58 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I find myself agreeing with Sylvius.

They changed it cos they reckoned that the bombardment of information in DAO confused players which was true to a degree.

I think DAO wasn't nearly informative enough.

As such, I find DA2's wilful promotion of ignorance even more grating.

[Morroian]

naledgeborn wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Maybe you want to look into some of the item mods? They've got level-scaling armor there.

I'm on 360. Thing is I know how to mod for it but Horizon and First Blight can really break a save file (too unreliable) whether it's little things like changing NPC approval or big things like inadverdently giving my PC + 30 Constitution. It really is an "at your own risk" process. Luckily I was able to mod my Parthalan Staff to "improve w/lvl up" without any side effects. But I'm not going through all that hassel again just to end up corrupting my save file or giving Hawke + 80 to all attributes.

The fact that I need to do this kind of stuff is proof enough that the scaling system in DA2 sucks.

Or they should make the unique armors evolving, they could do it, I've modded the unique armors on most of my games to be evolving on PC.

[naledgeborn]

Morroian wrote...

Or they should make the unique armors evolving, they could do it, I've modded the unique armors on most of my games to be evolving on PC.

Don't know how much trouble it would be to put it in a patch, but sure I could get down with that.

[Yrkoon]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

I find myself agreeing with Sylvius.

They changed it cos they reckoned that the bombardment of information in DAO confused players which was true to a degree.
A lot of the information was presented in wall-o-text style and many folks dont like reading like that.

Unfortunately in typical Bioware style instead of improving it by communicating the needed information in a concise manner they took it completely out and replaced it with something that makes even less sense than the wall-o-text presentation.

It sucks.

This is it.  Exactly.

And even beyond "confusing the players" we see 2 basic results  manifesting in player feedback:

1) It really DOES feel like you're getting weaker when you level up  (which is a horrible thing to do in an RPG)

2) The system itself lacks any semblance of creativity.  There are many, MANY ways to implement level scaling that do not involve  the STUPID notion of symetrically lowering the player's  effective combat stats while raising the opponent's upon level up.

Off the top of my head:

a) introduce different enemies in an encounter point depending on the party's level.  (BG2 did this.  You're in a hallway in   Firkraag's dungeon.  At level 10, you'll face basic low level mobs.... Orcs, trolls, warewolves etc.  But go in at level 18, and you'll be facing a pack of Golems instead.)

Increase the volume of enemies depending on party level.  (BG1 did this.   You're in a forest.  At level 2, you'll encounter a pair of Kobolds or Xvarts.   But go to that same forest at level 7 and  you'll face an army of kobolds and Xvarts)

c) Increase enemy abilities depending on the party level.  (DA:O did this.  At level 8, Hurlock emassaries toss basic tier 1-3 spells at you (lightning, fireball, winter's grasp), but at 15th level, their arsenal includes the nastier stuff  (Crushing Prison, Curse of Mortality, Glyph of Neutralization)


Edit: Evolving  Gear isn't the solution either, since it takes away  the fun of discovering new loot.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 12 octobre 2011 - 01:27 .

[Bitterfoam]

I don't feel weaker as I level up.

[San Diego Thief]

@Yrkoon - awesome examples! If only Bioware developers would realize this and comment on any future plans...

[Bestyj669]

Also slightly annoying thing for me was ... It took, for arguments sake 2 fireballs to kill a giant spider at level 5 ish. And ... it takes at least 3 fireballs to kill the same giant spider at level 25 ish.

It's still the same damned spider ! Just because Hawke got more powerful does not mean that every single spider around Kirkwall should.

(Does not apply to giant spiders only. they were just chosen as an example)

[Sylvius the Mad]

Yrkoon wrote...

Evolving  Gear isn't the solution either, since it takes away  the fun of discovering new loot.

Evolving gear is also lore-breaking.  Without some in-game justification, no piece of gear's stats should ever change.

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Evolving  Gear isn't the solution either, since it takes away  the fun of discovering new loot.

Evolving gear is also lore-breaking.  Without some in-game justification, no piece of gear's stats should ever change.

How about the in-game justification that it's enchanted to improve as the wielder's power grows? I mean, what's the in-game justification for a sword dealing spirit damage, or an amulet improving the wearer's attack stat? Because it has that particular enchantment. I don't see anything lore-breaking about the evolving property.

[ScotGaymer]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Evolving  Gear isn't the solution either, since it takes away  the fun of discovering new loot.

Evolving gear is also lore-breaking.  Without some in-game justification, no piece of gear's stats should ever change.

I dont really agree with this one actually. It doesnt bother me at all.

In fact it makes life easier given how broken level scaling is in DA2, because you dont need to bother faffing about finding gear if you find something that improves with you as you level up.

I dont think it is lore breaking either because given how magic works in DA it is perfectly reasonable to have swords, staffs, or armour "get better" as the player levels. The problem is DA2 doesnt ever seem to tell you this, so you dont really know why these things level with you, or why they make sense.

