Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Did Bethesda screw up with level scaling or is it necessary?

Crevice tab

Savant
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
224
Yes of course Bethesda screwed up level scaling. After seeing Oblivion how is this even a question?

On the deeper and more interesting discussion on leveling and game design I'll add this: level scaling is only good when used very, very, very sparingly for the purpose of increasing game reactivity. For example you'd get attacked by more of Miraak's assassins if you're at a higher level simply because you're obviously more dangerous. Any and all other cases of level scaling is bad. Using level scaling as a way of compensating for bad area design is doubleplusbad- it makes fights boring, decreases reactivity and C&C, affects immersion and encourages cliff races/dragons, dragons everywhere sort of design. Using level scaling as a more advanced form of HP bloat isn't something that should happen- now if only someone would make Bethesda understand that.

The only thing that can fix bad area design is *gasp* good area design. More specifically this:

There is even better system. Based on lore and make books, documents and rumors useful. If you read about 'Fortress of Doom and Faggots' in some book you rather shouldn't go there on 1 level, but if you want... why anyone should stop you? Gothic 1 and 2 do this right. Some characters will warn you about dangerous places around, but no one stop you if you want go there. Fuck - if you have enough luck (or you are mad enough) you can try go in there, get some high level shit to sell or for later. You can even fight with monsters there becouse if you mastered the fight system you have chance (very little) to kill them. Even if it take around 30 minutes to kill one of them.

Some regions should be safe, others should be hard to get in even at very high levels. Same with dungeons, towns etc. Want to skip through the Main Quest without doing any sidequests (why would you do that in an Elder Scrolls game?)- then turn that bloody difficulty bar down or better still play another game. What's the point of having an open world if everything's the same everywhere and the 95% side content can be easily skipped and has no actual value? Morrowind was on the right track with every NPC and many creatures being at a fixed level though even it had to use retarded level scaled filler monsters in more remote areas for some mysterious reason.
 

Krivol

Magister
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
1,952
Location
Potatoland aka Prussia
In NV there are some low level dungeons (the one near Goodsprings), mid level dungeons (the one with the Ratsleyer inside) and high level dungeons (Deathcalws' cave); you also have a few high-leveled areas (with cazadores and deathclaws) and mid-levels too (I think fire geckos are kinda mid-level, just like ghouls).

And nothing game-brteaking there (even if you get ratsleyer on low level, which is hard, but doable), pretty fun, without silly game scalling (except for Legons', Fiends' and Rnagers' loot). So... yes, Bethesda sucks old, ugly,hairy, onion-tasting balls badly.
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
56,176
Level scaling was needed in Daggerfall because everything in that game was randomly generated, so the scaling was pretty much unavoidable because the content itself was created for you on the spot, there was no pre-established world for you to explore.

But in a game like Oblivion, why bother with level scaling? What i find amusing is that the people that made Daggerfall had enough sense to limit how much a given creature could be scaled, in order to maintain some form of internal consistency. Of course, the algorithm they used for create dungeons was glitchy as shit so occasionally you'd have something like an high level lich roaming around a low level dungeon, but in the main there was no such thing as an epic rat or bullshit of that kind. Only modern Bethesda could be so derpy.
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792

Throwing out the imbalances that come with crazy high level builds aside; from a PvE perspective Dark Souls has a very good character system. This is based on the fact that most people are going to complete the game before SL 80.
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
56,176
Dark Souls is like Doom. Its strength lies in the execution and not the complexity of the system. Everything about the game simply feels "right". The combat, the animations, the level design, everything just fits together perfectly. But the system itself is not particularly profound, which isn't a huge deal because everything else is so good.

In a series like Elder Scrolls, where the system takes a bigger precedence over the more "gamey" aspects, the fact it is stupid and simplistic is an unpardonable crime.
 

Shadenuat

Arcane
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
11,955
Location
Russia
What they did in Oblivion was awful, but I know at least 1 game where level scaling made sense for the world - Space Rangers. As the game progressed so did technology, and all the other Rangers, traders and such upgraded their ships and weapons just as player did to face the threat of being destroyed by superior Klissans.
I don't remember what it was dependant on though, but it did feel like LS and it could screw you up just like LS. For some types or players (like not very well armed traders) was merciless too. Like in Elder Scrolls you could level up something useless (having big cargo hold or whatever, a la "get 10 levels by leveling up Trade skill" in Elder Scrolls) while everyone else just got better guns.
 

turul

Augur
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
149
Plus question is about what happens when the world levels up with you.

Software/technology limitations. The current mass-media "role playing' games, such as Oblivion/Skyrim has to use the same level/ same map for extended gameplay, otherwise the game is pretty much over, when your level 17 character is still killing level 2 rats.
Just happened to me in DA:I . I finished the game without visiting all half of the maps. I checked after the main quest was over, and even though I'm level 22, I'm facing level 11 enemies and receiving level 11-12 items. The game sucks now, even though there are 3 zones or areas I haven't even explored.

