Leveled loot and monsters

[Keldryn]

Bah. I bet you just didn't like the fact Gothic was RT and player skill was a genuine factor. Unlike Morrowind, you had to gain sufficient strength/dexterity to use specific weapons - you couldn't just use anything you got your hands on. So you had to train - which involved real decisions (unlike MW once again), as exp points were limited.

It was a real-time system, but one with balls. At least they made player skill relevant in a way that made combat very enjoyable if you like RT. Timing really mattered. Combat was fluid and felt realistic. No stand and click-fucky-click in Gothic, oh no. Morrowind might as well have been turn-based since its attempt at real time immershun was such a total failure.

@Lumpy - I hear what you're saying about implementation, I just don't see why levelled lists are neccessary at all, if enough effort is made with design and placement.

I have to agree with you about Morrowind's combat system there. It felt really pointless being in real-time, as I never felt that I doing much more than selecting the "Attack" action from the menu in FF X-2 (or similar game).

I don't like Gothic's combat system either though. Or I should say, I hate its control scheme. I like its combat system on paper, but the keyboard setup is rather clunky and non-intuitive. I always wished that Gothic would have been ported to the Xbox, using a control scheme similar to Fable or Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker. I've tried using gamepad emulation software with a PS2 gamepad plugged in via a USB adapter, but it's still clunky as hell.

As for relative difficulty levels, which is after all the topic of this thread, I don't think they are necessary if the game's design takes a different approach than the norm.

Part of this approach toward the game's design would be in abandoning the D&D-styled advancement that most CRPGs emulate, and moving toward a more balanced advancement with less dramatic improvements in ability.

In D&D, and in most CRPGs, characters start off incredibly weak, easily defeated in combat by the cannon fodder of the world -- goblins, kobolds, slimes, whatever. By the end of the game, the characters are often almost godlike in power, shrugging off blows that could fell a house-sized giant or a huge dragon. If you were to graph the advancement of the characters' power, it would look like a rapidly ascending staircase, starting off at the very bottom, and moving upwards in very dramatic "steps" until it is off the scale.

Consider a pencil & paper RPG such as GURPS. In GURPS, a starting PC is typically built upon 100 character points (I think this changed a bit in 4th edition, but I'll stick with 3rd edition nubmers, as that is what I'm more familiar with), which represents "heroic material." For comparision, an average citizen NPC is built upon 25 points. The typical 100-point fledgling hero is far more competent than a 1st-level D&D character, but gains increases in power gradually over time. They never quite reach the earth-shattering levels of power that 20th-level D&D character do, and enemies that were a challenge at the beginning of their careers could still potentially be a threat under the right circumstances. Plus, GURPS doesn't feature ever-inflating Hit Point totals. Characters can spend point to increase their Hit Point totals as they advance, but a warrior that started with 15 HP might only have 25 by the end of the game, rather than the 200+ HP that such a character in D&D might have -- or 8,745 as a Final Fantasy character.

If the power difference between an early-game character and a late-game character is not as extreme as it is in most CRPGs, then challenges become more "generic" by nature. Besides, aren't we supposed to be more concerned with role-playing than power-gaming on this forum? :-P

Ultima VII is a pretty good example. If you don't include the attribute gains that the Forge of Virtue add-on gives you, which utterly destroys any semblance of game balance. Your Avatar starts at 2nd or 3rd level, and can reach a maximum of 8th level. Your HP are equal to your Strength score (18 when you start, maximum of 30), and when you level up you get 3 training points to spend with trainers to increase your three attributes, and your Combat and Magic skills. You can even complete the game without levelling up at all, though you might run into problems in a few areas. You aren't accosted by super-powerful monsters as you travel from town to town; most of the tougher monsters are either lurking in the dungeons or in remote wilderness areas. If you don't use a glass sword (which kills any foe in one hit), a dragon or the Ethereal Dreadnaught (or whatever it is in one of the generators) pose some degree of challenge at any level.