I have always said that when you the customer have to use Meta Game knowledge to explain away plot holes or stupidities in the gameplay then then the developer has failed in those areas that meta game knowledge needs to be applied.
This is one of those areas alas.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 12 octobre 2011 - 07:07 .

[blaidfiste]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Evolving  Gear isn't the solution either, since it takes away  the fun of discovering new loot.

Evolving gear is also lore-breaking.  Without some in-game justification, no piece of gear's stats should ever change.

How about the in-game justification that it's enchanted to improve as the wielder's power grows? I mean, what's the in-game justification for a sword dealing spirit damage, or an amulet improving the wearer's attack stat? Because it has that particular enchantment. I don't see anything lore-breaking about the evolving property.

I'd like to sell the armor pieces to a smithy or Sandal and repurchase them upgraded.  Once per 5 levels or so. 

[naledgeborn]

blaidfiste wrote...

I'd like to sell the armor pieces to a smithy or Sandal and repurchase them upgraded.  Once per 5 levels or so. 

The ultimate immediate solution.

I want to see this for DAIII though

Yrkoon wrote...

a) introduce different enemies in an encounter point depending on the party's level.  (BG2 did this.  You're in a hallway in   Firkraag's dungeon.  At level 10, you'll face basic low level mobs.... Orcs, trolls, warewolves etc.  But go in at level 18, and you'll be facing a pack of Golems instead.)

Increase the volume of enemies depending on party level.  (BG1 did this.   You're in a forest.  At level 2, you'll encounter a pair of Kobolds or Xvarts.   But go to that same forest at level 7 and  you'll face an army of kobolds and Xvarts)

c) Increase enemy abilities depending on the party level.  (DA:O did this.  At level 8, Hurlock emassaries toss basic tier 1-3 spells at you (lightning, fireball, winter's grasp), but at 15th level, their arsenal includes the nastier stuff  (Crushing Prison, Curse of Mortality, Glyph of Neutralization)

Modifié par naledgeborn, 12 octobre 2011 - 07:36 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

How about the in-game justification that it's enchanted to improve as the wielder's power grows?

We'd need to define what "wielder's power" means.

I don't mind magic explaining how things work, but there needs to be an actual explanation that applies universally.

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

How about the in-game justification that it's enchanted to improve as the wielder's power grows?

We'd need to define what "wielder's power" means.

I don't mind magic explaining how things work, but there needs to be an actual explanation that applies universally.

Wielder's power means level. If we divorce the enchantment from the game-y rules, maybe experience (since that's what level is intended to represent)? Or whatever you feel level represents. I'm sure you've an answer for that

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

How about the in-game justification that it's enchanted to improve as the wielder's power grows?

We'd need to define what "wielder's power" means.

I don't mind magic explaining how things work, but there needs to be an actual explanation that applies universally.

Wielder's power means level. If we divorce the enchantment from the game-y rules, maybe experience (since that's what level is intended to represent)? Or whatever you feel level represents. I'm sure you've an answer for that

If we use experience, then experience would need to be something in the world, and not just an abstraction of learning.  And them equipment would need to gain strength constantly - not just at level boundaries.

Level would similarly need to be defined as an in-game fact: something of which the characters could be explicitly aware.  It would then need to be acceptable within the setting for two characters to talk about their relative levels.

If we don't want those things, then we cannot use levels or experience as the basis for improving gear.

There are ways to do this well, but they tend to produce a much lighter mood within the game.  A darkers, grittier game would be damaged by them.

[naledgeborn]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

How about the in-game justification that it's enchanted to improve as the wielder's power grows?

We'd need to define what "wielder's power" means.

I don't mind magic explaining how things work, but there needs to be an actual explanation that applies universally.

Wielder's power means level. If we divorce the enchantment from the game-y rules, maybe experience (since that's what level is intended to represent)? Or whatever you feel level represents. I'm sure you've an answer for that

If we use experience, then experience would need to be something in the world, and not just an abstraction of learning.  And them equipment would need to gain strength constantly - not just at level boundaries.

Level would similarly need to be defined as an in-game fact: something of which the characters could be explicitly aware.  It would then need to be acceptable within the setting for two characters to talk about their relative levels.

If we don't want those things, then we cannot use levels or experience as the basis for improving gear.

There are ways to do this well, but they tend to produce a much lighter mood within the game.  A darkers, grittier game would be damaged by them.

You two are thinking way too far outside the box when the answer is in your face. You want a lore justification for armor/weapon stat degredation and the "improves with level up" feature. 

To the former: It can be attributed to natural wear and tear. The more you use a piece of equipment the weaker it gets as Hawke levels up. Introduce a "smithing" mechanic where Hawke can pay for the repair/maintenace of his equipment. The quality of a given item parallels the price payed to the smith for repair. Just level up the arms and armor 2-3 levels higher than Hawke's base stats and voila. Back in action.

To the latter: "Improves with level up" is a spell/enchantment that negates wear and tear.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 13 octobre 2011 - 02:08 .

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

If we use experience, then experience would need to be something in the world, and not just an abstraction of learning.  And them equipment would need to gain strength constantly - not just at level boundaries.

