Spill your blasphemous opinions on CRPGs here

[Orogun01]

Skyrim is an RPG and Morrowind was a terrible game.

[Nepenthe]

Obsidian peaked with Alpha Protocol.

[Volourn]

They peaked with their absolute worst game? HAHAHAH!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I'm going to agree with Volo here.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

They peaked with their absolute worst game? HAHAHAH!

 

That title - sadly - belongs to The Stick of Truth, IMHO. Or NWN2 OC. Kinda hard to decide.

[Tale]

Morrowind was a terrible game.

I don't even know what to think anymore!

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Morrowind was a terrible game.

I don't even know what to think anymore!

 

 

It really is terrible. Each installment in the Elder Scrolls series has improved on many aspects of the previous one.

[Bryy]

 

 

Morrowind was a terrible game.

I don't even know what to think anymore!

 

 

It really is terrible. Each installment in the Elder Scrolls series has improved on many aspects of the previous one.

 

Pretty much this.

 

Oblivion was just a tech demo for Skyrim (which is actually their best TES game, but still a horrible game).

[Elerond]

 

 

 

Morrowind was a terrible game.

I don't even know what to think anymore!

 

 

It really is terrible. Each installment in the Elder Scrolls series has improved on many aspects of the previous one.

 

Pretty much this.

 

Oblivion was just a tech demo for Skyrim (which is actually their best TES game, but still a horrible game).

 

 

Morrowind has most interesting environmental designs in the series and best non-combat spells.

Skyrim has dragons and better graphics and it rule system isn't as broken as previous what TES games had. 

Oblivion tried its best to destroy best part of TES games, which is exploration by using random generated dungeons, uninteresting environments and very broken level scaling.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Oblivion tried its best to destroy best part of TES games, which is exploration by using random generated dungeons, uninteresting environments and very broken level scaling.

 

 

On the other hand, it had the most interesting quests in the entire series. Also, there was an option somewhere to set the level scaling at a not-quite-broken pace.

[Valsuelm]

Morrowind has most interesting environmental designs in the series and best non-combat spells.

Skyrim has dragons and better graphics and it rule system isn't as broken as previous what TES games had. 

Oblivion tried its best to destroy best part of TES games, which is exploration by using random generated dungeons, uninteresting environments and very broken level scaling.

Level scaling, in particular foes scaling with your level, is one of worst game designs out there. It's a primary reason why the TES games suck in my opinion, and the reason I did not buy D3's expansion.

[Orogun01]

 

Morrowind has most interesting environmental designs in the series and best non-combat spells.

Skyrim has dragons and better graphics and it rule system isn't as broken as previous what TES games had. 

Oblivion tried its best to destroy best part of TES games, which is exploration by using random generated dungeons, uninteresting environments and very broken level scaling.

Level scaling, in particular foes scaling with your level, is one of worst game designs out there. It's a primary reason why the TES games suck in my opinion, and the reason I did not buy D3's expansion.

 

Level scaling on an open world game prevents linearity by not restricting the player through enemies, plus on the context of the TES games exp is gained through repetition not through slaying monster. So it would be really counterproductive and serve no purpose other than restrict the player.

[Tigranes]

You mean, the best way to making something open world is to make everything in it the same so it doesnt matter where i go?

[Orogun01]

You mean, the best way to making something open world is to make everything in it the same so it doesnt matter where i go?

You mean open world  as I'm restricted to a specific area where the monsters are within my level?

[Volourn]

But,t hat's simply not true.

[Elerond]

Level scaling is good tool to keep game's challenge level on certain point, in games which have player character that gets stronger when game progress. There is three typical ways to implement it on general level, first is to make it static, meaning that level scaling is hard coded in game and enemies level don't changes with player's character's level,  this is very well suited especially in games that have linear path, second is dynamic one, meaning that enemy characters level change when player's character's level changes, this is well suited in open world games, where player's path can't be known beforehand, third is hybrid of first two, usually meaning that there is critical path where enemies level depend on player's character's level and optional challenges that have enemies with hard coded level, this is well suited on semi open games, like IE games.

 

But in Oblivion dynamic level scaling was implemented poorly in how it take into consideration player's character's progression, as player that advances his non-combat skill first find him or her self in situation where his or her character fared much better against enemies on same area before s/he progressed his or her character's non-combat skills. And even if you level your character's combat skill first you will found out that your character's combat prowess weakens as soon as you start to level up your non-combat skills. In addition to that Oblivion's level scaling made exploring and finding rare non unique items and money quite useless thing to do as your friendly neighborhood bandits carry glass and daedric armors and weapons. And it don't help that combat in the game is quite pointless if you don't want level up your weapon skills, as you can just use invisibility spell and run past all non-quest related enemies and not miss anything, which make closing Oblivion gates quite uninteresting thing to do as there was nothing to even to be found except the gem that closes the portal. So at the end Oblivion's level scaling mechanics caused that there was little sense of advancement in player's character's combat prowess, which is usually one major appeal in RPGs and it also caused that looting and exploring become much less important thing in the game, which is another typical major appeal in RPGs. And that is why is say that Oblivion has very broken level scaling. 

