Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Is Scaling content a good thing?

1679111214

Comments

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    edited June 2019
    Limnic said:
    Scorchien said:
    You can back and forth all day with everyone on this , But for some people ( i am one) Scaling games are easier , and yes they are developed targeting a casual demographic ..

      Shooters matter little to me here and have 0 consideration by me when discussing MMORPG , its apples and oranges , and they dont share many systems , the rest of your post is completely wrong and moving goalposts ..

        once again the point when i entered this discussion was  from Iselin comment of

     "I 've never seen an MMO where people can't solo some or most of the content that is made for groups at their level. But in traditional non-scaled MMOs it's even easier by just outleveling the content. It's how even the worst of the worst used to solo world bosses in ESO before scaling."

       I merely stated Facts that  , that statement is not true and provided evidence of it , the rest of your interjection , means little and does not apply to ,

    The Fact that in those games i listed Noone could solo the content at level when it was released ( outlevleing content does not need to be discussed here ) its like kicking kittens ..

        So once again ,

       You could not solo Dungeons in EQ2 at there release ( go try to solo even Black Burrow at level on Kaladim ) let me know how you make out ..

        You could not solo Dungeons or World Bosses in Rift at there release

        You could not solo Dungeons in Anarchy at there release..

       You could not solo Dungeons or World Bosses in Vanguard

         etc...

        Every where else you want to detract the conversation to just does not matter to that discussion

    Again, challenge has nothing to do with scaling.  It is design choice to make a game easy. You could have scaling with zero content soloable which cannot be done with vertical level.  That is because levels will make old content solo.  Meaning scaling has more difficulty potential.  
    Dude, I don't think he's gonna get that no matter how many times it's been said to him. I've already spent multiple posts making that point just to be met with "nuh-uh!".
    Some people have their head stuck so deeply into the EQ/WoW clone model that they can't imagine things can work differently... and better too.
    Only problem with that logic is i have a 460 CP NB .. its not that fun altho the world is beautiful , the crafting is well done , the combat and challenge are lacking ... Ill stick with UO for that ..
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited June 2019
    AlBQuirky said:
    Margrave said:
    I think scaling is terrible. Destroys the feeling of getting stronger on a character.

    If I can't go back to lower level zones and be God-like in aiding friends, then did I ever level up at all?
    But in ESO, a game with scaling, you still become stronger and you can go help your noob friends ! And you will still be of great help !

    Or do you have something to compensate for that you really need to one shot mobs in a video game without any challenge at all ?
    This is what I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around. How does a (in ESO, at least) 600CP (whatever that means) character help a 0CP character defeat the same monster without one-shotting it? Is that monster "scaled" to 600CP for you and 0CP for the noob? How is this "challenging" at all? What Am I missing?
    The mobs are scaled to 160cp. The player without any cp is also "scaled" to 160cp, but lacks the points they would obtain from being actually 160cp to invest into bonuses. the 600cp player would be 440cp over the scaled player and mob, as well as have the corresponding points to apply into bonuses that the other player lacks.

    This also comes with any access or evolution of skills that the 600cp player has obtained that the non-cp character may not yet have obtained.

    In many instances, the one-shotting won't take place because most skills simply aren't designed to one-shot. On the other hand, there are a variety of builds still fully capable of "more or less" one-shotting "trash mobs" if they are sufficiently geared up and built out.
    [Deleted User]gervaise1
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    AlBQuirky said:
    <snip>
    The ideal is to have freedom and challenge, the world as a wilderness, with a wide and broad range of difficulties and threats, leading unto death.
    <snip>
    This right here says in a nutshell why I dislike scaling. When scaling arrives, variety leaves.

    In the many, many ESO examples, it seems that variety comes in the way of solo vs group. I may be wrong but that's how I'm reading it.
    I find this a bit of an odd take.

    What of their comment indicated any dynamic that wasn't either solo or group? All experiences fall into one or the other. Things like puzzles, traps, unique mob mechanics and behaviors, etc all still have relevance in scaling content. Perhaps more so again when player's can't simply over-level and break the intended risk of those challenges.
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,198
    Iselin said:
    Scorchien said:
    Scorchien said:
    You can back and forth all day with everyone on this , But for some people ( i am one) Scaling games are easier , and yes they are developed targeting a casual demographic ..

