121 réponses à ce sujet

[druplesnubb]

I still don't get what everyone's problems with bandits and wolves scaling with your characters is. When your group of four better-than-average fighters get into an ambush set by ten bandits who all got daggers that can slt a man's throat with one strike or lethal arrows that they fire as soon as they see you or gets attacked by an entire pack of lightning fast predators literally built for killing all working together it should be life threatening and not something you just stroll through (I see it as a necessary realism break that you all don't just die in less than a minute).

I like scaling because it removes the weirdness that your chracter (who may have been fighting all his life before, depending on what game it is) can barely kill a rat but then fights for a few weeks and suddenly slaughters experienced war veterans and swordmasters in droves and then after some more weeks of training kills the Giant Evil Super Monster Of Doom. In Dragon Age the monster that amost solo'd your entire group stayed somewhat challenging even after you fought enough to become somewhat better but not by that much (read: the entire game)

It also removes the problem where either area A only has big rats and beggars with broken bottles with absolutely noone being stronger than a certain limit while area B (which through a lucky coincidence, your characcter happens to come by just after visiting the area where everyone is just slightly weaker) only has ancient liches and gigantic dragons (often with no explanation of why that is) or where the bears in area X just happens to be twenty times stronger than the ones in area Y (which, once again, your character just happens to stumble upon first) for no reason whatsoever. One of the biggest offenders is WOW where the boars in Winterspring likely have 100 times the health of the demons of the Burning legion in Durotar.

I'm okay with all this for gameplay reasons but scaling adds a nice touch of realism and greatly helps the immersion.

Modifié par druplesnubb, 18 décembre 2010 - 08:39 .

[In Exile]

Ymladdych wrote...

@In Exile: Okay, I see what you're looking for, but it would only change the mechanic on a superficial level. Instead of grinding and questing to level up, you're farming for cash so you can buy new abilities. It's a merchant mechanic, and that's fine, a lot of games have something like it in a different wrapper. (Buy a new gun that gives you a stun; buy a new spell; buy a new plasmid power; etc.)

The gain is that the mechanism is coherent. That increases my enjoyment.

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

druplesnubb wrote...

I still don't get what everyone's problems with bandits and wolves scaling with your characters is. When your group of four better-than-average fighters get into an ambush set by ten bandits who all got daggers that can slt a man's throat with one strike or lethal arrows that they fire as soon as they see you or gets attacked by an entire pack of lightning fast predators literally built for killing all working together it should be life threatening and not something you just stroll through (I see it as a necessary realism break that you all don't just die in less than a minute).

I like scaling because it removes the weirdness that your chracter (who may have been fighting all his life before, depending on what game it is) can barely kill a rat but then fights for a few weeks and suddenly slaughters experienced war veterans and swordmasters in droves and then after some more weeks of training kills the Giant Evil Super Monster Of Doom. In Dragon Age the monster that amost solo'd your entire group stayed somewhat challenging even after you fought enough to become somewhat better but not by that much (read: the entire game)

It also removes the problem where either area A only has big rats and beggars with broken bottles with absolutely noone being stronger than a certain limit while area B (which through a lucky coincidence, your characcter happens to come by just after visiting the area where everyone is just slightly weaker) only has ancient liches and gigantic dragons (often with no explanation of why that is) or where the bears in area X just happens to be twenty times stronger than the ones in area Y (which, once again, your character just happens to stumble upon first) for no reason whatsoever. One of the biggest offenders is WOW where the boars in Winterspring likely have 100 times the health of the demons of the Burning legion in Durotar.

I'm okay with all this for gameplay reasons but scaling adds a nice touch of realism and greatly helps the immersion.

I was tempted to start off by saying that I cant disagree more. Once I got my mind wrapped around your logic I understood it. However I have to take two steps backwards to grasp your logic. 

 Realism is a great tool for level design and many aspects of game design. Realism can break down when you take unrealistic path to get there. I would prefer for any armed group of thugs to still be somewhat challenging in the latter parts of any RPG thats starts at lvl one.

How about this as an alternative? Use a leveling system that’s not as hp based like the Age of Decadence demo or Bloodlines. Don’t add hp unless you spend skill or xp points for them. This makes characters more vulnerable and makes combat more tense and realistic. Then cut the filler combat. While we are talking realism how about designing places that make sense. The Ruined Temple and many other locations threw enemies at you like a sidescroller. How would all of those people at the ruined temple feed themselves? Why didn’t they all attack at the same time? Cut the filler combat and you cut the lvls. Pool of Radiance is still my fave RPG ever and I only leveled from one through six, seven, or eight depending on class because wizards lvled slower and rogues faster.