There is a better way, than just having dragons instead of crocodiles - sort of leveling. How about increasingly more difficult tasks to compete, that requires higher skill invested in the appropriate perks.
Or how about a level 2 hunter should not be able to go into a dungeon, that needs a level 15 mage skill to unlock
Not a mage? Sorry, out of luck, find a dungeon you can enter, leave this one alone, it's desgined for players with magical skills and most likely the loot will be mage-oriented.
Stuff like that, for example.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
795
IMO the best solution to open-world design is not level-scaling but limited character growth. It should be about gaining flexibility in how you approach the encounters, not hp and dps bloat. The same applies to enemies - different types should require different tactics to kill, not just have higher numbers.

That is a good point. It's really irksome that so much really just boils down to HP vs DPS in many cRPGs. Boring as hell.
You're missing the point this isn't about HP and DPS, it's about accessibility. This is about foes who can kill you easily either being presented to you by surprise or with lots of clues, or foes who cannot kill you easily, period. If foes cannot kill you easily then the whole problem of stumbling on them and being grinded to a pulp without any chance of escape or victory is remedied. This also reduces the problem of content being inaccessible because the entities are too highly skilled versus yourself. It all depends on how much things are scaled to be less than or equal or greater than your own proficiencies. If everything is scaled too high then the old problems will emerge again, since they'll be outside of your range and thus be inaccessible.

Even if HP and DPS weren't important and it was about a more natural strategic and tactical decision making, more difficult enemies would still wipe the floor with your entrails because they have better counter strategies and counter tactics than you can anticipate. It's like a person who's never carried a sword suddenly being faced with a champ swordsman. It's not about HP or DPS, but the newcomer will still be slaughtered mercilessly by the deft hand of the champion.

I think what you really wanted was something like "Oh, but what if I trip the super powerful megaman? Or what if I steal their trinket? Or what if I pull the lever just as they're crossing and they plummet to their death?" Well, what if the super powerful megaman anticipates all of that? Don't you think the super powerful megaman will be two steps ahead? Unless you know something really obscure? And yet I strongly suspect for you to know this obscure trick you must also yourself be a longtime player.

I do agree HP and DPS don't make a game challenging on their own. My personal opinion is it depends on how the game works. In some games there's not much meat, while in others harder hitting enemies force you to think faster which makes you use every piece of meat on the bone. In simplistic games there's no meat to sink your teeth into. You can play these games half asleep. There's just nothing to learn, no new tricks to exploit. This isn't exactly the same thing as being challenged by an intelligent enemy, but it's a challenge in its own right. What's the challenge? The gap betwen you and death is narrower, so the expectations are higher. Yet there's room to leanr new tricks. It's an adrenaline rush and a desire to stay above water level. However, in many of thes games the meat becomes stale and thin the more you play it and any challenge starts to fade after the midway point.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
795
Level scaling is just laziness. Why spend resources fine-tuning your gameworld for a genuinely hand-crafted experience when you can just auto-level everything and forget about it.

Too bad M&MX did so poorly. It was refreshing to have an open-world that wasn't dumbed down. It had been too long since I actually had to avoid difficult areas/encounters and getting my ass kicked felt so good.
I do somewhat agree, since games which pited you into an open world had to put a lot of thought into area design. They didn't want you to step into the game for hte first time, take a casual right turn and be pummelled by a level 100 monster. Like a few have mentiioned here, putting clues into the environment, forced or not, even subtle ones, adds a lot of character to it. It could be argued it requires more work to do hat. However, even level scaled worls must abide by these rules because not every creature you encoutner wil be of equal threat. Ya, nothing will kill you in one hit like a level 100 might have, but they won't all be equal.
 

*-*/\--/\~

Cipher
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
909
Level scaling is an abomination. You have a green goblin you kill in 5 hits, so you train to be more skilled, get better equipment... and start encountering a yellow goblin you kill in 5 hits. What is the damn point of advancing then? Level scaling completely kills any sense of progress and development, which should be a key rpg feature. It's good when you manage to overcome a stronger enemy and get some cool piece of equipment (and a well designed system will not break when the character does so). It's good when you encounter those orcs that bothered you at the start and flatten them with a single spell (Complaining you get shitty exp and loot from those? You barely expended any effort to defeat them, what did you expect?).

It was probably introduced as a result of:

- legion of consoletards demanding "appropriate challenge"
- other shitty design decision like huge stats bloat
- developers being lazy fucks, settling with throwing random stuff at you instead of proper, handcrafted design
- other consoletards complaining that the game has to entertain them for at least 600 hours without becoming "the same"

While it should be just a minor tool to fine-tune the game, like making some scripted/key events more appropriate.
The same goes for excess of level scaled content in any other areas, like items in shops - rummaging through loads of random generated shit to switch your level 22 axe for a level 23 axe feels kind of lame.
 

