increase with level and a sword swing does the same damage in the hands of a peasant as it does in the hands of a demigod, and yet an high level character is massively more powerful than a novice.

Well playing skyrim on adept ( which is the default difficulty setting, which the majority of people play on ) I didn't have much trouble exploring and getting killed by things in say 1 hit..the only times that happened to me was when a strigger ( or whatever they are called, those tree things ) ambushed me out of a woods, and another time when i picked a fight with a giant, some things I had to run away from but I went back and killed them later which gave me a sense of accomplishment.. It also gives me a sense that I have to get stronger and stronger and keep leveling up because tough enemies lie ahead of me.

so if your exploring and constantly getting killed then your not very good at the game, and your also rushing around the map into all the dungeons way too fast..if you explore the dungeons near whiterun you should level up at just the right speed so that you can explore into dungeons further away and not get killed with ease.

I'm playing a pure fire destruction mage without having used sneak, alchemy, smithing or enchanting in combat once. I'm only wearing bought gear+dragon mask.

I haven't backed out of a fight in 26 levels and 50+ hours of gameplay

I haven't died since testing how much damage a giant does when I was level 5

I'm playing on master


Now, let's clear things up: the game has not given me a challenge in 50 hours, and it has given me useful loot once in that playtime. Why is it that wherever I go in the vast lands of Skyrim I can't find either difficult enemies to keep me on edge or loot to keep me enthused?

If the game was scaled then there would be a ton of loot out there to keep me enthused, and a ton of enemies out there to keep me on edge. The lack of this, the game adjusting to your strength babying you through the whole experience, THAT is linearity.

There are reasons why many have logged multiple 100 hours into vanilla Morrowind. I can assure you that it is not linear in the slightest. I am one of those people. The reason I haven't done the same with Oblivion is because it babies you through a linear path, and no matter which path you chose in the game, it will feel similar on the next play through when trying to chose a different path.

And then when you reach level ten it'll feel like an accomplishment maybe?

Or you could just take a nice safe carriage ride from Windhelm. Problem solved

Edit:

And obviously you wouldn't go plonking strong enemies randomly across the map so you block off important areas. if that happens then the game design team are lined up along a wall blindfolded

I'm the president of the United states and i agree with OP's post.

From what i have seen in skyrim so far quests are sending me from one side of skyrim to the other to complete them. Without any level scaling most quests would have to be more local to the area that you get them.
Has anyone come across a worthy fight around the starting area (Riverwood to Helgen) later in the game?

There is ton of complete misinformation in this thread. For one, bandits do not get crazy items like they did in Oblivion. I've killed hundreds and even at level 36 they wear nothing but fur while a bandit leader may have steel. A few of the bandit keeps have scripted bosses that will have better weapons and armor but they are few and far between and they destroy you at low levels. Your standard bandits, like most everything in the game, are restricted to a level range.

Secondly, there are tons of monsters in the early game that will one hit a low level character and are not scaled to you and there are many dungeons where you will be annihilated at low levels. Not every area or dungeon scales to you.

Lastly, yes, New Vegas railroaded you down a certain path. You had to go south, then across to Novak then on to NV. Hell, it even had invisible walls. The only way around this was to spend 3-4 levels on Sneak and try to get past the Deathclaws to the north. Is that what people want out of Skyrim?

Why should be immersion breaker? on the contrary, you don't know who/what you'r goin to face, and that gives (to me at least) immersion
What breaks immersion for me is if i already know that wherever i go, whoever i try to backstab i'm "ready for it", imo mixing some scaled content with some non-scaled one could be a perfect solution, i have no idea if it's doable as i'm just a player and not a game designer/etc

Skyrim scaling is similar/same as Fallout New Vegas where zones/areas have a min/max enemy level system. I love this system but in New Vegas I hated everything else, the story, quests, level layouts, gear etc(Fallout 3 had a more fuller level scaling experience but everything else was waaay better then New Vegas)

I'm no expert, but I don't like the fact that I'm basically no stronger at lvl 25 than I was at lvl 10. just saying.

I've completely stopped playing my first playthrough because most dungeons have become almost impossible to complete because of how I level my character. (did alot of non combat along with combat, nothing is above 60.)

I really don't see what the big deal is. Bethesda are trying something new, and it's cool.

TES fans are divided into two camps, those that like new stuff, and those that just want Daggerfall/Morrowind remade over and over again.

I like the ability to have the game-world change between level-ups.

In Morrowind, the light level-scaling and lack of Radiant-style quests made me play the exact same way the first three hours of each playthrough.

In Skyrim, I don't. I can play differently each time because the world re-defines itself according to your character.

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?

You're conclusion is wrong, deal with it.

I'm neither dismissing your position, nor am I necessarily disagreeing with what you have said. I'm merely pointing out that all scaling, even when implemented well, is not an RPG element but rather an Action/Adventure element that is used to keep the character in balance with the world in order to maintain a somewhat even level of difficulty. RPGs are about overcoming difficulty through character improvement, Action/Adventure games are about surviving difficulty through player interaction.

Are you really this ignorant? This is not what a static world is like and you are showing yourself to be incredibly ignorant when entering a discussion berating the other side without even understanding what their position entails. The game would force you to be on the look out for strong enemies when traveling to Riften and to avoid them, that is what a static world would to your quest of getting to Riften. This adds to the immersion, to the depth of the world and to the depth of the game.

I have yet to see one argument against a static/close to static world made by someone who did not disclose in an obvious manner that they have no idea what a static world would entail. People are creating strawmen of what a static world is, then ripping them down. If that makes you feel better, then continue, but don't expect that your opinions will ever have an effect on someone who knows you're full of [censored].