      Shooters matter little to me here and have 0 consideration by me when discussing MMORPG , its apples and oranges , and they dont share many systems , the rest of your post is completely wrong and moving goalposts ..

        once again the point when i entered this discussion was  from Iselin comment of

     "I 've never seen an MMO where people can't solo some or most of the content that is made for groups at their level. But in traditional non-scaled MMOs it's even easier by just outleveling the content. It's how even the worst of the worst used to solo world bosses in ESO before scaling."

       I merely stated Facts that  , that statement is not true and provided evidence of it , the rest of your interjection , means little and does not apply to ,

    The Fact that in those games i listed Noone could solo the content at level when it was released ( outlevleing content does not need to be discussed here ) its like kicking kittens ..

        So once again ,

       You could not solo Dungeons in EQ2 at there release ( go try to solo even Black Burrow at level on Kaladim ) let me know how you make out ..

        You could not solo Dungeons or World Bosses in Rift at there release

        You could not solo Dungeons in Anarchy at there release..

       You could not solo Dungeons or World Bosses in Vanguard

         etc...

        Every where else you want to detract the conversation to just does not matter to that discussion

    Again, challenge has nothing to do with scaling.  It is design choice to make a game easy. You could have scaling with zero content soloable which cannot be done with vertical level.  That is because levels will make old content solo.  Meaning scaling has more difficulty potential.  
    Again it does , when the scaling content  that we have and actually exists intended for groups is being soloed
    How many times does someone else need to post that they hate scaling because they can't go to the lowbee areas and feel like a god, one-shotting everything, for you to get that in non-scaled games it's even easier?

    The only argument against scaling that makes half-way sense to me is losing the feeling of progression argument. And IMO, that's just an example of when it's done poorly or in a game that is not well suited to scaling.

    Everything is easier just doesn't work for me as an argument that is a consequence of scaling because the only part that is easier is not having mobs that are a higher level than you but by the same token you also do not have any that are lower level. 
    That is not even true either.

    You can have newbie areas that are easier the higher level you are.  You can have areas that are "elite" group difficulty that are always "elite" group difficultly.  Scaling is number manipulation.  There is no hard rules. 
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Limnic said:
    In many instances, the one-shotting won't take place because most skills simply aren't designed to one-shot. On the other hand, there are a variety of builds still fully capable of "more or less" one-shotting "trash mobs" if they are sufficiently geared up and built out.
    Yup. A bow Snipe from stealth being one notable exception if you have it slotted but it's very rare for any high CP player to slot it anywhere but PvP.
    Temp0
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432
    edited June 2019
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    Limnic said:
    <snip>
    So how is that immersion breaking to you? Think @AlBQuirky should question the "insightfulness" of such a slanted and misinformed opinion.
    <snip>
    Apparently, YOU know better than I what immerses me.
    Well one, that was a question, not an assertion.

    Two, that was a question posed to Pogg, not to you.

    Three, the part I did address you in was in questioning Pogg's commentary as being insightful, as a riff on you having tagged it as such in spite of my perception that it was largely a post of misinformation.

    I apologize for any misconceptions that was had there.
    I admit being on the defensive, since you think my "opinion" is so wrong "misinformed." My arguments, though, get a "null/red herring/facetious" response from you, so there is nothing more I can say, since you can't believe someone differs in opinion from you.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    AlBQuirky said:
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    Limnic said:
    <snip>
    So how is that immersion breaking to you? Think @AlBQuirky should question the "insightfulness" of such a slanted and misinformed opinion.
    <snip>
    Apparently, YOU know better than I what immerses me.
    Well one, that was a question, not an assertion.

    Two, that was a question posed to Pogg, not to you.

    Three, the part I did address you in was in questioning Pogg's commentary as being insightful, as a riff on you having tagged it as such in spite of my perception that it was largely a post of misinformation.

    I apologize for any misconceptions that was had there.
    I admit being on the defensive, since you think my "opinion" is so wrong "misinformed." My arguments, though, get a "null/red herring/facetious" response from you, so there is nothing more I can say, since you can't believe someone differs in opinion from you.
    Again, the dialogue that was considered to be misinformed was Pogg's, not yours.
    As I stated in the prior post, you were tagged as a riff on the fact that you put an insightful tag on Pogg's post.

    I thought I had already clarified that. Are you just looking to be derisive?
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    Margrave said:
    I think scaling is terrible. Destroys the feeling of getting stronger on a character.

    If I can't go back to lower level zones and be God-like in aiding friends, then did I ever level up at all?
    But in ESO, a game with scaling, you still become stronger and you can go help your noob friends ! And you will still be of great help !