Luzur

Good Sir
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
41,396
Location
Swedish Empire
Level scaling is just laziness. Why spend resources fine-tuning your gameworld for a genuinely hand-crafted experience when you can just auto-level everything and forget about it.

Too bad M&MX did so poorly. It was refreshing to have an open-world that wasn't dumbed down. It had been too long since I actually had to avoid difficult areas/encounters and getting my ass kicked felt so good.
I do somewhat agree, since games which pited you into an open world had to put a lot of thought into area design. They didn't want you to step into the game for hte first time, take a casual right turn and be pummelled by a level 100 monster. Like a few have mentiioned here, putting clues into the environment, forced or not, even subtle ones, adds a lot of character to it. It could be argued it requires more work to do hat. However, even level scaled worls must abide by these rules because not every creature you encoutner wil be of equal threat. Ya, nothing will kill you in one hit like a level 100 might have, but they won't all be equal.

Now, you kinda need for console players to pick-up on such hints (or even read more then 6 lines of dialogue text/books before screaming "IS THIS SOME DAMN LIBRARY? IF I WANNA READ I GO TAKE A SHIT WITH PLAYBOY MAG GEEZ"), or they will simply walk into that trap, die some +12 times at the same spot then go BAAW on game forum (i know an example of this was posted here a time ago, how some devs looked at how a casual played their game and saw he was derp and changed to easy it for him) about how hard and unfair shit is/map is too big and i cant navigate/other complaint and suddenly game publisher feels his usual cash flow under threat of being cut in half since console players plays their games different then PC gamers.

And yes, MMX went back to the old style with "higher-lvl-then-you-enemy-roadblock" blocking access to new areas/loot, which is more preferable for me (since i grew up used to unfair conditions in games from both console and PC RPG games.) then this level-scaling business.
 

rezaf

Cipher
Joined
Jan 26, 2015
Messages
650
Has anyone played Armalur: The Reckoning?

Back when I played Oblivion, I though Bethesda did a bad job at level scaling, but man is it annoying at times in Armalur.
Especially those Jotur guys, with tons of hitpoints and special attacks you cannot block/escape. Battling them just drags on and on.

I understand why developers implement level scaling, but prefer the approach used (for example) in Gothic. If every enemy you meet in an area has magically the same level like usually the case in scaled games, it's kinda dull, imo.
It was great having to run away from (or outright avoid) some enemies in Gothic, but return to them five or even fifteen hours of gameplay later with a leveled char and good gear, and then beat them up for their lunch money. No such rewards in a scaled game...
:(
_____
rezaf
 

Mastermind

Cognito Elite Material
Patron
Bethestard
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
21,144
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.

Amn Nom

Learned
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
216
Location
Amn
Open world games need a little bit of level scaling, developers usually just get it wrong. Baldur's Gate 2 was filled to the brim with content and they used a couple of different methods. XP was scaled depending on level and iirc some encounters were scaled in difficulty depending on level.

Bethesda takes a very stupid approach to game design. They spend a lot of time designing a world, this is where most of their resources go. You have this massive world that can't possibly be filled with hand crafted encounters that are finely tuned for multiple strategies. Their answer is to simply scale every design and hope it works. If they took the time and did something even a bit more sophisticated, like Nehrim's level range areas, it would be a more manageable experience. But good luck with that when the general audience doesn't seem to give a fuck.
 

Perkel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
15,811
XP was scaled depending on level and iirc some encounters were scaled in difficulty depending on level.

XP didn't scale for level, it had more or less geometric scale of XP which was imo awesome as it required constantly bigger stake missions instead of doing something exactly the same.
 

Commissar Draco

Codexia Comrade Colonel Commissar
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
20,856
Location
Привислинский край
Insert Title Here Strap Yourselves In Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Divinity: Original Sin 2
Has anyone played Armalur: The Reckoning?

Back when I played Oblivion, I though Bethesda did a bad job at level scaling, but man is it annoying at times in Armalur.
Especially those Jotur guys, with tons of hitpoints and special attacks you cannot block/escape. Battling them just drags on and on.

I understand why developers implement level scaling, but prefer the approach used (for example) in Gothic. If every enemy you meet in an area has magically the same level like usually the case in scaled games, it's kinda dull, imo.
It was great having to run away from (or outright avoid) some enemies in Gothic, but return to them five or even fifteen hours of gameplay later with a leveled char and good gear, and then beat them up for their lunch money. No such rewards in a scaled game...
:(
_____
rezaf

Welcome to the generation raised expecting instant gratification and suffering from ''ADHD'' (which is reality kids not disciplined by birch) Comrade. :incloosive:

Amalur although still having fun popamole combat (Still think it was better Hackamole than DAO and Skyrim) has even unique gear LSed to your level. :decline:
 

naossano

Cipher
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,232
Location
Marseilles, France
I also think that LS should only used in a few times, like for assassins and major boss (that would still be several level above you).