Arcanum seems to be another good example, but I've never actually gotten around to playing much past the first town (it's on my to-do list).

And there is nothing wrong with making it possible (or even necessary) for the player to encounter enemies that he or she has no hope of beating early in the game -- so long as the player has ample opportunities to run away. It does suck if you're walking along, minding your own business, when suddenly a constellation in the sky turns into a dragon, and then swoops down and kills your entire party in a single blow. Anyone who has played Drakkhen knows what I'm talking about.

Of course, enterprising players continually surprise the game designers with ways in which they manage to kill powerful foes at the beginning of the game.

However, if the game design sticks with a very dramatic rate of power advancement to extreme levels, it is very difficult to make a game non-linear without resorting to levelled lists of enemies and treasure.

 

[LlamaGod]

I never got how people have such a hard time learning new controls or ways to navigate menus.

Gothic isn't that hard, you just need to learn the buttons...

Maybe i'm just weird, but instead of going 'y doesant I open teh inventory', I go to Controls, see what button opens inventory, hit it and then figure out how navigating the inventory works (you move arrows and use spacebar/enter/mouse 1 for selections).

 

[Twinfalls]

Exactly.

And for another Super-Retard review of Gothic 2, check this oneout - not only do you get the usual 'teh controlz are not like Zelda' but also:

A major drawback to the game is the fact that it takes a tremendous amount of time to progress your character through quests and leveling. After several hours of playtime, I was suddenly hit with the realization that I really hadn’t gotten anything done yet. The game moves at a crippling slow pace. The sluggish pace can become very disappointing for those that only have an hour or two to play at a time. If you’re expecting to load up the game, and hop into some large intense battles: don’t. A large portion of the game consists of nothing but dialogue.....

Fighting in the game is surprisingly difficult early on. It’s difficult to the point where it is more of an annoyance than anything else. The fighting controls are almost as perplexing as the interface set up. To attack, you have to hold down the alt key (by default) and press the forward and side arrows to swing your weapon or shoot your bow. Every time your character levels up he gains an insignificant bonus to his health, without any boost to stat points. Instead you are given learning points (LPs) which are used to increase stats such as strength and dexterity to name a few. Also, finding good weapons and armor that can be equipped early on is about as likely as George W. Bush pronouncing the word “terrorist” correctly. It simply isn’t going happen.

 

[Micmu]

OH MY GOD HE ACCIDENTLY REVIEWED AN RPG

 

[LlamaGod]

He says the game runs slowly too.

I have an incredibly shitty computer and it runs perfectly for me. Maybe he should learn how to use configuration files and menus.

 

[kingcomrade]

Things don't have to be leveled. Say, in Fallout, where everything is mostly hand crafted, it would make sense to allow equipment to take on more difficult enemies.

I was thinking of a system a bit like Metroid's, where you never really change, but you find equipment and stuff that allows you to do things that you couldn't before.

That way, almost all items (I'm intending that they also be handcrafted, or something like) become useful, so long as they have their advantages and disadvantages. Fallout already had something along these lines, as most guns did similar damage to each other, but had greater ammunition capacity/firing rate/armor piercing ability/whatever. You might give pistols the ability to become concealed, which allows you to take a weapon into a place where you couldn't before, and need one to progress (or finish a quest, or whatever). After all, pistols aren't battle weapons.

Someone earlier used an example of some monster in the woods in Gothic. I haven't played it, but it would be just as meaningful to get something that allows you to overcome that obstacle without just being +5 levels from the last time you met?

It doesn't have to be equipment, it can be abilities. Metroid and newer platformers, like Psychonauts, generally allow you to unlock more content by gaining abilities that allow you to do things you couldn't before. Like, as a simple example, in Psychonauts, once you get Invisibility, though, you gain the ability to do a lot of things you couldn't overcome before. You can easily sneak up and damage or set on fire mega-censors and psychic bears and psychic cougars, you can sneak up and steal the gold watch from the squirrel, etc.