[AGX-17]

Level scaling is good tool to keep game's challenge level on certain point, in games which have player character that gets stronger when game progress. There is three typical ways to implement it on general level, first is to make it static, meaning that level scaling is hard coded in game and enemies level don't changes with player's character's level,  this is very well suited especially in games that have linear path, second is dynamic one, meaning that enemy characters level change when player's character's level changes, this is well suited in open world games, where player's path can't be known beforehand, third is hybrid of first two, usually meaning that there is critical path where enemies level depend on player's character's level and optional challenges that have enemies with hard coded level, this is well suited on semi open games, like IE games.

 

But in Oblivion dynamic level scaling was implemented poorly in how it take into consideration player's character's progression, as player that advances his non-combat skill first find him or her self in situation where his or her character fared much better against enemies on same area before s/he progressed his or her character's non-combat skills. And even if you level your character's combat skill first you will found out that your character's combat prowess weakens as soon as you start to level up your non-combat skills. In addition to that Oblivion's level scaling made exploring and finding rare non unique items and money quite useless thing to do as your friendly neighborhood bandits carry glass and daedric armors and weapons. And it don't help that combat in the game is quite pointless if you don't want level up your weapon skills, as you can just use invisibility spell and run past all non-quest related enemies and not miss anything, which make closing Oblivion gates quite uninteresting thing to do as there was nothing to even to be found except the gem that closes the portal. So at the end Oblivion's level scaling mechanics caused that there was little sense of advancement in player's character's combat prowess, which is usually one major appeal in RPGs and it also caused that looting and exploring become much less important thing in the game, which is another typical major appeal in RPGs. And that is why is say that Oblivion has very broken level scaling.

Level scaling isn't inherently bad, it just limits opportunities to make large risk/reward gambles. The biggest problem with it is that, if enemies always keep pace, why bother having levels at all? If the game can be readily completed by a lv1 character, what's the point of a lv20 character?

 

It lacks dynamism and challenge.

Edited April 2, 2014 by AGX-17

[Orogun01]

risk/reward only applies where reward is given, TES doesn't reward you being smart about engaging the enemy (Such as running towards a giant's camp so that it kills all the bandits) exp is the direct result of the application of in game skills so there isn't a real reward from engaging high level enemies other than to quickly grind on some skills such as Block,H&L armor.
 

Also there is such thing as a dynamic level range which is wider than pure level scaling based on the player's level. If used correctly it can be of great benefit to the game so as to maintain enough challenge to be engaging but not so much that it is unbelievable. Skyrim seemed to have that, other wise by level 81 you would have the world's deadliest Skeevers.

[HoonDing]

 

You mean, the best way to making something open world is to make everything in it the same so it doesnt matter where i go?

You mean open world  as I'm restricted to a specific area where the monsters are within my level?

 

Gotta sneak past those deathclaws, man.

[Tigranes]

I'd rather a not-well-done world where higher level monsters are too tough and I have to look for challenges I can overcome, rather than a world where I can go anywhere because I know I'm fighting the exact same thing. At least there's a meaning to exploration when there are things I have to look out for and avoid, as opposed to basically holding down forward and left click in Oblivion.

 

Ranged level scaling can be an adequate compromise, but the best solution is good level design completed with no or little leveling.

[Orogun01]

I find that the way Stalker handles it is very interesting, instead of your character leveling you get better equipment.

[ Insert Yakov Smirnoff joke here ]

[Bartimaeus]

I find that the way Stalker handles it is very interesting, instead of your character leveling you get better equipment.

[ Insert Yakov Smirnoff joke here ]

 

...on the other hand, you can go through the entire game with the most basic equipment, if you really want to, (I've gone through all of SHoC with just the starting Makarov, for example).

[213374U]

I'd rather a not-well-done world where higher level monsters are too tough and I have to look for challenges I can overcome, rather than a world where I can go anywhere because I know I'm fighting the exact same thing. At least there's a meaning to exploration when there are things I have to look out for and avoid, as opposed to basically holding down forward and left click in Oblivion.

 

Ranged level scaling can be an adequate compromise, but the best solution is good level design completed with no or little leveling.

 

I like this idea, but unfortunately it's handled terribly in the games that have tried—by encouraging save scumming and metagaming, mostly. You rarely ever get in-game hints that you are going to be in over your head and that it would be wise to turn around... it's just a quick death followed by a sense of "wha?" → reload.

[marelooke]

 

I find that the way Stalker handles it is very interesting, instead of your character leveling you get better equipment.

[ Insert Yakov Smirnoff joke here ]

 

...on the other hand, you can go through the entire game with the most basic equipment, if you really want to, (I've gone through all of SHoC with just the starting Makarov, for example).

 

That's rather masochistic...especially if you also only used the standard armor (well, except where you're forced to us another one, of course)

[Nepenthe]

 

I'd rather a not-well-done world where higher level monsters are too tough and I have to look for challenges I can overcome, rather than a world where I can go anywhere because I know I'm fighting the exact same thing. At least there's a meaning to exploration when there are things I have to look out for and avoid, as opposed to basically holding down forward and left click in Oblivion.

 

Ranged level scaling can be an adequate compromise, but the best solution is good level design completed with no or little leveling.

 

I like this idea, but unfortunately it's handled terribly in the games that have tried—by encouraging save scumming and metagaming, mostly. You rarely ever get in-game hints that you are going to be in over your head and that it would be wise to turn around... it's just a quick death followed by a sense of "wha?" → reload.

 

 

True. Going to be interesting to see how Bioware tackles this in DAI, as it's been one of their key selling points.