Level scaling - a brilliant feature or a big mistake?

[Special_Can]

What? All I ever saw in Oblivion was regular wolves and Timber Wolves. What super Wolves are you talking about?

I was talking about levelscaling in general and using Oblivion wolves as an example. By "Super Wolves" I was referring to the ridiculous situation of random encounters with the stats to defeat small armies.

You can't both have a gameworld & mechanics depend power-relations, hierarchies and level progression, and have an equalizer system that ensures no power-relations, hierarchies or level progression can matter, without thoroughly breaking the game.

Well, Wolves never go above level 5 and later get replaced by bears and mountain lions. If you are calling these bears and mountain lions "Super Wolves" then I get it, and I'm an idiot. If your not, then I think you are greatly misunderstanding how Oblivion's leveling Scaling system works.

 

[Disconnected]

If your not, then I think you are greatly misunderstanding how Oblivion's leveling Scaling system works.

I won't pretend to remember Oblivion's levelscaling in every detail, but what I meant was indeed:

If you are calling these bears and mountain lions "Super Wolves" then I get it, and I'm an idiot.

- Not that that makes you an idiot, rather, it means I suck at communicating. Anyway, I trust my point is clear now?

 

[King Crispy]

The Rare Items mod for Oblivion almost nullfied the frustration of level scaling in Oblivion for me. Once my equipment's quality surpassed that of any of the common inhabitants of the world, I got that "I am uber" feeling once again when walking around the utterlife dull and lifeless towns. How fun.

Still, as has been pointed out, the concept of level scaling is a solution to an RPG's age-old problem -- how to open up the whole world to the new player. It's just that, unfortunately, Bethesda's implementation of a potentially good idea fell flat on its face.

You know, it's pretty sad how all the changes to this once very creative company have reflected on its products lately. I really miss the old Bethesda.

 

[Nutcracker]

Still, as has been pointed out, the concept of level scaling is a solution to an RPG's age-old problem -- how to open up the whole world to the new player.

How the hell is that an age-old problem? I dont know about you, but i actually find it exhilarating to wander into an area and get my ass handed to me my more powerful creatures/humans. It makes it all the more enjoyable when i can set that aside for a while, train up, and come back and go toe-to-toe with them. Way more satisfying than just being able to pwn everyone from the word go.

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Loot should never be level-scaled. That just ruins half the experience. Creatures shouldn't be level-scaled either, but if you have to do it at least make it so that you *replace the old creatures with another sort* and not just increase the old creatures' hit-points tenfold.

If there's anything I hate in a game it's creatures/NPCs that can take hundreds of hits and still live. I still remember my Arena matches in Oblivion where I had to fire about 100 fireballs in the face of the opponent while simply running backwards. It's not necessarily more challenging, but it's certainly much more tedious and boring.

Is it OK that I pronounce your name "rapist"?

 

[Damned Registrations]

One of the biggest problems in oblibion was the fucked way you gained power with your levels compared to enemies. A perfect example is thus: Make a character with the highest possible starting skill in destruction as a minor skill. Never train any major skills. Congratulations. You can now OHKO anything you'll ever encounter with a basic touch spell of magical death. Nothing at level one will resist or reflect it. Gaining levels simply increases their HP without increasing your mana or damage potential. The reverse, of course, is also true. It's entirely possible to have your character be a complete gimp compared to all the enemeis after a few levels because you wanted to run fast and made athletics a major.

My favourite level scaling is in Nethack. Monsters spawned take their level from an average of your level and the dungeon level. Hanging around and grinding on the first few floors will net you monsters equal to your level, but little loot, since thats not usually found on the monsters. Rushing deeper and deeper without training will net you a nasty death to a monster you can't begin to challenge. However, backtracking to a previous area is still easy: enemies are stronger than before, but your gear and minor level advantage easily trumps them. I really don't need to run into kobolds or cliff racers to know I'm uber. But I do need to occasionally have my ass handed to me by a superior foe I can later destroy. And that foe better not be a level 20 kobold.

 

[Claw]

It's intended as a solution to a problem, after all.

<s>Which problem?</s>

I get it. The problem retards posing as game designers have. Opening up the game world my ass.

This conversation is stuck and really ought to move forward to discussing ways that level scaling could be done more creatively and effectively and without otherwise ruining the game.

More creatively and effectively than what?

I know a game that adds new monster types to the world as the PC levels up and has an ingame rationale for the gameworld becoming increasingly dangerous. Also, dungeons and "bosses" don't scale.

For a more sophisticated RPG with non-combat options, the game could calculate a "threat rating" for both PC and monsters using key stats and scale especially random encounters within certain limits.

 

[Redeye]

anybody not banned should now go over and resurrect the FO3 level scaling thread.

 

[Occasionally Fatal]

lol:
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index ... pic=830338

Everyone please give a round of applause for gatt9's brilliant analysis as well.

 

[afewhours]

Is there anybody who likes grinding?

Er... odd as it may sound, I sometimes get... mesmerised by the grind. I'll wander around mindlessly whacking random monsters for no reason at all. I've played some games where I've lost all sight of what I'm supposed to be doing because I'm just too busy killing things. I can't really explain why.

