575 réponses à ce sujet

[ladydesire]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upper_Krust wrote...

In DAO I would be of the opinion that the game gets easier (mechanically) as you progress, even taking level Scaling into account.

Have you played it more than once?

I find that it got easier, but then it stayed easy, as the difficultly curve wasn't the game itself but just me learning the game.

How many RPGs have you played? If you're constantly buying and playing them, you're not going to find as much of a challenge on the second and subsequent playthroughs as someone that rarely buys them.

The result of this is that the player can become lazier (mentally) with their tactics as the game goes on.

DAO does lack tactical variety.  Once you find a tactic that works for you you can use it again and again without the need to develop new ones to defeat more creative enemies.

I do agree that something is needed to satisfy those complaining about the lack of challenge, but I don't think the answer is to do it with a mod that essentially removes the scaling; what is needed is a way to make the foes much more tactical in their combat, which is something that Upper_Krust has said in other threads on this subject (I think he's mentioned it in this one as well).

[contown]

OP has a point. There should be new, more powerful enemies. Not more powerful versions of old enemies.

[Sylvius the Mad]

contown wrote...

OP has a point. There should be new, more powerful enemies. Not more powerful versions of old enemies.

I also want to keep the old, weaker enemies.

[AuraofMana]

I can't believe you related this to Oblivion. Do you know how bad scaling in Oblivion was? Jesus, that game was completely unplayable to me without heavy modding. Leveling in that game actually makes the game HARDER and may make it UNPLAYABLE. In this game, level scaling is limited, so certain monsters would never exceed level X. Not to mention if you build your character right, the more levels you get, the easier the game gets because your character's power scaling beat the level scaling. This was done so you character never get stuck in a location because the fight is to too difficult because the set level of the monsters. Harder enemies actually obtain new talents/spells as opposed to just getting a stat buff and nothing else. It is very well done imo.

TES V should do that instead of the POS way done in Oblivion. God... Oblivion sucked >_>

[Akka le Vil]

Upper_Krust wrote...

Looking at video games in general, the more skill required to play a game, the less emphasis is placed upon Levelling Up. You could say that Levelling Up is the crutch of the casual gamer to some extent.

Now I feel dirty to have been compared to a casual player *puke in disgust*

And I disagree. Leveling up is simply a feature in games where the avatar (not just the player) is becoming stronger. It doesn't mean it's a crutch, but simply that the avatar isn't static.
It's a bit like saying that developping technology in Civilization is a crutch to make it easy for the casual. 

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

contown wrote...

OP
has a point. There should be new, more powerful enemies. Not more
powerful versions of old enemies.

I also want to keep the
old, weaker enemies.

Well, same here. I hate level scaling because it remove the very reason why we level up, and because it makes the game-world completely unbelievable.
Replacing weaker monster by stronger monster is less ridiculous than having auto-leveled identical monsters, but it still keep the two main problems above.

I can't believe you related this to Oblivion. Do you know how bad
scaling in Oblivion was?

Yes.
Do you know how bad scaling is in DAO for 90 % of the game ?

[CybAnt1]

Not to mention if you build your character right, the more levels you get, the easier the game gets because your character's power scaling beat the level scaling.

Correct. What people don't seem to get is although levels are scaling, many things are not, so the game is definitely getting easier as it goes along.

Your lvl 18 mage may bump into a lvl 18 emissary ... but I guarantee he will have fewer spells, worse gear (no it doesn't "oblivionize" it upwards automatically and you may have noticed most darkspawn items carry red penalties), might be carrying a few potions but will never drink them, will be tactically/AI-wise "dumber" and use his spells worse even than your NPC mages on AI, and will not co-ordinate with his peers as well as you are with your party members. He will not use any items and almost never buffs himself or receives buffs/heals from others.

For all these reasons ... yes the game is level scaling but ISN'T challenge scaling. 

[k9medusa]

Depends on one's mode and stress level, I like two different areas -- super easy one to beat on something to release hard day's stress, but I also liked hard areas sometimes so that it does not make the game boarding either -- that is a hard balance to do right

Modifié par k9medusa, 11 mars 2010 - 03:31 .

[Upper_Krust]

[quote]ladydesire wrote...

