228 réponses à ce sujet

[Rorschachinstein]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Halarid wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

I know the principle behind the funneling which is to help your character level up before attempting the harder areas.

The content is all scaled anyway.  This principle doesn't apply.

The content in BG and BG2 wasn't level scaled (apart from a few instances of additional monsters appearing in BG2 due to the PC's level) and you could get your party wiped out if you weren't careful enough. That's one of the beautiful aspects of exploration - unpredictability and thrill.

Of course, the older games didn't scale as much.  BG would happily let you wander south from Candlekeep at level 1 and promptly get killed by Droth the Ogre Mage.

Yea, Skyrim cheated people when they made all the enemies scaled to your level. Made the bosses kind of lame.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

Yea, Skyrim cheated people when they made all the enemies scaled to your level. Made the bosses kind of lame.

That the dragons are all exactly the same challenge is a serious problem, yes.

[Halarid]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Halarid wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

I know the principle behind the funneling which is to help your character level up before attempting the harder areas.

The content is all scaled anyway.  This principle doesn't apply.

The content in BG and BG2 wasn't level scaled (apart from a few instances of additional monsters appearing in BG2 due to the PC's level) and you could get your party wiped out if you weren't careful enough. That's one of the beautiful aspects of exploration - unpredictability and thrill.

Of course, the older games didn't scale as much.  BG would happily let you wander south from Candlekeep at level 1 and promptly get killed by Droth the Ogre Mage.

I remember Droth and the vicious Nereid.  Excellent helmet as loot and experience, which was a great incentive to face them early on.

Ah the memories... Yeah, that can be called exploration. When there's no level scaling holding your hand wherever you go.
I curse the day when certain mainstream developers had come to the conclusion that introducing the abomination of level scaling is a good idea.

[fchopin]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
He says something like "This is the area of DAO. (pops up map of Thedas with Ferelden highlighted) This is the area of DA2. (same map highlights the tiny area of Kirkwall) This is what we are hoping the area will be for DA3. (highlights over a third of the entire map of Thedas, much more than the DAO highlighted portion)"

It never comes out and says double the size, but visually its easily seen.

Like I said, around the 5 minute mark.

How big the map is has nothing to do with how big the game is so they can make the map as big as the universe if they like, it makes no difference.

[wrigleyviller]

Halarid wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Halarid wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

I know the principle behind the funneling which is to help your character level up before attempting the harder areas.

The content is all scaled anyway.  This principle doesn't apply.

The content in BG and BG2 wasn't level scaled (apart from a few instances of additional monsters appearing in BG2 due to the PC's level) and you could get your party wiped out if you weren't careful enough. That's one of the beautiful aspects of exploration - unpredictability and thrill.

Of course, the older games didn't scale as much.  BG would happily let you wander south from Candlekeep at level 1 and promptly get killed by Droth the Ogre Mage.

I remember Droth and the vicious Nereid.  Excellent helmet as loot and experience, which was a great incentive to face them early on.

Ah the memories... Yeah, that can be called exploration. When there's no level scaling holding your hand wherever you go.
I curse the day when certain mainstream developers had come to the conclusion that introducing the abomination of level scaling is a good idea.

Eh, I'm OK with some level scaling (it isn't always fun spending substantial time exploring an area only to realize you are gonna die hard and there's almost nothing you can do about it). On the other hand, DA2 is far too level scaled - why are trash mobs exactly as difficult when I'm the Champion as when I'm a level 2 refugee? (Also, what insane group of low-level thugs would attack the Champion?) I'd prefer a slightly less scaled version of DAO, where you were free to attempt the Deep Roads or hang out in Denerim immediately after Lothering but those areas were gonna be hard on you in the early game (especially the Deep Roads). Difficulty went something like Orzammar > Denerim > Brecelian Forest > Redcliff > Circle Tower.

With the exception of certain optional quests (like the High Dragon) fight difficulties are just way too similar in DA2.

[Madcat 124]

fchopin wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
He says something like "This is the area of DAO. (pops up map of Thedas with Ferelden highlighted) This is the area of DA2. (same map highlights the tiny area of Kirkwall) This is what we are hoping the area will be for DA3. (highlights over a third of the entire map of Thedas, much more than the DAO highlighted portion)"

It never comes out and says double the size, but visually its easily seen.

Like I said, around the 5 minute mark.

How big the map is has nothing to do with how big the game is so they can make the map as big as the universe if they like, it makes no difference.

True that it makes no difference in a game like DA, but at least with a bigger map there's a better chance that we'll see more unique enviornments and go to more exotic places. Probably said before, just restating it.

[Halarid]

wrigleyviller wrote...

Halarid wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Halarid wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

I know the principle behind the funneling which is to help your character level up before attempting the harder areas.

The content is all scaled anyway.  This principle doesn't apply.

The content in BG and BG2 wasn't level scaled (apart from a few instances of additional monsters appearing in BG2 due to the PC's level) and you could get your party wiped out if you weren't careful enough. That's one of the beautiful aspects of exploration - unpredictability and thrill.

Of course, the older games didn't scale as much.  BG would happily let you wander south from Candlekeep at level 1 and promptly get killed by Droth the Ogre Mage.

I remember Droth and the vicious Nereid.  Excellent helmet as loot and experience, which was a great incentive to face them early on.

Ah the memories... Yeah, that can be called exploration. When there's no level scaling holding your hand wherever you go.
I curse the day when certain mainstream developers had come to the conclusion that introducing the abomination of level scaling is a good idea.

Eh, I'm OK with some level scaling (it isn't always fun spending substantial time exploring an area only to realize you are gonna die hard and there's almost nothing you can do about it). On the other hand, DA2 is far too level scaled - why are trash mobs exactly as difficult when I'm the Champion as when I'm a level 2 refugee? (Also, what insane group of low-level thugs would attack the Champion?) I'd prefer a slightly less scaled version of DAO, where you were free to attempt the Deep Roads or hang out in Denerim immediately after Lothering but those areas were gonna be hard on you in the early game (especially the Deep Roads). Difficulty went something like Orzammar > Denerim > Brecelian Forest > Redcliff > Circle Tower.

With the exception of certain optional quests (like the High Dragon) fight difficulties are just way too similar in DA2.

That entirely depends on area design.
Smart design will always let you do something in an area regardless of your PC's capabilities; isolate quests, having parts of the area populated with easier enemies, non-linear areas.. Also, the emphasis should be on a shallower power curve which is one of the best ways to suppress level scaling.

Level scaling is an abomination. If they really really want scaled content, it's much better to have quantity scaling, of course sporadically. 
For example, instead of an alpha wolf + 1 "normal" wolf when your PC is level 2, have the game spawn an alpha wolf + 3 "normal" wolves when your PC is level 7. Without changing the stats of the alpha wolf or the normal wolf.

Naturally, I agree with you that there was way too much scaling in DA2 (and DAO, which was similarly scaled).


With level scaling there's no middle ground. When you mix cake and feces - the product will always be feces. Level scaling being the feces here.

Modifié par Halarid, 04 février 2012 - 06:44 .

[LightningSamus]

Hope to see Loghain in Orlais if you kept him alive.

[DoctorMax]

It is interesting thread. But with lack of real information
- could we also exchange thoughts about what dragon age 3 is like story wise?



I'd give my 2 cents - if this is wrong forum for that - ignore me



After finishing DA2, I now think that the whole thing will boil down to lyrium.

That episode where people who were under influence of lyrium idol started to
hear song really establish a connection with DA-O Awakening and the mother who was
mad about not hearing the song of old god again.

One can even argue that old gods who were cast underground became mad because
of exposure to lyrium and darkspawn came to be from people of different races
who were left alive and mad forever because of same exposure, like profanes in
dragon age 2. And their taint could be also lyrium connected and therefore
there is great potential to use taint as source of great and different powers
(DLC - Warden's Keep).



Lyrium stands as main factor in mage - templar conflict. In possible exalted
march against dwarfs. Even in elves history with their sudden connection to
dwarfs (DA-O DLC witch hunt).



And hint that Andraste was a mage completes the picture by establishing clear
link between maker, who was living in the fade (Golden and then Black City) and
people of the real world through magic - which in turn is connected to lyrium.



So could it be that the reborn old god will be able to break the cycle and
separate world of living and world of spirits, removing influence of lyrium and
closing the wail for good? Is that what Flemeth wants? A hint that she is old
elven god that trapped gods once suggests that she can desire to do it again.



Warden is a tool to defeat another risen god - but allowing his soul to live
cleansed. Hawk is a tool to expose the primeval thaig and be a catalyst to
explode mage-templar balance (as hinted by Varric "maybe if not for the
champion it would not even went so far”). If this is the case than Flemeth is
prepared to make her move and Warden with Hawk will be standing in front of the
choice - live their life with however they have chosen or fight a war again.



Should be interesting...

Modifié par DoctorMax, 06 février 2012 - 04:10 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Halarid wrote...

Naturally, I agree with you that there was way too much scaling in DA2 (and DAO, which was similarly scaled).

DAO had the advantage of scaling an area the first time you visited it.  So within any given playthrough, the enemies in any given area didn't appear to scale from the PC's perspective.

DA2, on the other hand, didn't do that.  So while the darkspawn in Ortan Thaig didn't magically grow more powerful just because the Warden did, the denizens of the Wounded Coast in Act 2 are vastly more powerful than they were in Act 1.

[Morroian]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DA2, on the other hand, didn't do that.  So while the darkspawn in Ortan Thaig didn't magically grow more powerful just because the Warden did, the denizens of the Wounded Coast in Act 2 are vastly more powerful than they were in Act 1.

Why couldn't the movement in time account for that? 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Is that plausible, though? Everyone's a weakling now, but in three years no one is a weakling? Shouldn't there always be some diversity within the population?

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Agreed. Final Fantasy X-2 suffered from this (yes, I played that game. I regret it greatly), where the game started you out with the airship you worked hard to acheive in the first game. But you could only visit four or five locations in the entire world starting out, so it was a hollow experience.

Actually, in FF X-2 all the locations become available quite early on. Pretty much immediatly after the tutorial mission on top of Mount Gagazet, you're free to go wherever you want. Locations that will progress the story are clearly labelled as "Hotspots", but you can put off going to those for as long as you like.

And you can still physically walk from any one location to any other, if you're so inclined.

[RazorrX]

Area scaling is not bad if it only scaled within a given range. Say +/- 2 or 3 levels max spread. With boss creatures only scaling up.

[Halarid]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Halarid wrote...

Naturally, I agree with you that there was way too much scaling in DA2 (and DAO, which was similarly scaled).

DAO had the advantage of scaling an area the first time you visited it.  So within any given playthrough, the enemies in any given area didn't appear to scale from the PC's perspective.

DA2, on the other hand, didn't do that.  So while the darkspawn in Ortan Thaig didn't magically grow more powerful just because the Warden did, the denizens of the Wounded Coast in Act 2 are vastly more powerful than they were in Act 1.

This (DAO's L.S.) doesn't make the concept of level scaling any less horrible/idiotic. 

Also, I'm not really sure if areas didn't appear to scale from the PC's perspective in DAO, because you're constantly facing foes of strength comparable to that of your PC (which is the "point" of l. scaling) - so I assume the PC would kind of notice at some point something's off. Wtf, why is this wolf/bandit so hard to kill even now that I've slained a dragon. 

The player, of course, does notice this miserable mechanism regardless of what we imagine the PC does or does not notice.

Modifié par Halarid, 07 février 2012 - 10:13 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Pretty informative read, thanks! I am expecting an official reveal sometime after ME3's release, possibly at E3 this June.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Halarid wrote...

This (DAO's L.S.) doesn't make the concept of level scaling any less horrible/idiotic. 

Also, I'm not really sure if areas didn't appear to scale from the PC's perspective in DAO, because you're constantly facing foes of strength comparable to that of your PC (which is the "point" of l. scaling) - so I assume the PC would kind of notice at some point something's off. Wtf, why is this wolf/bandit so hard to kill even now that I've slained a dragon. 

The player, of course, does notice this miserable mechanism regardless of what we imagine the PC does or does not notice.

I completely agree that scaling, in general, is bad.

If they're so concerned with the possibility of the player running into impossible challenges, the obvious solution is to give the entire game a shallower power curve (like BG did).

[Halarid]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Halarid wrote...

This (DAO's L.S.) doesn't make the concept of level scaling any less horrible/idiotic. 

Also, I'm not really sure if areas didn't appear to scale from the PC's perspective in DAO, because you're constantly facing foes of strength comparable to that of your PC (which is the "point" of l. scaling) - so I assume the PC would kind of notice at some point something's off. Wtf, why is this wolf/bandit so hard to kill even now that I've slained a dragon. 

The player, of course, does notice this miserable mechanism regardless of what we imagine the PC does or does not notice.

I completely agree that scaling, in general, is bad.

If they're so concerned with the possibility of the player running into impossible challenges, the obvious solution is to give the entire game a shallower power curve (like BG did).

Indeed.


Look at this absurdity.


Bioware gameplay developer 1: We need the game to be accessible.


Bioware gameplay developer 2: Ten times yes! Our players should be able to travel wherever they want and kill whatever they want at any point in the game.


Bioware gameplay developer 1: Oh, we should also throw in a dragon and a couple of revenants for those tryhards who don't appreciate the concept of innovative *accessible* games. 


Bioware gameplay developer 2: Of course.


Bioware gameplay developer 1: Anyway, how do we keep the challenge at a constant level?


*God of RPGs aka Forgotten Hope whispers in the distance*: If you need a comparable level of challenge throughout the game, use a shallow power curve.


Bioware gameplay developer 1 & 2 in unison: I think we need... YES!... we need to have enemies level up at the same time the PC does! 

*** 


So on one hand we have level scaling and 20 meaningless levels of (more or less) considerable absolute increments in power... that do not matter in relation to the world as enemies level up with the PC.


And on the other hand we have common sense and increments in power that do matter, however small they are.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Oh no, don't get me started on level scaling for monsters. I do miss games where a wrong turn could lead to a brutal death of my character. It is a video game afterall with the ability to reload so it's not the end of the world if a character dies here and there. Too many developers seem to want to hold the player's hand and walk them through the game the whole way. It's getting obnoxious, plus it seems a crutch in some games so that some developers don't have to think much about combat depth/style of play, importantance in leveling of character skills/abilities or strategy of attack.

[Tsuga C]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I completely agree that scaling, in general, is bad.

If they're so concerned with the possibility of the player running into impossible challenges, the obvious solution is to give the entire game a shallower power curve (like BG did).

*crosses fingers and hopes*

They're showing some signs of--how to put this politely?--accepting that much of what they did in DA2 was less than desirable, so we might just have our way on this one.

[Durang]

 Glad to hear that the game world will be bigger.  That was one of the things that disappointed me most from DAII.  I thought we were going to explore all of the Free Marches and we ended up only going around Kirkwall and the surronding areas.

Less dungeon recycling is great too.  I got tired of visiting the same place over and over with just a few different tunnels closed off.

Not sure I'll be happy if the story revolves mostly around the mages vs. templars though.  I had enough of that from DAII tbh.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Tsuga C wrote...

*crosses fingers and hopes*

They're showing some signs of--how to put this politely?--accepting that much of what they did in DA2 was less than desirable, so we might just have our way on this one.

They are indeed.

[alex90c]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Tsuga C wrote...

*crosses fingers and hopes*

They're showing some signs of--how to put this politely?--accepting that much of what they did in DA2 was less than desirable, so we might just have our way on this one.

They are indeed.

...hence why they're sticking with the DA2 direction.

They'll obviously get rid of things like recycled environments and paratroopers, but most of the DA2 stuff is gonna be staying.

[Sylvius the Mad]

alex90c wrote...

most of the DA2 stuff is gonna be staying.

I have no reason to believe that.