If a game is just the grind, like in Dungeon Siege, then I get bored, but if the grind is there as an alternative to progressing with the game then sometimes I just pick the grind.

I think level-scaling like Oblivion's is pretty retarded, but I've played a few games where it works. I dug out my Saturn recently and started playing an old SRPG called Mystaria. I have a strange fondness for the game simply because it's the ugliest thing I've ever seen.

Now the game uses level scaling. As you go from battle to battle, the mobs stay the same level as you, guaranteeing the challenge, and it's a tricky game that punishes mistakes quite readily. If you send anyone but your tank into the front line without a protection shield spell, they'll drop dead with two hits. A standard melee fighter might require three.

Now, the game is fairly linear, but you can fag around fighting meaningless battles and doing a meagre handful of sidequests if you really want. What keeps the extra fights from being meaningless are Techniques. As you level up, you get better Techniques that do more damage and cover more ground. The enemies you have to fight may scale in level, but they only have fixed Technique lists, so the extra levels you earn can give you an edge in early battles. Obviously, enemies at the end game get access to everything a maxed out party can, so there's no acing the final battle by just grinding. So, you can put in a bit of extra work to get you through the game, if you're so inclined, without ruining the end.

So level-scaling may have its place, but if Oblivion's anything to go by, it should kept out of the sandbox at least.

 

[Dementia Praecox]

TIMEOUT:

Doesn't mean we can't have a good discussion in here.

...is actually quite uncivilized

If the discussion doesn't get uncivilized at some point, it's a shitty discussion.

You know, the more you repeat something, the less significant it is.

That's what your mother told you when you were nagging for that candy-bar. Real World calls and say bullshit. Politicians aren't repeating the same mantra in the exact same words over and over again to make their -something- less significant.

Carry on.

 

[MetalCraze]

lol:
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index ... pic=830338

Everyone please give a round of applause for gatt9's brilliant analysis as well.

bethforums really need some raid with mass-posting tubgirl and goatse in random threads using proxies.

http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index ... =0&start=0
Turning into Super Mutant.
Would you like to have such possibility? Would you ever try to complete game as one of them? Discuss.

It could be interesting playing the same world but you are a supermutant sent out to stop some Vault Dweller, and find out where the Vault is. You get issued a nice weapon and have a small party so that whenever you capture a "norm" you have them escort them back for 'dipping'.

an interesting question with a retarded bad mutants answer.
also one of the poll options is "No, as playable character." while the other one is "Not at all"

now please explain this retardation to me. it's like - you will turn into a supermutant and according to the 1st question - complete the game as him - but then this -not as playable character- option? really how? wtf?
needs moar tubgirl

also

Sure, why not? I would rain destruction and chaos upon the wastelands once again.

oh gawd

This could be similar to being a vampire in obilvion. It would have benefits, but would change the way you play the game. Like being a vampire meant you couldn't go out in the sun, and had a weakness to fire. In this maybe you could only stay in areas with high radiation or something.

yes apparently no mutie can survive in the normal area

you mean i get skills like "polish skulls" and "make belt of skulls" and loose all my dialog options and not be bothered by pesky cars nuclear blowing behind me, and turn the game into a pure shooter?
w00t, count me in....

a+

I'd love to be a SM if there were real benefits to the change like duel wielding miniguns for double damage or something

I was thinking about something like Shivering Isles. Let`s say that you are another one 101 vault dweller, but less fortunate one. You were captured by SM`s and turned into one. You are prime normal so you are not stupid after mutation, just bigger stronger and ugly. Now you have to deal with your future.

priceless

 

[Herbert West]

I was thinking about something like Shivering Isles. Let`s say that you are another one 101 vault dweller, but less fortunate one. You were captured by SM`s and turned into one. You are prime normal so you are not stupid after mutation, just bigger stronger and ugly. Now you have to deal with your future.

WARNING Strong possibility of EMO Supermutant detected!

 

[RK47]

IMO if they take level scaling too far to the point where i run into dungeons and meet nothing but rats at level one, but when i return there at lvl 15, a bunch of liches are having a birthday party, that's where it gets retarded.

I remember running into a small inn outside of the Imperial city. I went there at level 2 and everyone was wearing leather and chains. They're just sitting there, minding their own business. 15 levels later, I was being chased by a bunch of daedric horde, I decided to run into the inn, lo and behold they're wearing glass and daedric plates and readily kicked the daedra asses that went through the door and resumed their table gazing without much of a concern once the bodies piled on the floor.

 

[Thalkirst]

I remember running into a small inn outside of the Imperial city. I went there at level 2 and everyone was wearing leather and chains. They're just sitting there, minding their own business. 15 levels later, I was being chased by a bunch of daedric horde, I decided to run into the inn, lo and behold they're wearing glass and daedric plates and readily kicked the daedra asses that went through the door and resumed their table gazing without much of a concern once the bodies piled on the floor.

I started the ogre slaves quest on lvl 18. The guards in the mine were all wearing daedric armor... that was the point where I stopped playing the game.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

I think Wizardry 8 did decent level scaling.

