Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Virtz]

"That's the way Bethesda does things" This statement makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever about the topic of level scaleing.
They did level scaleing the way you described, without any form of 'leveled' zones, for ONE game, one, Oblivon. Morrowind, Daggerfall, Arena, Fallout 3, they all had atleast to a small degree leveled zones. It is entirely possible in all of those games to run into something you're not supposed to run into for another 5 to 10 levels or so. Unlikely? Yes but possible. Saying that the way a company handled a single game is "the way they do things" when they have done things differently for games made before and after that game make no logical sense.

Arena and Daggerfall Bethesda is pre-bought out Bethesda (or pre-Zenimax Bethesda), with different leads and very different teams. You could say Morrowind is considerably different from the rest of Zenimax Bethesda, though.

But between Oblivion, Shivering Isles, FO3 and all its DLCs, there's a pretty clear trend of making everything you encounter immediately defeatable. There's nothing that could overpower you. Ever. You can talk all you want about level areas, but the end result is not significantly different enough.

And it ain't that much of a stretch to call something the X-way when X has lately been following a trend.

[KaguroDraven]

Shivering Isles is an expansion, don't count it as it's own game. And that statement about FO3 is blatently wrong. I've encountered Super Mutant Masters at level 4, you know, the big ones with miniguns that can be hard at level 12? Yeah. Then there is the fact that is your want to you can go fight an always hostile Sentry Bot at level one, or go to a town filled with Deathclaws, two of the toughest enemies in the game.

[Virtz]

Shivering Isles is an expansion, don't count it as it's own game. And that statement about FO3 is blatently wrong. I've encountered Super Mutant Masters at level 4, you know, the big ones with miniguns that can be hard at level 12? Yeah. Then there is the fact that is your want to you can go fight an always hostile Sentry Bot at level one, or go to a town filled with Deathclaws, two of the toughest enemies in the game.

If they wanted to, they could've altered the system in Shivering Isles. They didn't, though. Hence it's still part of a trend.

And it could be a Behemoth for all I care, there's never a moment where you can't beat anything you encounter so long as you've got a semi-decent ranged weapon, ammo and any amount of cover. Plus deathclaws were total pansies in FO3, they weren't even close to toughest. Are you sure you were playing FO3 unmodded?

[scriver]

If I'm not mistaken, Daggerfall was highly level-scaled as well. Vampire lords and liches all over the dungeons at high levels.

Also, can somebody please describe me what is "good level scaling" because I didn't face one and I want to know.

From the top of my mind, BGII: Shadows of Amn did it pretty good.

It's mostly about moderation. Slight increase of higher level creatures when you are at high-leveled keeps the game interesting. Oblivion overdid it by removing all low level creatures. And also by having a broken system and giving everything high-end equipment.

[Karnewarrior]

Shivering Isles is an expansion, don't count it as it's own game. And that statement about FO3 is blatently wrong. I've encountered Super Mutant Masters at level 4, you know, the big ones with miniguns that can be hard at level 12? Yeah. Then there is the fact that is your want to you can go fight an always hostile Sentry Bot at level one, or go to a town filled with Deathclaws, two of the toughest enemies in the game.

If they wanted to, they could've altered the system in Shivering Isles. They didn't, though. Hence it's still part of a trend.

And it could be a Behemoth for all I care, there's never a moment where you can't beat anything you encounter so long as you've got a semi-decent ranged weapon, ammo and any amount of cover. Plus deathclaws were total pansies in FO3, they weren't even close to toughest. Are you sure you were playing FO3 unmodded?

I literally just killed a Deathclaw in FO3. I was maybe level 4. So yes, they are possible to be defeated; HOWEVER, it was very challenging, and it was already heavily wounded by some hilarious Raider placement. In fact, it only had two pips of health.

I think the issue here is that we play Dwarf Fortress and are thus in a subgroup that includes some very intelligent and very good gamers. We're able to take the game far and beyond what we're supposed to and by doing so makes the game feel badly leveled.

[scriver]

Playing DF does neither make you intelligent or "better" at playing games. Seriously.

[Johuotar]

I wonder if enchanted items are going to have ugly glow.
I liked morrowind more than oblivion due to setting and few quirks but I think that this is going to be better than OB. They learn from their mistakes I'm sure.

[Lysabild]

I must agree with the swede, what ever makes you think that? Steep learning curves can be climbed by dumb and unskilled people just the same.

[Duke 2.0]

Also, can somebody please describe me what is "good level scaling" because I didn't face one and I want to know.

Literally Morrowind.

 At a higher level more diseased and blighted creatures appear, which are stronger than the normal ones. I think some bandits and daedra also scale up slightly, with bandits changing from leather to iron and Daedra usually small increases. I cant verify this last sentence, but there are some small touches here.

 Which is the emphasis, small touches. You dont scale levels by matching the level of the character, you scale level by adding more of the tough enemies of this zone if the player is a high level and adding more low level enmies of that zone for a low level player. There still needs to be some curve of advancement that forms a framework.

[Leatra]

Playing DF does neither make you intelligent or "better" at playing games. Seriously.

True. Nothing can you make intelligent. I don't know if you replied to Karnewarrior but he only said "Dwarf Fortress and are thus in a subgroup that includes some very intelligent and very good gamers." and I agree with him. Even chess can't make you intelligent. You only learn to use your brain in chess (and DF). Anyway it's off topic.