Psychonauts even has an EXP system for those abilities. You don't really get more health, I think you get that for accomplishing objectives, but as you get EXP for doing and collecting stuff, you get closer to new (or upgraded) abilities. That way you don't have leveled characters, but if you couldn't do without EXP you could still use that system. Like, you level up, and you get 20 skill points to spend, or whatever you like, but you don't just magically gain HP or anything like that, though this is smudging the line from a "pure" system. It would make more sense that at certain points or as rewards for certain accomplishments, instead of EXP, you are rewarded with skill points directly, or to choose a new ability. That way you can still develop your character the way you want without having to deal with levels.

Personally, I would like a tag system. Where, you don't have skill points, but when the game rewards you, you get to tag a skill. Like, if you tag Small Arms, which allows you to use small arms. You can tag it a second time (or a second skill to go in combination) which allows you to use scoped rifles competently. Or something like that.

The only snag, which I think could probably be dealt with, is how do deal with random monsters lurking about. There would have to be some sort of reward for killing them. In a post-apoc game, ammunition would be nice, or health kits or other things. In Psychonauts, killing got you ammunition, health, money, and grenade recharges. The enemies were also typically in your way and had to be dealt with. There might even be some benefits in the role-playing arena. After all, if you don't need their equipment, why would you want to get into fights? The only time you would need to fight is when something is in your way, or you are surprised, or you need some ammo, etc.

I mean, why would a Vault Dweller actually take the time to clear the cave rats out, or get into fights with 50 Enclave patrols? The player does it for EXP, of course, but otherwise it doesn't make sense unless they attack him or are in the way.

One of the things that happens here is that the world becomes MORE dangerous. You have to pick your battles, and you have to employ tricks to deal with some enemies. I mean, no human is ever going to become powerful enough to take on a dragon, or anything like that. He would have to have abilities and equipment. Goblins will still be a problem unless those equipment and abilities help him deal with them. Why does everyone think goblins should be pushovers, anyways? If they were pushovers, they wouldn't survive in your average fantasy world, especially in their typical large numbers.

Nobody has any comments? I thought it was a good idea.

 

[Keldryn]

I never got how people have such a hard time learning new controls or ways to navigate menus.

Gothic isn't that hard, you just need to learn the buttons...

Maybe i'm just weird, but instead of going 'y doesant I open teh inventory', I go to Controls, see what button opens inventory, hit it and then figure out how navigating the inventory works (you move arrows and use spacebar/enter/mouse 1 for selections).

Not sure if that was directed at my commentary on Gothic's control scheme but... I don't have a hard time learning new controls or ways to navigate menus. I generally pick up new UIs pretty quickly. I didn't find Gothic that hard to control.

However, that doesn't mean that Gothic doesn't have a shitty, clunky, and unintuitive control scheme. It doesn't mean that Kingdom Hearts and Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles don't have control schemes that suck ass.

A shitty control scheme is a shitty control scheme. Yes, you can learn to use it. I can learn to use it. But it still stinks like what my puppy left outside this morning.

 

[Keldryn]

Nobody has any comments? I thought it was a good idea.

I think it's a great idea... was going to comment on it, but I ran out of time. I'll post my thoughts on it tomorrow. For now, let's just say I really like ideas that recognize that you can recreate the spirit of a good (PnP) role-playing game without making what is essentially a paper-and-dice RPG simulator on a computer.

 

[bryce777]

That was just because that is what you did. You could do other crap, too. I would dos tuff like use shrink and then shoot them.
Also, by the time I got magic, I remember thinking "Who the fuck cares?" Basically the game was about over by then.

A shrinking spell cost 2000, IIRC, which was way to much to spend on anything else than a troll, which was almost unkillable otherwise.

I dont remember too well to be honest. I just know I barely used the magic, and just shot anything I came across, and that shooting things meant near instant victory compared to HtH which was ridiculously difficult, except against skeletons.