 

[Relien]

I think Wizardry 8 did decent level scaling.

Agreed. Probably because the whole reason for level scaling was entirely different there.

There was area-scaling, so in order to enter a particular area you sometimes had to advance a bit. With no level scaling you would have to fight the same type of enemies for the same amount of xp to advance several levels which would be quite a pain considering how the xp requirements progress in w8.

Therefore the partial and local level scaling was there to help you bridge the gap between different level ranges of enemies in different game areas. And you always had a reason to advance.

I heard Oblivion was meant to have this type of scaling too, but from my limited experience with it I would say that it was absolute in most (all?) areas of the game.

And if even the bosses' levels weren't fixed, then, ...well it's been said too many times...

Level scaling is too elementary to be judged without context.

 

[Jormungandr]

It's odd that both Daggerfall and Oblivion have level scaling, yet DF works very well, and OB doesn't. I think the main reason for this is the range of the scaling. For instance in OB if you are level 12 you meet level 12 NPCs and level 10-15 monsters. That's not a lot of variance, so every battle ends up being very much the same, and you see the same damn monsters over and over until you get to level 16 and start seeing the next set.

In Daggerfall, what you meet is leveled, yes, but the variance is wide open. You can meet a vampire ancient at level 2, which will kick your ass 115% of the time. You can also run into a wimpy ass skeletal warrior at level 18. The end result is that there is always content, but you can't just storm into a room knowing that whatever is there is catered to my current power level. Also, there are enemies that are ALWAYS going to be difficult, regardless of your level. I think that helps.


Also, most games just suck at leveling content. Enemies just fight harder, never smarter. They don't start using advanced tactics, just bigger spells and better equipment. It's laziness, is what it is.

 

[Herbert West]

I recall there was a mod for Oblibion, called Action Oblivion [yeah, spot on!]

If I'm not mistaken, it did away with lvl scaling to large degree, meaning no more farmers with full daedric plate when you ding above certain level. Instead it spawned more mobs.
It did made the game more fun I daresay, and far more challenging. Certainly that dungeon with the necromancer king felt like a lair of necromancers, when it had 4x more of them. Considering how actiony Oblivion was, why not go all the way? Alas, combat mechanics still sucked.

 

[Squeek]

It's intended as a solution to a problem, after all.

<s>Which problem?</s>

I get it. The problem retards posing as game designers have. Opening up the game world my ass.

Since I never said anything about opening up the game world, I suppose I could claim you're the one who's retarded (or who just gets a charge out of mentioning his ass). But I don't see the need. I haven't advocated level scaling. I only suggested that there's a conversation there worth having.

Do you really think this is something that only game designers can understand? Maybe I'm just kidding myself, but it doesn't seem like it to me.

So go ahead and flame me, kid.

 

[Lurkar]

Level scaling doesn't HAVE to be the same way it was in Oblivion.

Baldur's Gate 2 had some level scaling, and it actually worked somewhat well. If you crossed a certain threshold, enemies in some areas would be upgraded a notch or two. I remember once I left the Shadow Temple until way late in the game, and when I finally went in I came up to a lich or two. It didn't break the game, but it made the fights more interesting, as opposed to what would've happened otherwise - think the lawnmower scene from Dead Alive

 

[Jormungandr]

So go ahead and flame me, kid.

I will, thank you. Your reading skills suck. Someone responded to your post, so you lash out some lame <s>counter</s>attack without bothering to read the posts between the two.

Exhibit A:

Still, as has been pointed out, the concept of level scaling is a solution to an RPG's age-old problem -- how to open up the whole world to the new player.

Now lets reread that post:

It's intended as a solution to a problem, after all.

<s>Which problem?</s>

I get it. The problem retards posing as game designers have. Opening up the game world my ass.

Who's the retard? You, yes, but Claw is actually referring to game designers who think that level scaling "opens the game world up" and--more importantly--who think that the whole gameworld needs to be open to all new characters in the first place.

 

[denizsi]

Also, most games just suck at leveling content. Enemies just fight harder, never smarter. They don't start using advanced tactics, just bigger spells and better equipment. It's laziness, is what it is.

That would be a nice and refreshing approach.

 

[Warden]

I think it's a bad design decision. I like the surprise effect - you can stumble across very challenging enemies.. or not.
And to know that enemies get stronger as you level up just takes away a lot from the enjoyment of levelling up.

@Lurkar
BG 2 level scaling is very limited - it only happens in a few areas (adding a couple of stronger vampires, that's all). Other standard and unique enemies do not scale in bg2.

 

[Squeek]

Now lets reread that post:

It's intended as a solution to a problem, after all.

<s>Which problem?</s>

I get it. The problem retards posing as game designers have. Opening up the game world my ass.

Who's the retard? You, yes, but Claw is actually referring to game designers who think that level scaling "opens the game world up" and--more importantly--who think that the whole gameworld needs to be open to all new characters in the first place.

Silly me for responding to what Claw actually said instead of what you think he meant. Thanks for setting that straight.