Have you played it more than once?[/quote]

Not yet. Been very busy with work and I have some new games I'd like to play once (Just finished Bayonetta and I have Darksiders waiting for me) before I get to another playthrough. Theres also Dante's Inferno and Awakening I suppose too although I haven't bought them yet (obviously not in Awakenings case since its not available yet).

[quote]I find that it got easier, but then it stayed easy, as the difficultly curve wasn't the game itself but just me learning the game.[/quote]

To a degree yes, but at no point did I ever sense the game was getting harder...or even maintaining the challenge. It just gradually gets easier and easier punctuated by a few boss fights that will punish you if you get too lazy (which of course is something the game seems to promote).

How many RPGs have you played?[/quote]

Before Dragon Age I hadn't played a computer RPG since Final Fantasy 9.

[quote]If you're constantly buying and playing them, you're not going to find as much of a challenge on the second and subsequent playthroughs as someone that rarely buys them.[/quote]

First videogame RPG in about a decade...but I'm pretty good at games in general.

[quote]DAO does lack tactical variety.  Once you find a tactic that works for you you can use it again and again without the need to develop new ones to defeat more creative enemies.[/quote]

Exactly, and its the games biggest drawback.

[quote]I do agree that something is needed to satisfy those complaining about the lack of challenge, but I don't think the answer is to do it with a mod that essentially removes the scaling; what is needed is a way to make the foes much more tactical in their combat, which is something that Upper_Krust has said in other threads on this subject (I think he's mentioned it in this one as well).[/quote]

I personally don't think the scaling has anything to do with the games problems at all, but its something easily avoided (or at least easily disguised) if we needed to.

Ironically, the DAO game mechanics seem like a throwback to the 3rd Edition D&D rules; while the 4th Edition D&D rules have taken cues from videogames to create a far more rewarding tactical experience.

[NumeroS]

Level scaling makes DA:O more tactical game than just like "Bloody hell I have 99 strenght I can kill Archdemon with 1 hit".¨

Like was said before, you are still human, even with 10 or 99 strenght.

Even on 2nd or 10th level. You have to keep in your mind that you are human so you have to think about how to defeat enemy, how and who attack, when use what etc. Ok, it's kinda silly that random bandit, with level scalling , can be as strong as Ultra Elite Bodyguard of the Maker. In this case you have to keep in your mind that bandits dagger is still dangerous weapon even in childs hand for human being like your hero (or elf or dwarf). :-D As you gain more level you gain new skills, you can boost your Mana Points etc. but more level can't change you into Immortal Superman. YOU HAVE TO USE YOUR BRAIN IN THIS GAME (not just click on your new stats )

That's why I think that Level Scaling System is big plus for DA:O .

Of course as much people play this game, that much opinions 'bout it we have.



About mob changing: Like if you have level 1 you will meet Rat, if you are on level 5 you will meet Cursed Rat etc. - that ain't a solution. It's still the same enemy just with cosmetic changes, but still strong as you are, and cosmetic changes was NOT something that Akka wanted.



And level zones WILL MAKE DA:O linear.

[Greyclouds40]

Not sure if anyone actually noticed this... but some Darkspawn... erm... "spawns" actually consisted of very very low level Darkspawn (specifically the first part of the ending zones).



So, OP, you have your sense of "power" and meanwhile you have level scaling that allows you to pick and choose which quest-lines you pursue first when the game opens up.

[Michael Withstand]

I agree with the topic starter. One of the reason why I play on easy just to get the feeling of being somewhat powerful not exactly a solution as the enemy level up with you but at least I no longer struggle all the time.

[5Warlocks]

Akka le Vil wrote...
I'd say that the main problem with DAO (and even beyond strictly the point of level scaling) is the extreme dissociation between the "game" side and the "world/story" side, which leads to many breaking of the suspension of disbelief.
In the "story" part, we're someone who is very skilled right from the start, a match from anyone in the land, and who uses her skills to best her opponents. Our character (story-wise, again) doesn't really improve, and is just naturally gifted. All our companions are, in fact, either experienced or gifted (or both) and don't have to improve either to be heroes.
But on the "gameplay" part, we start being a total greenhorn (level 1) to ends up being a killing machine (level 20+).

So there is a wide gap between what the story tells and what the gameplay shows. It's like if the game was trying to obey two archetypes at the same time : the Story of the Big Hero and the Starting From Scratch Game.
It ends up having both parasiting each others. And it shows the worst flaw of DAO : lack of immersion because gameplay just shows his head far too much, and constantly reminds you "this is a game, this is a game", rather than grabbing you inside the world of the game and letting you "believe" you "are" the character.