Level would similarly need to be defined as an in-game fact: something of which the characters could be explicitly aware.  It would then need to be acceptable within the setting for two characters to talk about their relative levels.

If we don't want those things, then we cannot use levels or experience as the basis for improving gear.

There are ways to do this well, but they tend to produce a much lighter mood within the game.  A darkers, grittier game would be damaged by them.

Sure, but those same statements apply to the level mechanic as well as they do to the "improves with level-up" enchantment. Level is a game-y abstraction of the constant accumulation of experience. The rules of the game aren't the rules of the world: only representations of them. Perhaps the weapons really are increasing in power constantly, but the mechanical representation of that is such that it only improves at level-up, just like the character's strength.

Basically, if you accept a level mechanic, then it's simple to justify the "improves with level-up" enchantment. If you don't accept a level mechanic, then it's going to be forced on you anyway, so the point is moot

[mousestalker]

I prefer level pitting, myself.

[PsychoBlonde]

San Diego Thief wrote...

I agree...level scaling sucks....the monsters and enemies you encounter should determine the difficulty..if you encounter an enemy that is too strong in the beginning, you should be able to sneak by it with a distraction, run away, or talk your way out of the encounter...

Granted, this would require them to allow you to a.) sneak by, b.) distract stuff, c.) run away, and d.) actually talk your way past most things.

With 90% of the stuff in DA3, you can't do *any* of those things, so the only way out of a situation you can't handle is e.) load an earlier save.

I don't keep earlier saves because I prefer my first few playthroughs be cold:  even if I do something I didn't like, I won't reload to go back and fix it.  So if it turns out there's a huge unkillable boss at the end of this dungeon, I may not have a save that'd let me go back far enough to respec my party.

So they have monster scaling in the hopes that it'll prevent people from screwing themselves and having to start over in order to progress.

[Sylvius the Mad]

They could also reduce this problem by having a shallower power curve.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Sure, but those same statements apply to the level mechanic as well as they do to the "improves with level-up" enchantment. Level is a game-y abstraction of the constant accumulation of experience. The rules of the game aren't the rules of the world: only representations of them. Perhaps the weapons really are increasing in power constantly, but the mechanical representation of that is such that it only improves at level-up, just like the character's strength.

Basically, if you accept a level mechanic, then it's simple to justify the "improves with level-up" enchantment. If you don't accept a level mechanic, then it's going to be forced on you anyway, so the point is moot

No.  The scaling needs to be explained based on in-game events.  Levels are an abstraction of an in-game event - they are not themselves an in-game event.

And again, what's the explanation?  How are these weapons growing stronger based on the ability or knowledge of the wielder?  And how high-magicky and frivolous does that explanation make the setting sound?

You can't just gloss this over and assume it makes sense, because whether it makes sense depends on all of the consequences of the systems myriad details.

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No.  The scaling needs to be explained based on in-game events.  Levels are an abstraction of an in-game event - they are not themselves an in-game event.

And again, what's the explanation?  How are these weapons growing stronger based on the ability or knowledge of the wielder?  And how high-magicky and frivolous does that explanation make the setting sound?

You can't just gloss this over and assume it makes sense, because whether it makes sense depends on all of the consequences of the systems myriad details.

The "improves with level-up" property is also an abstraction of in-game events. The in-game event is that the item is increasing consistently with the the character's power. The explanation is "a wizard did it," same as the explanation for every other enchantment.

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

No.  The scaling needs to be explained based on in-game events.  Levels are an abstraction of an in-game event - they are not themselves an in-game event.

And again, what's the explanation?  How are these weapons growing stronger based on the ability or knowledge of the wielder?  And how high-magicky and frivolous does that explanation make the setting sound?

You can't just gloss this over and assume it makes sense, because whether it makes sense depends on all of the consequences of the systems myriad details.

How bout this?

The more adept you are at your class, the more effectiveness you can utilize from the weapon. The limitation isn't in the weapon, but in the character's ability to wield it properly.

[Sylvius the Mad]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

How bout this?

The more adept you are at your class, the more effectiveness you can utilize from the weapon. The limitation isn't in the weapon, but in the character's ability to wield it properly.

That would be fine, but the best way to represent that wouldn't be in the weapon's stats, but the character's stats.

Perhaps they want to present only a single number to the player, but this entire discussion has shown how confusing that is.  If they want people to accept their mechanics, they're going to have to reveal those mechanics.

The system you propose is a good one.  Weapons of different quality could have different power caps on them - a point beyond which the skill of the wielder no longer matters because the weapon just isn't good enough to offer them further improvement.  But that's not how DA2's system works.

Any system they use needs to be explicable in all cases.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 13 octobre 2011 - 05:35 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Look, if BioWare had come out when people started asking "Why is my weapon getting weaker?" and explained that it wasn't, but it was being measured against different opponents, or if they responded to questions about the "Improves with level-up" ability with some sensible explanation, then I think we would have accepted that and moved on to "Why isn't this better documented?" questions.

But until we know what they were actually going for, documentation questions don't make sense.