DA didn’t need half of the combat, xp and lvls. If the game only had 1-8 lvls like Baldur’s Gate, a hit point system like the AoD demo or Bloodlines then you would not need scale wolves and common bandits to 17th lvl to make them a threat for most of the game.

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 18 décembre 2010 - 10:28 .

[Silent 1]

As long as it has better level scaling than Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion I have "nessun problema" (no problem)

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Silent 1 wrote...

As long as it has better level scaling than Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion I have "nessun problema" (no problem)

Low low standards. You could at least said Mass Effect.

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 19 décembre 2010 - 06:32 .

[Cazlee]

I liked the level scaling in DA:O. I think it works great in linear games like Bioware's RPGs, but it is terrible in non-linear games like Oblivion. I used to be a fan of grinding, but games with level scaling made me realize that grinding is very boring.

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Cazlee wrote...

I liked the level scaling in DA:O. I think it works great in linear games like Bioware's RPGs, but it is terrible in non-linear games like Oblivion. I used to be a fan of grinding, but games with level scaling made me realize that grinding is very boring.

Wasnt the purpose of having scaling in DA because it wasnt linear?
 
I thought the scaling in DA was worse than Oblivion. Technically they were equally horrible designs I just respected what they were going for in Oblivion. Basically they wanted you to have encounters that were fit for your lvl. Its like if you buy a pen and paper for a 10-15th lvl character the random encounters are set for that lvl. That’s the same thing you have in DA except the creatures don’t change which makes it even less believable and a more listless design on the part of the devs.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

I think partial level scaling is nice, but full level scaling can feel rediculous. Other posters mentioned situations with wolves, rats or other initial gameplay opponents which seem kind of goofy later on to pose a challenge to our heroic parties of characters. It's alright to occaisionally still run into the runty monsters, it makes the player feel powerful. For big dungeons, it's a good idea to put some form of level scaling on the monsters to keep the challenge of a significant location.



I hate to use Baldur's Gate as an example but I enjoyed roaming to locations on the world map, getting smacked down by powerful monsters then raising my fist, vowing I would return one day...then returning and kicking butt. It may make the game more linear to not have full level scaling, but it feels nice to have a challenge to work your characters up to as well, instead of having the challenge the same wherever they roam.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I don't think there should be any search for trainers. I would design the game to have very obvious centres for learning. They would cost money, but that would be a balancing mechanic so you could not learn all skills. Since the game would be primarily linear, you would just spread out your power curve by access to trainers.

Think of it a little like Jade Empire, at least with respect to how they spread out different styles from Tien's Landing to the Imperial City.

Manuals would just be drops from bosses.

Again, I hate open world and would never design any such game, or even consider that style of game when proposing an alternative to the XP system.

Everything you've described here seems designed to make the game less fun.

[Rzepik2]

In Exile wrote...
I honestly can't remember Fallout very much. My impression was that it was linear... 

Could my opinion of this forum drop any lower? Evidently so.

[Vena_86]

Well, semi level scaling would work. Instead of changing base stats, the game would choose how many enemies you encounter and what different versions of it.

For example in the begining of the game 5 Darkspawn Scouts (made up name) would challenge your party, but half way through the game you could encounter 8 Scouts accompanied by 3 Darkspawn Warriors (made up name as well) for a similar challenge.
The advantage of this is ofcourse that you really see and feel how much more powerfull your party becomes against individual enemies.

Modifié par Vena_86, 19 décembre 2010 - 08:56 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

Level scaling is as realistic as PC leveling up.

That aside, if you think completing a month's worth of fetch quests and killing random enemies should make a significant difference (which I personally do, to an extent at least), replacing enemies instead of leveling them up is a good idea. Increasing their numbers is also a good idea.

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Level scaling is as realistic as PC leveling up.
That aside, if you think completing a month's worth of fetch quests and killing random enemies should make a significant difference (which I personally do, to an extent at least), replacing enemies instead of leveling them up is a good idea. Increasing their numbers is also a good idea.

You go out and get into a month of life or death street fights or fight a in a war with battles every day for  a month and tell me you wont be a much tougher SOB afterwards. Leveling is very realistic. What is unrealistic is what the game changes when you level and for animals and bandits to level with you.

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 19 décembre 2010 - 09:21 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

In a Bioware game, I don't think there should be any freedom to explore. The biggest narrative weakness of any Bioware game is the ''here are four areas that you can visit that won't individually advance the plot'' that they've been pulling since KoTOR.