Some would say it's an attempt to concile two major staples of RPG, I say it's bad design.
If you're going to include progression, then put a story where you start small and end up big.
If you're going to be The Hero, then use a system that isn't based on going from level 1 to level 25.
But doing both is just contradictory.

I think that this is a fair point.  One of the nice things about DAO's characterization is that the PC is not presented as someone just setting out in the world a la the Bhaalspawn in Candlekeep, but as someone who is competent from the get-go.  All of the Origins reinforce this to some degree: the Human Noble is complimented as having grown into a fine warrior, the Dwarf Noble is able to defeat Orzammar's finest in the Proving and has gained enough skill and respect to be given a military command, and even the City Elf is known as brave/skilled despite not having done anything dramatic yet.  The Origins have you do everything from contest with the most powerful game-lore demon (Pride) in the Fade to surviving on your own in the Deep Roads.  When Alistair instinctively looks up to the PC, it makes sense, because you've already likely proven yourself. 

Yet for all of this, the gameplay is strictly very familiar going from being terrible at level one, to being godly by the upper teens.  The Archdemon is not a difficult battle even on Nightmare for many powergaming builds, whereas if you go and fight the Denerim bandits right at level seven, you're in for a rough time.

I think you're right that Bioware is trying to have its cake and eat it too.  I'm able to overlook it and just enjoy the game (I love DAO's gameplay, somewhat more than the story) but I can see how it could be impossible for someone else.  It's a real quandary and I'm not sure I have any viable solutions for it that go beyond "listen to Akka and Sylvius because the game would feel more logical," which I'm not sure is something we can reasonably hope for.

For what it's worth to any of the developers reading this thread, it seems fair to say that a player like me would enjoy the game regardless of what the power curve was, whereas there's a definite audience that would enjoy the series more if character growth (and thus the need for level scaling) was toned down, making the latter seem like better business that it might initially appear.

[Upper_Krust]

NumeroS wrote...

About mob changing: Like if you have level 1 you will meet Rat, if you are on level 5 you will meet Cursed Rat etc. - that ain't a solution. It's still the same enemy just with cosmetic changes, but still strong as you are, and cosmetic changes was NOT something that Akka wanted.

Unfortunately (as far as I am aware) Akka never suggested a feasible alternative to level scaling. In this instance I believe it is the lesser of two evils (the other being relatively no enemy variety*)

*Though I suppose you could argue we have that now to an extent since so many enemies are so similar.

[Akka le Vil]

NumeroS wrote...

Level scaling makes DA:O more tactical game than just like "Bloody hell I have 99 strenght I can kill Archdemon with 1 hit"."

It must have been said about one or two millions times, but what you describe has nothing to do with level scaling, and is becoming a trifle tiring...

Ok, it's kinda silly that random bandit, with level scalling , can be as strong as Ultra Elite Bodyguard of the Maker.

That is the point.

In this case you have to keep in your mind that bandits dagger is still dangerous weapon even in childs hand for human being like your hero (or elf or dwarf). :-D

It is true, but it has NOTHING to do with level scaling. If a dagger stop being dangerous because you gained some levels, it comes from your rules, not from scaling.

For example, if gaining a level doesn't earn you more damage and health, but rather better attack/defense, a hit with a dagger is just as deadly at level 20 than level 1, just much less likely to happen.
(this is a very simplified example, but it shows just how totally unrelated your argument is to level scaling)

As you gain more level you gain new skills, you can boost your Mana Points etc. but more level can't change you into Immortal Superman. YOU HAVE TO USE YOUR BRAIN IN THIS GAME (not just click on your new stats )
That's why I think that Level Scaling System is big plus for DA:O .

Level scaling has, again, nothing to do with this. People just put half the design into level scaling, while a lot of things are totally unrelated to it. Level scaling just means that everyone becomes magically stronger for no story-wise/in-world reason.

Greyclouds40 wrote...

Not sure if anyone actually noticed this... but some Darkspawn... erm... "spawns" actually consisted of very very low level Darkspawn (specifically the first part of the ending zones).

So, OP, you have your sense of "power" and meanwhile you have level scaling that allows you to pick and choose which quest-lines you pursue first when the game opens up.