 

[Lumpy]

I dont remember too well to be honest. I just know I barely used the magic, and just shot anything I came across, and that shooting things meant near instant victory compared to HtH which was ridiculously difficult, except against skeletons.

Indeed, there was a quest where you had to use a bow, the Minecrawlers' cave. It was stupid. I couldn't damage them at all with my sword, but with a bow I was almost never hurt.

 

[Twinfalls]

It was not stupid. They have a protective shell, so maybe with a bow your character was targeting weak spots, whatever. I don't recall not being able to harm them with my sword. Gothic was not stupid, you are.

As for its controls, they were not clunky or shitty. They were deliberately designed to feel 'interactive', ie to give a more active hands-on feeling, akin to actually retrieving and wielding objects. It's people who must play every game with mouse or gamepads in the same way they are accustomed, who are the problem.

 

[bryce777]

It was not stupid. They have a protective shell, so maybe with a bow your character was targeting weak spots, whatever. I don't recall not being able to harm them with my sword. Gothic was not stupid, you are.

As for its controls, they were not clunky or shitty. They were deliberately designed to feel 'interactive', ie to give a more active hands-on feeling, akin to actually retrieving and wielding objects. It's people who must play every game with mouse or gamepads in the same way they are accustomed, who are the problem.

The keyboard controls were ridiculously stupid. If you have to read a manual to figure out how an interface works, it is bad design.

Aside from binding the actions to totally random keys, I can't imagine how they could be worse.

The combat system is also completely stupid and it amazes me anyone would defend it. If you did not have weapon + strength > creature armor, you did zero damage...and considering creature armor levels were routinely above 100 and the damage they did was routinely 150 or more it means that you can't hit a creature at all, and they kill you in one blow. No matter what. You could hopefully get a critical every blue moon, but that was rare.

Soak is something that should be used incredibly sparingly or else you have an asinine combat system. Like gothic.

Gothic was an OK game, I suppose, but there is nothing in it I can see that warrants the level of fandom it seems to receive here. The quests are OK, but you basically get railroaded and as I said exploration is very frowned upon because you desperately need armor to survive and you can only get that through the quest paths, all of which lead you to be in the rebel camp no matter what you first decide.

 

[Lumpy]

It was not stupid. They have a protective shell, so maybe with a bow your character was targeting weak spots, whatever. I don't recall not being able to harm them with my sword. Gothic was not stupid, you are.

As for its controls, they were not clunky or shitty. They were deliberately designed to feel 'interactive', ie to give a more active hands-on feeling, akin to actually retrieving and wielding objects. It's people who must play every game with mouse or gamepads in the same way they are accustomed, who are the problem.

Oh. I could harm them... a bit. They killed me in three blows.

 

[Twinfalls]

The keyboard controls were ridiculously stupid. If you have to read a manual to figure out how an interface works, it is bad design.

What??! "Oh Noez, I have to read the instructions to know some basic keyboard commands! Bad bad BAD" Come off it bryce. We know there's been an uprising of the illiterates in gaming, but you're not part of that revolution, and you're too old to join now.

If you did not have weapon + strength > creature armor, you did zero damage...

I don't recall this to be the case, but even if it was, what's wrong with it? It worked fine in practice. The game balance played a hell of a lot better than Morrowind.

and considering creature armor levels were routinely above 100 and the damage they did was routinely 150 or more it means that you can't hit a creature at all, and they kill you in one blow. No matter what. You could hopefully get a critical every blue moon, but that was rare.

Translation: the game was too hard for me.

Gothic was an OK game, I suppose, but there is nothing in it I can see that warrants the level of fandom it seems to receive here. The quests are OK, but you basically get railroaded and as I said exploration is very frowned upon because you desperately need armor to survive and you can only get that through the quest paths, all of which lead you to be in the rebel camp no matter what you first decide.

Gothic's fandom is well earnt, for it exists despite shitty reviews by retards who declared it had too much dialogue, was too hard, and didn't slather it with the sort of hype and auto-cum-spraying that far weaker, undeserving games like Morrowind and Fable received.