I think the biggest weakness of any BioWare game is that they try to control the narrative.

In Exile wrote...

I don't like exploration at all. That's part of the chore for me, not the fun.

Exploration is perhaps my favourite part of gameplay.  It grants absolutely unfettered freedom to determine the PC's motives, never contradicts those determinations, and allows the game world appear to exist independently of the authored narrative.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 19 décembre 2010 - 09:25 .

[Xewaka]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In Exile wrote...
I don't like exploration at all. That's part of the chore for me, not the fun.

Exploration is perhaps my favourite part of gameplay.  It grants absolutely unfettered freedom to determine the PC's motives, never contradicts those determinations, and allows the game world appear to exist independently of the authored narrative.

The level of enjoyment of exploration depends on how well-defined the outworld setting is. Exploration takes some work and some very good outdoors level design to be properly done, but when adequately executed, it's a great reward for curiosity.
When not properly done, it feels like a gigantic useless timesink.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

You go out and get into a month of life or death street fights or fight a in a war with battles every day for  a month and tell me you wont be a much tougher SOB afterwards. Leveling is very realistic. What is unrealistic is what the game changes when you level and for animals and bandits to level with you.

I happen to be a former soldier who fought several battles every week for months back in my day and I know what I am talking about, thank you very much. My point still stands. Level scaling is as realistic as PC leveling up. What is unrealistic is enemies sitting there doing nothing while you are killing your way to ultimate power and you coming back only to see the sad sacks still mooching about where you left them.

[In Exile]

Xewaka wrote...
The level of enjoyment of exploration depends on how well-defined the outworld setting is. Exploration takes some work and some very good outdoors level design to be properly done, but when adequately executed, it's a great reward for curiosity.

Exploration requires an interesting in objects or things. You have to care about finding a cave, or a view, or an item. As a player, I mean. If you find these sorts of things a chore, then you're not going to enjoy exploration in a game.

It doesn't matter how well-defined the setting is. What matters is interpersonal experience. The only way I would find exploration interesting is if we basically bad a Bioware game that was ''open-world'' in the sense that there was no main plot and each area had its own small vignette quests like the companion and recruitment missions of ME2. Standalone, but with a decent balance of action and interaction.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Everything you've described here
seems designed to make the game less fun.

Could you stop begging the question?

Making the game less fun for you is not making the game less fun.

That being said - why do you feel this way?

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I think the biggest weakness of any
BioWare game is that they try to control the narrative.

Whereas I think it's their biggest strength. It is, actually, one of the main reasons I purchase their games. If they were to release a game like BG again, I might very well not buy it.

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I happen to be a former soldier who fought several battles every week for months back in my day and I know what I am talking about, thank you very much. My point still stands. Level scaling is as realistic as PC leveling up. What is unrealistic is enemies sitting there doing nothing while you are killing your way to ultimate power and you coming back only to see the sad sacks still mooching about where you left them.

You cant be serious. I’m not talking about enemies having different levels I’m talking about them having the same levels as you. That’s not realistic at all. They are not living your life. A inexperienced bandit might have made a big score at a young and kicked back for a month, a bear might have been hibernating, an undead creature shouldn’t lvl unless its intelligent (lich, vampire) a soldier might have taken time off, and even a wolf that lives a rough life shouldn’t evolve into Rambo wolf. You might like that as a game mechanic to ‘balance’ but don’t argue that its realistic.

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 19 décembre 2010 - 03:41 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

You cant be serious. I’m not talking about enemies having different levels I’m talking about them having the same levels as you. That’s not realistic at all. They are not living your life. A inexperienced bandit might have made a big score at a young and kicked back for a month, a bear might have been hibernating, an undead creature shouldn’t lvl unless its intelligent (lich, vampire) a soldier might have taken time off, and even a wolf that lives a rough life shouldn’t evolve into Rambo wolf. You might like that as a game mechanic to ‘balance’ but don’t argue that its realistic.

What makes you think I'm arguing otherwise? Of course I'm well aware of the possible variances in pace across different creatures of Thedas, including you. I'm not saying enemies should always be the same level as you are, no matter how hard you try. What I'm saying is, a static world revolving around the protagonist like a planet going around its sun is not realistic. Before you go farther with your inferences, I'll refer you to my first post in this thread, where I mentioned examples of measures which can be applied as an alternative to blatant level scaling.
As for realism, you don't level up in real life; that's not realistic. You get experienced. Combat experience doesn't allow you to withstand twenty times as many blows to the head as what you used to in the beginning of your adventure in real life. Me, I don't give a rat's ass how realistic a game is, but if we're talking about realism here, level scaling is as realistic as PC leveling up.