You obviously didn't read, or at least understood, anything at all about the point being made, and just repeat the same false argument that has been defeated three times a page (and twice in this very post) since the beginning.

Modifié par Akka le Vil, 12 mars 2010 - 09:49 .

[LH000]

I admit that I have not read the whole thread, so maybe (in fact - probably) I will address something already mentioned. But if you want to be able to choose your own play-ordering in the magnitude as in DA:O, there just have to be (or should be) encounters level-scaling of some kind. But I totally agree that the way it is treated in DA:O is not ideal. For example at least optional bosses (like dragons) should not be scaled. I hope that BW will improve (in this case i would prefer revolution over evolution) this feature in their next games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LH000 wrote...

I admit that I have not read the whole thread, so maybe (in fact - probably) I will address something already mentioned. But if you want to be able to choose your own play-ordering in the magnitude as in DA:O, there just have to be (or should be) encounters level-scaling of some kind.

If you had read the thread, you would have seen this very argument defeated.

[Koralis]

I agree in principle, but in practice I think DA:O's implimentation works very well. Since levels are tied to both HP/damage/skills/mana/stamina each level gives you more power and flexibility, even if your foes are also increasing in their ability to take damage and dish it out.



The current system allows you to tackle replays in a different order, which adds considerably to the replay value in the variety in my opinion.

[LH000]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LH000 wrote...

I admit that I have not read the whole thread, so maybe (in fact - probably) I will address something already mentioned. But if you want to be able to choose your own play-ordering in the magnitude as in DA:O, there just have to be (or should be) encounters level-scaling of some kind.

If you had read the thread, you would have seen this very argument defeated.

Then there is probably misunderstanding about the expresion "encounters level-scaling".
Lets have a game where in some point you can decide which of areas A and B to visit first. If they would be static, then they can't be too difficult for your current character. Also, if you want to be able  (to some extent, significantly) to improve your character while playing in area you have chosen-lets say area A (quite important feature of RPG games), area B will be too easy when you will arrive there. This cannot be solved in any way unless restricting your ability of "ordering-choice" or decreasing  power-increasing of your character through leveling while in area A.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LH000 wrote...

Then there is probably misunderstanding about the expresion "encounters level-scaling".
Lets have a game where in some point you can decide which of areas A and B to visit first. If they would be static, then they can't be too difficult for your current character. Also, if you want to be able  (to some extent, significantly) to improve your character while playing in area you have chosen-lets say area A (quite important feature of RPG games), area B will be too easy when you will arrive there. This cannot be solved in any way unless restricting your ability of "ordering-choice" or decreasing  power-increasing of your character through leveling while in area A.

If you give the entire game a much shallower power curve (say, levels 1-8 on the DAO scale), then yes, the level 8 areas will be too difficult when you're level 1, but the level 3-5 areas could be done in any order, and the level 5-7 areas could be done in any order.  Some would be easier or harder based on when you went there, but there would be no need to scale them to make them playable.

[Moogliepie]

I don't see how getting rid of level of scaling would make it any more realistic. Levels aren't realistic. And it isn't unrealistic to assume that as you are honing your skills through practice, that other people in the world are doing the same.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Moogliepie wrote...

I don't see how getting rid of level of scaling would make it any more realistic. Levels aren't realistic. And it isn't unrealistic to assume that as you are honing your skills through practice, that other people in the world are doing the same.

Individuals are doing the same, but the distribution of levels throughout the world doesn't really change much.

There are always a bunch of people in the world who are just learning how to do whatever it is they're doing.  Which people those are changes constantly, but those people are always there.

Level scaling eliminates that.  Level scaling means that everything I meet early in the game is relaitively weak and everything I meet later is relatively strong.  That doesn't make any sense.

When I'm just starting out, there should be creatures and people in the world who are clearly superior to me.  When I'm an expert, I should be clearly superior to some people and creatures.

[Akka le Vil]

Moogliepie wrote...

And it isn't unrealistic to assume that as you are honing your skills through practice, that other people in the world are doing the same.

Yeah, sure, when I passed my black belt, suddendly everyone in the world had a black belt-level in martial art too !
Everyone in the world was just holding back in order to wait for me, and they all started to practice martial arts when I did, and they all got their belt the same moment I did !
Pretty realistic, sure.