I'm not going to list Gothic's virtues, they are many and you know what I'd say (AI, gritty atmosphere, non-linearity, blah blah). You have to accept it's an adventure/RPG hybrid. It's real time combat, player timing is a real factor.

Oh and Lumpy - I'm sorry to hear those horrible monsters killed you in three blows. What a mean, nasty game Gothic is. Stick with something nicer, like whack-a-mole. Or Oblivion - you'll only have creatures at your level to deal with, and you can be grandmaster of every guild! Hurrah!

 

[Lumpy]

Oh and Lumpy - I'm sorry to hear those horrible monsters killed you in three blows. What a mean, nasty game Gothic is. Stick with something nicer, like whack-a-mole. Or Oblivion - you'll only have creatures at your level to deal with, and you can be grandmaster of every guild! Hurrah!

Twinfalls, stop the personal insults. What do you think this is, the Codex?
If I can't kill the Minecrawlers with swords yet I can easily kill them with a bow, it tells something about the balance of the game...

 

[bryce777]

The keyboard controls were ridiculously stupid. If you have to read a manual to figure out how an interface works, it is bad design.

What??! "Oh Noez, I have to read the instructions to know some basic keyboard commands! Bad bad BAD" Come off it bryce. We know there's been an uprising of the illiterates in gaming, but you're not part of that revolution, and you're too old to join now.

If you did not have weapon + strength > creature armor, you did zero damage...

I don't recall this to be the case, but even if it was, what's wrong with it? It worked fine in practice. The game balance played a hell of a lot better than Morrowind.

and considering creature armor levels were routinely above 100 and the damage they did was routinely 150 or more it means that you can't hit a creature at all, and they kill you in one blow. No matter what. You could hopefully get a critical every blue moon, but that was rare.

Translation: the game was too hard for me.

Gothic was an OK game, I suppose, but there is nothing in it I can see that warrants the level of fandom it seems to receive here. The quests are OK, but you basically get railroaded and as I said exploration is very frowned upon because you desperately need armor to survive and you can only get that through the quest paths, all of which lead you to be in the rebel camp no matter what you first decide.

Gothic's fandom is well earnt, for it exists despite shitty reviews by retards who declared it had too much dialogue, was too hard, and didn't slather it with the sort of hype and auto-cum-spraying that far weaker, undeserving games like Morrowind and Fable received.

I'm not going to list Gothic's virtues, they are many and you know what I'd say (AI, gritty atmosphere, non-linearity, blah blah). You have to accept it's an adventure/RPG hybrid. It's real time combat, player timing is a real factor.

Oh and Lumpy - I'm sorry to hear those horrible monsters killed you in three blows. What a mean, nasty game Gothic is. Stick with something nicer, like whack-a-mole. Or Oblivion - you'll only have creatures at your level to deal with, and you can be grandmaster of every guild! Hurrah!

". If you have to read a manual to figure out how an interface works, it is bad design."

I have made many, many, many user interfaces. This is a saying in the user interface bidness, and it's true. Like if you walk to a door and can't figure out how to open it. That doesn't mean keyboard = bad, but they should have made some hints in the interface and honestly, the keys they chose were just mindbogglingly weird.



It has too much dialog for an action game which is what it basically was, but it didn't have all that much for an rpg.

Actually the combat was super unbalanced and ridiculous. Like I said it made just exploring the world a ridiculous task with no reward except pain and frustration. The problem was not that it was too hard, but that it was either impossible to win or impossible to lose, with only a small overlap area of reasonable challenge. If you went and did the quests in the exact order with no exploration this might not be as apparent, but if you tried to explore a bit the idiot combat system was very apparent. Also, if you just use your bow all the time, you pretty much beat anything out there with ease by just running around and sniping.

There was a lot I liked such as making my own swords in the smith and some of the quests, but the combat was just lame.