[Dorian the Monk of Sune]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

What makes you think I'm arguing otherwise? Of course I'm well aware of the possible variances in pace across different creatures of Thedas, including you. I'm not saying enemies should always be the same level as you are, no matter how hard you try. What I'm saying is, a static world revolving around the protagonist like a planet going around its sun is not realistic. Before you go farther with your inferences, I'll refer you to my first post in this thread, where I mentioned examples of measures which can be applied as an alternative to blatant level scaling.
As for realism, you don't level up in real life; that's not realistic. You get experienced. Combat experience doesn't allow you to withstand twenty times as many blows to the head as what you used to in the beginning of your adventure in real life. Me, I don't give a rat's ass how realistic a game is, but if we're talking about realism here, level scaling is as realistic as PC leveling up.

Leveling up is just a simulation of the benefits one gets from experience. Simulating experiance is realistic and we agree that how they do it isn’t. You can put on muscle, learn how to roll with punches in real life but that’s peanuts compared to the way hit points balloon in most RPGs. There are systems that do a better or at least a more realistic job of simulating experience. Earlier in this thread I gave the example of Bloodlines and the Age of Decadence demo. A more realistic system would help make level scaling unnecessary.

If the encounters don’t need to be the same level as you then we agree that level scaling is unnecessary. I still cant grasp how you would see that as more realistic than the alternative. Level scaling doesn’t even attempt to simulate reality. it’s a game mechanic used to balance difficulty. Encountering creatures of variant difficulty is life. Variations do not in any way simulate a static world.

I am happy agreeing to disagree with anyone who doesn’t see realism as an apparatus. I see realism as a game designers friend. Its isn’t always the best solution but I would always consider what is realistic and work from there. Many of DA’s design flaws are grounded in artificiality being used as a short cut to achieve balance and gameplay.

Modifié par Dorian the Monk of Sune, 20 décembre 2010 - 12:02 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

Dorian the Monk of Sune wrote...

If the encounters don’t need to be the same level as you then we agree that level scaling is unnecessary. I still cant grasp how you would see that as more realistic than the alternative.

Perhaps because I wouldn't?

Again, my point is, leveling up on the player characters' part is as unrealistic as leveling up on the enemies' part. Sure, PC's leveling is meant to symbolize their gains from all those ordeals, how they get more toughened and experienced. Intent is there, yes. But intent doesn't automatically make it realistic; implementation is the key.

Level scaling doesn’t even attempt to simulate reality. it’s a game mechanic used to balance difficulty. Encountering creatures of variant difficulty is life. Variations do not in any way simulate a static world.

That's right, and level scaling somewhat helps alleviate the "oh, c'mon, I've been doing all this running around and leveling up, and these guys are still as lame as they were when I was twenty levels lower" feeling. Not everyone lives the same hectic life, of course, but you're not the only person going through duress that makes you tougher, either. The rest of the world does more than sitting on their butts all day, downing booze and playing poker. Especially if they're meant to fight hostiles as part of their day-to-day life.

Is level scaling the best solution? Not at all. It sucks. But that's another story. But level scaling as a means to convey the living, breating world feeling is not the sole unrealistic thing there. PC's leveling mechanics is as much of a criminal, too.

I am happy agreeing to disagree with anyone who doesn’t see realism as an apparatus. I see realism as a game designers friend. Its isn’t always the best solution but I would always consider what is realistic and work from there. Many of DA’s design flaws are grounded in artificiality being used as a short cut to achieve balance and gameplay.

Yes, the more I read others in these forums, the more I realize there are people who place great importance in realism. Of course, to each their own. There are times I feel uncomfortable when my suspension of disbelief is strained too much, too. But one should also ask themselves: If a creature meant to pose a manageable challenge at level 10 remains exactly the same when the player comes back at level 20, would that be received well? Sure it can be assumed that they didn't do much in the way of training in the meantime, but for gameplay purposes, this kind of design presents new problems to deal with.

Again, increasing the number of creatures in each encounter or replacing them with more powerful variants might be better, among other examples.

[The Sum of all Evil]

Are there already any mods out there that disable level scaling for DA2 as there are for DA:O? Thanks.

EDIT: spelling

Modifié par The Sum of all Evil, 20 mars 2011 - 01:36 .