And I mean, it's totally believable that this whole-village-threatening abomination was actually several times weaker that this run-of-the-mill brigand, just because I encountered it sooner.

[LH000]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LH000 wrote...

Then there is probably misunderstanding about the expresion "encounters level-scaling".
Lets have a game where in some point you can decide which of areas A and B to visit first. If they would be static, then they can't be too difficult for your current character. Also, if you want to be able  (to some extent, significantly) to improve your character while playing in area you have chosen-lets say area A (quite important feature of RPG games), area B will be too easy when you will arrive there. This cannot be solved in any way unless restricting your ability of "ordering-choice" or decreasing  power-increasing of your character through leveling while in area A.

If you give the entire game a much shallower power curve (say, levels 1-8 on the DAO scale), then yes, the level 8 areas will be too difficult when you're level 1, but the level 3-5 areas could be done in any order, and the level 5-7 areas could be done in any order.  Some would be easier or harder based on when you went there, but there would be no need to scale them to make them playable.

Yes, I do agree. And it could also make the whole thing more believable. On the other hand, I like getting really powerful. It maybe could be solved, however, by letting your character to gain more significant strength at some points in the game, when non-linear part of game would end (maybe just temporarily). (  I mean something like the Landsmeet in DA:O.)   

[ztemplarz]

While it might be a dead horse, despite my fairly thorough enjoyment of DAO, the level scaling did dramatically detract from the game play value for me. Unlike other people, who have argued that scaling helps make it MORE replayable, I believe it does the reverse. Why? Because I KNOW that I can go ANYWHERE in the game story (ie. plot) and ONLY be challenged, no more. I KNOW that I won't encounter and ogre which will quickly smash me into a bloody pulp (unless I'm perhaps a mage) anywhere, just an ogre which will make for a strategic fight.



I think part of the other problem with DAO, which impacts the level scaling issue, is the profound lack of alternative solutions to problems (ie. quests). Unlike Arcanum or the first two Fallouts, and in some cases KOTOR (but in line by and large with BG), there was never a, "because you are sooo incredibly suave, you convince this higher level fighter to go slay a troublesome bandit group" or "you win at a match of wits and force the enemy to concede their hopeless situation". There were a few occasions for this, but they were typically in small, inconsequential quests where the stakes were not high (from my recollection, and I've played entirely through once, and mostly through with another 2 entirely different characters). Point is, when alternative solutions which don't require a set level of combat skill aren't available, the only way to overcome your obstacles is through violence, and you will fail if they aren't scaled. If you started off Arcanum or Fallout as a weak combat character but as highly persuasive, or beautiful, you could make up for that by recruiting more followers to compensate for your lack of ability. And sometimes you could convince someone of significantly higher level to help you, which would give you an advantage over many enemies. Or if you were extremely intelligent or lucky, you could find ways to complete quests WITHOUT having to kill everything or possibly anything. Or if you were really stealthy, you could sneak by that enemy of a significantly higher level than you and steal what you needed.



The level scaling of enemies in DAO isn't the only problem- it's also the level scaling of allies (no matter when they join or how much you actually have them in your "party", they are equal to you you and the level scaling of yourself. "You can't be a master at stealth because the game isn't designed to support that until you're level 16" or "you can't have a strength score that high because you MUST start with a generic set of attributes and can't make your character an imbecile that's really strong". You could be nearly a master of melee at a very low level in Arcanum if you were willing to have people react in revulsion to your ugly, slobbering, uncivilized idiot character. In DAO, like in Gattaca, you can't be drastically flawed, just more or less normal.

[Moogliepie]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Moogliepie wrote...

And it isn't unrealistic to assume that as you are honing your skills through practice, that other people in the world are doing the same.

Yeah, sure, when I passed my black belt, suddendly everyone in the world had a black belt-level in martial art too !
Everyone in the world was just holding back in order to wait for me, and they all started to practice martial arts when I did, and they all got their belt the same moment I did !
Pretty realistic, sure.

And I mean, it's totally believable that this whole-village-threatening abomination was actually several times weaker that this run-of-the-mill brigand, just because I encountered it sooner.

I apologize. You're right. It's much more believable that you can go from a nobody to a god-slaying superhero in a world of dragons, demons, werewolves, and fireball blasting mages in a very short time span. Damn the devs for making a gameplay design decision, instead if insisting on absolute realism and historical accuracy in this entirely fictional world.