Level scaling in Oblivion pretty much sucked. It seems everybody on this topic is agreeing to this. However, I still don't think Bethesda can pull of this whole "level scaling" thing. I regret there are games with "good level scaling" (though I don't really count them as level scaling) but Bethesda always seems to fuck up at this. In my opinion the only time they were close to "not bad" at level scaling, it was Morrowind.

Bethesda's way of level scaling always reminds me an old friend of mine who was good at drawing. Sometimes, when he completed a drawing, he would always try to "fix some of his mistakes" or "polish it up" and result, sucked. He polished it up so much it eventually became something else

Whatever. I'm so sick of debating about a game that didn't even released yet. I can tell you, you are going to love it or hate it. It's not going to be a game where you can say "meh, pretty good." People will debate endlessly about the features of the game and I will just play it until I'm bored and return to Morrowind again until TES VI and the whole cycle will start again.

At least there are roguelikes

[scriver]

Playing DF does neither make you intelligent or "better" at playing games. Seriously.

True. Nothing can you make intelligent. I don't know if you replied to Karnewarrior but he only said "Dwarf Fortress and are thus in a subgroup that includes some very intelligent and very good gamers." and I agree with him. Even chess can't make you intelligent. You only learn to use your brain in chess (and DF). Anyway it's off topic.

I'm sorry to keep the derail up, but no, DF does not require intelligence to play, and it does not require "gaming skills" of any particular height. DF is, from the player's side, a very simple and straightforward game. Doesn't require any more thinking, planning or strategy than playing with a bunch of building blocks. In fact, the reason I grow tired of playing it every so often is that once you've made your way up the curve and learnt how to play there is hardly any challenge left in the game. All DF requires from a player is patience and/or stubbornness to get through the learning curve, and a mindset that doesn't shy away from losing at times. Neither which has anything to do with "intelligence" or "gaming skills".

Also, relating to the discussion; DF scales the difficulty of it's encounters/mobs as well, though not to your level (as there is none), but to your number of companions. This, because facing 5 bandits with your 10 soldiers wouldn't be much of a challenge. So the number of bandits you face are increased to make it one.
It is the same underlying theory, same effect, just different triggers.

[Vattic]

Fortress mode is also scaled. The various triggers for titans, megabeasts, and sieges being examples.

I'm still looking forward to this game despite my concerns, though, I will likely enjoy it better after the modding scene has developed for it.

[ed boy]

Also, can somebody please describe me what is "good level scaling" because I didn't face one and I want to know.

Here are a couple examples:

-Level scaling, but within bounds. If your level is within a bound, it scales, but if it is outside, your level is treated as the maximum/minimum appropriately. This can be randomied to an extent.

-Semi-scaling. Each encounter consists two groups of enemies. One group is static, one group is scaled. Moree groups can be added as necessary.

-Number scaling. low difficulty and high difficulty areas have the same enemies, but in different numbers

-AI scaling. At a low level, enemies will stupidly rush towards you. At a high level, they will sneak around in the darkness and ambush you. They may alsos cotton on to your sneaky tactics quicker/slower

-Enemy adapting. At low levels, the enemies are random, and use random gear. At high levels, their gear is biased towards your skills/weaknesses

[Karnewarrior]

Playing DF does neither make you intelligent or "better" at playing games. Seriously.

True. Nothing can you make intelligent. I don't know if you replied to Karnewarrior but he only said "Dwarf Fortress and are thus in a subgroup that includes some very intelligent and very good gamers." and I agree with him. Even chess can't make you intelligent. You only learn to use your brain in chess (and DF). Anyway it's off topic.

I'm sorry to keep the derail up, but no, DF does not require intelligence to play, and it does not require "gaming skills" of any particular height. DF is, from the player's side, a very simple and straightforward game. Doesn't require any more thinking, planning or strategy than playing with a bunch of building blocks. In fact, the reason I grow tired of playing it every so often is that once you've made your way up the curve and learnt how to play there is hardly any challenge left in the game. All DF requires from a player is patience and/or stubbornness to get through the learning curve, and a mindset that doesn't shy away from losing at times. Neither which has anything to do with "intelligence" or "gaming skills".

Also, relating to the discussion; DF scales the difficulty of it's encounters/mobs as well, though not to your level (as there is none), but to your number of companions. This, because facing 5 bandits with your 10 soldiers wouldn't be much of a challenge. So the number of bandits you face are increased to make it one.
It is the same underlying theory, same effect, just different triggers.

Leatra is right, you've got the wrong idea. Dwarf Fortress does not require you to be a good gamer; however, it very much encourages it and the character traits which bring it about. The same goes for intellect. While DF doesn't require you to be smart, after you get used to playing it, you feel smart, so you act smart, and through doing so probably become smart.

It's less of a requirement and more of a effect. And DF is hardly the only source; you're quite capable on your own of becoming a good gamer, or smart, you could be born a genius, or just good at gaming, but DF attracts that sort of people and is a good indicator. Sort of like Iodine, you can reasonably say "If he/she plays Dwarf Fortress, he/she is very likely to be intelligent and/or good at games.", even though it's by no means always true, it's constant enough.


Anyways I'm gettiong this one for PC so that when I get bored of it I can mod the shit out of it. I hate not having any Oblivion mods and just looking at all the sweet PC mods there are. :\

[Neonivek]

While DF doesn't require you to be smart, after you get used to playing it, you feel smart, so you act smart, and through doing so probably become smart

Is that the "Rewarding" I've heard so much about?