But i don't think i ever saw LS well used so far...
 

rezaf

Cipher
Joined
Jan 26, 2015
Messages
650
Amalur although still having fun popamole combat (Still think it was better Hackamole than DAO and Skyrim) has even unique gear LSed to your level. :decline:

True, though I feel combat - while fun in principle - got more than a little annoying due to the constant respawning.
Thinking about it, rampant respawning is probably an even bigger issue for me than level scaling...

As for leveled gear ... I can't remember which Diablolike "invented" it, but I don't get why more games that have stuff like set-items don't use stats (or bonuses) tied to player level. (IF you really must have stuff like scaling at all - like I wrote, I prefered the Gothic approach).


But i don't think i ever saw LS well used so far...

It didn't get in the way too much in FO3/FNV. It helps to have somewhat sensible "scaling ranges". But by and large, agreed.
_____
rezaf
 

ERYFKRAD

Barbarian
Patron
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
28,242
Strap Yourselves In Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
[QUOTE="Commissar Draco", post: 3720168, member: 13227]Amalur although still having fun popamole combat (Still think it was better Hackamole than DAO and Skyrim) has even unique gear LSed to your level. :decline:[/QUOTE]
That happens in vanilla Skyrim also, kamerad.
 

adddeed

Arcane
Possibly Retarded
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
1,473
IMO the best solution to open-world design is not level-scaling but limited character growth. It should be about gaining flexibility in how you approach the encounters, not hp and dps bloat. The same applies to enemies - different types should require different tactics to kill, not just have higher numbers.
Welcome to Gothic/Risen. Great games.
 

buzz

Arcane
Joined
Apr 1, 2012
Messages
4,234
I think too many praise Gothic games for "open world done right". The second game is somewhat better in this regard, but for me Gothic 1 rarely feels "open".

It's essentially an open game turned linear with "natural" barriers or downright obvious ones. Venturing into the dangerous places like caves and woods and forts is just a case of "not playing the game right" rather than a feature of realistic open-worldness.

Basically, there's little to no point venturing outside of the paths determined by whichever chapter you want to play.

Here's the G1 map:

o1Sllj4.jpg


Wow, so many places to explore, right?

Ehh, not so much. This is how the game actually plays:

zhMjBIE.jpg


The game starts with a short walk to the Old Camp. There you find two NPCs who take you to the other camps. Most of the first chapter 1 Quests happens in the areas around the camps, with low-level encounters and giant telegraphed messages telling you to not go into the forest/orc regions. Because there's nothing to do out there other than trying to fight a couple of bigger monsters.

Many of the places required for quests in later chapters are "closed-off". Jammed gates, not many secrets or reasons to venture past the places marked. Most of the ch2/3/4/5 areas only come in place when the main quest (which gets awful linear in chapter 2) demands it. So the game still scales with you because you never really have to fight a minecrawler until chapter 2, an orc until chapter 3 and so on.

Of course, it's still better design than level scaling bullshit. But it's closer to Zelda stuff of "open world" than true open world. Gothic 2 did it better like I said, because it has more secrets, shortcuts and quests spread all over the world instead of contained in simple lines, but even there there's a huge amount of content "gated" by things.

edit: G2 also has more things for you to do which encourage exploration.
 
Last edited:

rezaf

Cipher
Joined
Jan 26, 2015
Messages
650
I think too many praise Gothic games for "open world done right".

I agree with you that it still isn't perfect and that G2 is better than G1 (of which I have only a fairly vague recollection, it's been some years), but the games DO deserve some praise for even trying to do a reasonably good job.

There is quite a bit of "gating", sure, but on the other hand, this probably is not too bad an idea - some players need to be protected from themselves, so to speak. It's one thing to have an out-of-place monster in a hard to reach spot, but something else to allow a player access to an entire map where everything can one-shot him. It wouldn't be so bad to me personally - as long as there's a autosave before you enter the area and/or some realistic means to escape the carnage, but I can see how it'd put off some players.
So Gothic compromises, and it does it fairly well, imo. G2 is better still, but then it goes downhill again with NotR and G3.

Ddidn't all open world games ever use some means to prevent players from getting to some places? I guess you could go pretty much anywhere in some of the really old classics, like the GoldBox or Ultima games, for example ... but in more recent times?
_____
rezaf
 

ERYFKRAD

Barbarian
Patron
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
28,242
Strap Yourselves In Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
You could beat them trolls in G2 if you were skilled enough.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom