184 réponses à ce sujet

[KC_Prototype]

I'm not sure if this is true but I heard that there will be no level scaling. That would mean if your want to fight something, it needs to be around your level. This may be good for some people but I for one hate that and hope DA:I has level scaling. Look at a game like Two Worlds 2, the level scaling almost made it unplayable(along with weak story, Lore and characters) because the damn game would kill you so often. Dragon's Dogma also does this(I've had no problems with this yet because you level up with ease). I just think level scaling gives players freedom to choose what ever quest they want to do at what time, unless it conflicts with the plot.

Modifié par KC_Prototype, 14 août 2013 - 08:42 .

[o Ventus]

I would rather the levels not scale. Walking around in level 50 purples, getting 3-hit by the same skeletons you've been fighting since the start of the game does convey any sense of power to the player.

[David7204]

So...you're saying level scaling ruined Two World 2 but you want it in DA: I?

[Kidd]

EntropicAngel wrote...

No level scaling is a wonderful idea. Level scaling means the world around you grows in power with the character--meaning that your character doesn't actually get more powerful. you might as well be playing a game without levels, if they scale.

Very much this. With level scaling, you might as well throw out most of the whole levelling mechanic (like ME2 did) and just get powers/spells.

It also means gear is not about how awesome you are, but how much you are behind. Levelling up without finding new gear would essentially mean you've made the game harder. Finding a better armour later on would mean you're back to status quo, not that you are more powerful. So it ruins the sense of progression in gear as well.

I'm all for games that don't have different swords dealing a different amount of damage (iron is iron) and don't increase your strength tenfold over the course of the game. But DA does have those progression elements and thus the rest of the game should be designed around that.

[Ziggeh]

Perhaps my memories a little hazy, but I had the impression that there would be level scaling, with the exclusion of some large creatures dotted about the place.

[o Ventus]

Ziggeh wrote...

Perhaps my memories a little hazy, but I had the impression that there would be level scaling, with the exclusion of some large creatures dotted about the place.

Nope. No level scaling.

[fchopin]

I want to control how my character levels up, if i want to fight a monster that kills me every time that should be up to me.

I don’t want to play combat like DA2, ME2 and ME3 where you just point a gun and shoot everything with your eyes closed. Any 5 year old can do that.

[Maiden Crowe]

David7204 wrote...

So...you're saying level scaling ruined Two World 2 but you want it in DA: I?

I haven't played Two Worlds 2 so forgive me if I am wrong here but I would assume that Two Worlds 2 not having level scaling ruined the game for him.


But that being said I personally view level scaling as a plague that is best avoided at all costs, I would much rather they scrap levelling up than use level scaling as level scaling pretty much makes levelling up feel gimmicky and not needed.

I really do not agree with the idea that you should be able to freely stroll into Mordor at level one and have the game lower the difficulty for you so you can do anything in whatever order you want. The whole point of levelling up is so that the character can grow in power and work their way up to these harder challenges, add level scaling and you might as well just scrap levelling.

[Jonathan Seagull]

I'm not a fan of level scaling in general. As others have said, I think it really diminishes the feeling of accomplishment that you get from leveling up. On the one hand, when your character is still relatively weak (or even when he's of moderate ability) there's a certain visceral terror that comes with running into some monster that's way out of your league. The game should never trap you in that situation, of course, but so long as you're able to avoid it if you so choose, I think it really lends a valuable sense of danger to the world. On the other end, I find that it's extremely satisfying once you've leveled up to be able to obliterate those low-level enemies that were such a hassle at the beginning.

To be fair, I think Dragon Age has handled level scaling reasonably well so far. They did a good job of balancing things. An infamous example of it not being done well, which has been brought up in conversations with a friend of mine multiple times, is Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. Scaling in that game was ridiculous. At high levels you eventually had common bandits trying to rob/kill you, all while they're decked out in rare and expensive armor. Coupled with the fact that you're fighting largely the same types of enemies throughout the game, and the feeling of progression (and as in the case of the bandits, sometimes even logic) went out the window.

I was honestly a bit shocked by the news that they're ditching it. Although it's not clear whether they're removing it entirely, or perhaps only removing it for certain areas or certain types of enemies. I tend to think that "boss" type encounters and similar things along the main path will probably still involve at least some scaling. I'm very curious to see exactly what they do.

Modifié par Jonathan Seagull, 14 août 2013 - 09:24 .

[fchopin]

Maiden Crowe wrote...

 add level scaling and you might as well just scrap levelling.

Yep level scaling is just an illusion as basically you have the same strength for level one or level 50 as nothing you do makes any difference.
It is better to remove level scaling from the game and have the same level throughout the game.

[David7204]

Fallout 3 did it best. No level scaling, but much more likely to encounter difficult enemies at high levels. Also some areas with high level enemies regardless of your level.

Perhaps most importantly, well-designed quests which encourage the player to explore areas fit for their likely current level.

[KC_Prototype]

I guess you guys have a point but I feel as if I just want to play the game, not be told when to do things if Bioware could help it. I know you can fight things that are higher level than you but it makes it impossible if your 10 levels below. I'm not sure is DA:O had level scaling but if DA:I is like that, than ok, but if it's like Two Worlds 2 or an MMO, no.

[KC_Prototype]

David7204 wrote...

So...you're saying level scaling ruined Two World 2 but you want it in DA: I?

The fact they didn't have it made almost ruined it. But the weak story and quest did.

[Wulfram]

The problem with not having level scaling is that you still want fights to pose a challenge towards the end of the game, so likely that bandits and gaurds and whatnot in later areas of the map won't be made arbitrarily more powerful than at start. They'll just be scaling towards when you're supposed to encounter them, rather than to your actual level - which isn't really all that different, it just means you've got less real freedom. And it can be annoying, if you find your supposedly epic heroes getting their rear ends handed to them by random bandits because you visited the wrong part of the map.

Unless they've flattened the power curve dramatically, anyway.

There's also the question of whether the game will be too difficult if you don't do all the sidequests, or to easy if you do. Though there are ways you can avoid that, like scaling the XP rewards to slow you down if you get ahead, or speed you up if you're behind..

[Commander Kurt]

I also heard that it will be a few encounters that don't scale, high dragons and such.

Anyway, I really like the sound of this. No scaling is awesome for choosing how you want to play the game (beat your head against the wall or be patient), BUT!

Please. Please. Don't make me spend much time grinding. This may be required for the old schoolers to really get it on, I wouldn't know, but it really takes me out of a story.

As an example, Dragon's Dogma did this well. No need to grind, but some enemies early on could really tear you a new one. Final Fantasy 13, I felt, didn't. They even put a level in it just for grinding.

[xnode]

Pretty much in the vid the only not leveling scaling they mention was "running to a location to find a boss that's a bit tougher then you can handle and having to go back to it later" that to me makes sense and in a design structure saves a hell of a lot of time developing. In open world environments, good luck trying to guess every which way a player can play. Making only bosses (as again they only talked about doing this) makes total sense in design and gameplay. I think some read into it or at least changed what they thought they heard. See the video again.

[Ziggeh]

o Ventus wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Perhaps my memories a little hazy, but I had the impression that there would be level scaling, with the exclusion of some large creatures dotted about the place.

Nope. No level scaling.

The exact phrase is: "very little of the content is scaled to your level" in a paragraph about open world exploration. Which either means: "very little of all of the games content is scaled to your level" or "very little of the open world content is scaled to your level".

[inarvan]

Level scaling makes sense in some instances for me, but mostly when it scales downward rather than upward. I think that you should able to deal with low-tier foes like bandits, etc., even if you wander into a higher level area. I hate it when content scales upward with no reason for it other than to present challenges to higher level characters. Monsters, higher tier opposition characters, and things like that shouldn't scale down, so that players are encouraged to build up to them. My two cents, anyway.

[Inprea]

I'm glad there won't be any level scaling. As someone that disarms every trap, opens every chest I can and kills every enemy I can in an attempt to squeeze out every little bit of experience I possibly can I greatly dislike level scaling. I don't play so carefully so that I can stay to the power curve I do it to get ahead of the power curve.

This holds especially true for games where enemies re-spawn. I'm one of those people that will clear a dungeon ten times before going into what I suspect is the boss's room just to make sure the fight goes the way I want. I want to kill things in flashy ways not be challenged except for on puzzle games. Yet for some reason I can never bring myself to change difficulty settings to easy or casual. I suppose for me grinding out levels is an in character way of improving the characters while changing the difficulty level is playing god.

[andar91]

I think it depends on how it's done. No level scaling can be great if--and I mean IF--there is some way to determine if I'm heading into an area that is beyond me. I don't want to reload my saves all the time just because I had no way of knowing what was coming.

[cJohnOne]

The problem I see with not having level scaling is that you will probably have to do things in a certain order which goes against having choice in the game. I don't know how to avoid this problem. But I've never played Baldur's gate games.

But I sort of like the concept of no level scaling since it makes things more exciting. Anyone know how this would work?

[Beerfish]

There will be level scaling of a sort in my opinion. They have indicated that you will progress through the story along the lines of the chapters in DA2 but it will be depend on the inquisitions. reputation or credibility rather than needing to get gold. There will be no level scaling within these chapters but they can still control enemy difficulty via progression through chapters.

[Challseus]

I'll be so happy with no level scaling, so I really hope it's true. As for Baldur's Gate, I *think* it worked because you weren't gaining levels left and right in the game. I think I reached a high of... level 9 in BG1? Could be wrong...

Anyway, point is, slower XP growth means you could potentially have a situation where you need to go to 3 different places (in the order you want), and perhaps you wouldn't gain a level until you completed 2/3, making the 3rd one *slightly* easier?

Eh, I'm rambling now