 

[Twinfalls]

Bryce I completely disagree.

t was either impossible to win or impossible to lose, with only a small overlap area of reasonable challenge. If you went and did the quests in the exact order with no exploration this might not be as apparent, but if you tried to explore a bit the idiot combat system was very apparent.

I really suspect you didn't realise some of the tactics available. For a start, you could outrun most creatures (I can only recall Shadowbeasts being an exception), by zig-zagging. So it was never too hard that you were doomed. You could also effectively explore most areas very early if you wished, but you'd do a hell of a lot of running away. Secondly, you had to fight with the strike-retreat-strike method. Of course you couldn't set yourself upon some Fire Lizards right from the get-go, and indeed wolves, and even adult Scavengers could easily kill you AS IT SHOULD BE.

I dunno about the all-powerful bow, as I played a hybrid warrior then a mage, but if that was the case, OK then it had its flaws. Still its a game with BALLS goddammit, a complete rarity in todays tragically decayed 3D gaming scene, a series which looked dumbing down straight in the eye and said 'FUCK YOU BUDDY'.

Which is why I am an admitted fanboy.

Edit: I will concede that you are right in saying it is in essence an action game, but I'd call it an action-adventure. I hate that cliche 'with RPG elements' but I struggle to think of an alternative here, for this has more RPGness than a lot of other so-called RPGs.

 

[Lumpy]

MSFD posted something about levelled monsters in this thread: http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=213285&hl=

I would recommend playing the game first. I doubt you will even notice that it's happening. There will still be easy encounters, and there will still be super hard encounters.

 

[bryce777]

Bryce I completely disagree.

t was either impossible to win or impossible to lose, with only a small overlap area of reasonable challenge. If you went and did the quests in the exact order with no exploration this might not be as apparent, but if you tried to explore a bit the idiot combat system was very apparent.

I really suspect you didn't realise some of the tactics available. For a start, you could outrun most creatures (I can only recall Shadowbeasts being an exception), by zig-zagging. So it was never too hard that you were doomed. You could also effectively explore most areas very early if you wished, but you'd do a hell of a lot of running away. Secondly, you had to fight with the strike-retreat-strike method. Of course you couldn't set yourself upon some Fire Lizards right from the get-go, and indeed wolves, and even adult Scavengers could easily kill you AS IT SHOULD BE.

I dunno about the all-powerful bow, as I played a hybrid warrior then a mage, but if that was the case, OK then it had its flaws. Still its a game with BALLS goddammit, a complete rarity in todays tragically decayed 3D gaming scene, a series which looked dumbing down straight in the eye and said 'FUCK YOU BUDDY'.

Which is why I am an admitted fanboy.

Edit: I will concede that you are right in saying it is in essence an action game, but I'd call it an action-adventure. I hate that cliche 'with RPG elements' but I struggle to think of an alternative here, for this has more RPGness than a lot of other so-called RPGs.

Well, to me those things are not really tactics per say, but cheese. Running backwards, inding an overlook to shoot at monsters from in safety. Ok, maybe the sniper thing could be called tactics, but really I think you are glossing over things a little.

It is a broken, broken system. For example, in DnD a 2nd level character is much better than a 1st level character but even so a 1st level character has a reasonable chance of beating a 2nd level character, especially by doing clever things or sneaking up on them.

The difference between a 5th and 6th level character is very little.

the difference between a 1oth and 11th is negligible. You continue getting good growth for your characters with each level, but being a few levels off does not make a character insurmountable.

2-3 1st level characters are probably almost sure to beat a second level character unless they do something lucky. 2-3 10th level characters have a huge advantage over an 11th level character, but the 11th level one could still win if the player is clever and lucky.

if DnD were balanced like gothic, a 2nd level character would win ove a 1t level character almost every time. Even wrose, a 3rd level character would be completely invulnerable to a 1st level character, and be able to beat a 2nd level character pretty much every time. yet worse, a 13th level character would be able to beat an infinite number of level 1 - level 11 characters because he would somehow be magically completely immune to all the damage that they could possibly do.

Not only is the gameplay style action, but it is the goofiest and stupidest, most unbalanced system for an action game I have heard of.

You can explore, and yes I could win, but after the 100th time of going up to a fucking wolf and hitting it once and having no damage done and then dying if ou can't run away, you have to wonder what the point is. You can win, but only by spending a painful amount of effort, and it's ten times easier just to get the armor by doing the quests. Then you are somehow magically invulnerable to wolf damage.

Regardless of the basic system (which is stupid) I resent that items completely determine your power level.

Even in something like zelda items might be helpful, but they do not make you 100 times as powerful. Here, armor makes you infintely powerful compared to any creature that can't penetrate it. So, you may as well have a line of code that says if(armor == heavy armor) wolf = dead.

 

[obediah]

MSFD posted something about levelled monsters in this thread: http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=213285&hl=

I would recommend playing the game first. I doubt you will even notice that it's happening. There will still be easy encounters, and there will still be super hard encounters.

This appears to be the standard oblivion pr pattern:

Marketeer goes on an on about how super-excellent feature Y is. Fanboys and 360'ers rejoince. Marketeer states you couldn't play the game without it, it's so essential.

Grumpy old codex think it sucks, bitch about it and post 100 lame stewart and erosion jokes.

MSFD assures us that we'll hardly notice it.

Why did bethesda spend all this time on features we'll hardly notice?

 

[Imbecile]

MSFD posted something about levelled monsters in this thread: http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=213285&hl=

I would recommend playing the game first. I doubt you will even notice that it's happening. There will still be easy encounters, and there will still be super hard encounters.

This appears to be the standard oblivion pr pattern:

Marketeer goes on an on about how super-excellent feature Y is. Fanboys and 360'ers rejoince. Marketeer states you couldn't play the game without it, it's so essential.

Grumpy old codex think it sucks, bitch about it and post 100 lame stewart and erosion jokes.

MSFD assures us that we'll hardly notice it.

Why did bethesda spend all this time on features we'll hardly notice?

In fairness if enemies are well levelled you shouldnt notice that they are levelled at all. Its rather like a good referee, or background music. It is often best when you dont notice it.

 

[bryce777]

MSFD posted something about levelled monsters in this thread: http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=213285&hl=

I would recommend playing the game first. I doubt you will even notice that it's happening. There will still be easy encounters, and there will still be super hard encounters.

This appears to be the standard oblivion pr pattern:

Marketeer goes on an on about how super-excellent feature Y is. Fanboys and 360'ers rejoince. Marketeer states you couldn't play the game without it, it's so essential.

Grumpy old codex think it sucks, bitch about it and post 100 lame stewart and erosion jokes.

MSFD assures us that we'll hardly notice it.

Why did bethesda spend all this time on features we'll hardly notice?

In fairness if enemies are well levelled you shouldnt notice that they are levelled at all. Its rather like a good referee, or background music. It is often best when you dont notice it.

It's impossible not to notice soemthing like that.

 

[MrSmileyFaceDude]

The leveled creature stuff doesn't have to be "At level 5, you get a level 5 creature." It can be "At level 5, in this particular instance you get a 50% chance of a level 5 goblin, a 40% chance of a level 2 rat, and a 10% chance of a level 10 troll." It can also use offsets from your current level. There can and will be super-easy encounters as well as extremely difficult ones. Some dungeons may start out easy and then get tougher and tougher the further you go -- and it's still all based on your character's current level.

 

[Twinfalls]

Yes, but go to a dungeon early on in the game, and encounter some creatures.

Go there again later in the game, and there will be different creatures in there.

That is retarded.

 

[Micmu]

Yes, but go to a dungeon early on in the game, and encounter some creatures.

Go there again later in the game, and there will be different creatures in there.

That is retarded.

And even outside world can suddenly become populated by minotaurs everywhere. That's not immersive at all - if there's no explanation for that.