    Or do you have something to compensate for that you really need to one shot mobs in a video game without any challenge at all ?
    This is what I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around. How does a (in ESO, at least) 600CP (whatever that means) character help a 0CP character defeat the same monster without one-shotting it? Is that monster "scaled" to 600CP for you and 0CP for the noob? How is this "challenging" at all? What Am I missing?
    The mobs are scaled to 160cp. The player without any cp is also "scaled" to 160cp, but lacks the points they would obtain from being actually 160cp to invest into bonuses. the 600cp player would be 440cp over the scaled player and mob, as well as have the corresponding points to apply into bonuses that the other player lacks.

    This also comes with any access or evolution of skills that the 600cp player has obtained that the non-cp character may not yet have obtained.

    In many instances, the one-shotting won't take place because most skills simply aren't designed to one-shot. On the other hand, there are a variety of builds still fully capable of "more or less" one-shotting "trash mobs" if they are sufficiently geared up and built out.
    How does scaling even have "trash mobs?"

    I'm sorry, but this is sounding like the "can't miss chance of a lifetime", it is getting sold so hard and appears to contradict itself at certain points.

    "All monsters are 160cp scaled up or down to the character's CP."

    Then...

    One can "more or less" one shot trash mobs.

    Which is it? Do the monsters scale or not?

    Maybe this is all much too complicated for my simple mind. My apologies if I am totally missing the boat here.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432
    edited June 2019
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    <snip>
    The ideal is to have freedom and challenge, the world as a wilderness, with a wide and broad range of difficulties and threats, leading unto death.
    <snip>
    This right here says in a nutshell why I dislike scaling. When scaling arrives, variety leaves.

    In the many, many ESO examples, it seems that variety comes in the way of solo vs group. I may be wrong but that's how I'm reading it.
    I find this a bit of an odd take.

    What of their comment indicated any dynamic that wasn't either solo or group? All experiences fall into one or the other. Things like puzzles, traps, unique mob mechanics and behaviors, etc all still have relevance in scaling content. Perhaps more so again when player's can't simply over-level and break the intended risk of those challenges.
    All I can say is, "So what if players can over-level an encounter and 'break' the intended risk of those challenges?" Why would you care? How does that effect you?

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    AlBQuirky said:
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    Margrave said:
    I think scaling is terrible. Destroys the feeling of getting stronger on a character.

    If I can't go back to lower level zones and be God-like in aiding friends, then did I ever level up at all?
    But in ESO, a game with scaling, you still become stronger and you can go help your noob friends ! And you will still be of great help !

    Or do you have something to compensate for that you really need to one shot mobs in a video game without any challenge at all ?
    This is what I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around. How does a (in ESO, at least) 600CP (whatever that means) character help a 0CP character defeat the same monster without one-shotting it? Is that monster "scaled" to 600CP for you and 0CP for the noob? How is this "challenging" at all? What Am I missing?
    The mobs are scaled to 160cp. The player without any cp is also "scaled" to 160cp, but lacks the points they would obtain from being actually 160cp to invest into bonuses. the 600cp player would be 440cp over the scaled player and mob, as well as have the corresponding points to apply into bonuses that the other player lacks.

    This also comes with any access or evolution of skills that the 600cp player has obtained that the non-cp character may not yet have obtained.

    In many instances, the one-shotting won't take place because most skills simply aren't designed to one-shot. On the other hand, there are a variety of builds still fully capable of "more or less" one-shotting "trash mobs" if they are sufficiently geared up and built out.
    How does scaling even have "trash mobs?"

    I'm sorry, but this is sounding like the "can't miss chance of a lifetime", it is getting sold so hard and appears to contradict itself at certain points.

    "All monsters are 160cp scaled up or down to the character's CP."

    Then...

    One can "more or less" one shot trash mobs.

    Which is it? Do the monsters scale or not?

    Maybe this is all much too complicated for my simple mind. My apologies if I am totally missing the boat here.
    Not all mobs have to be created equal. Just because there is a mid-point to scale does not mean every type of enemy has to have exactly matched stats, skills, AI, etc. Differing types of mobs can have differing traits and tiers of difficulty

    I'm not sure what's so confusing about that.

    And as you can see right in the post you quoted, I said "The mobs are scaled to 160cp". Nothing about "to the character's cp". You are currently inserting things that were not said, and that is messing up the conclusions being drawn.

    And being able to one-shot a mob with a 600cp player is not mutually exclusive to mobs being scaled to 160cp. Rather, it makes it a pretty simple dynamic because as long as that 600cp player is properly geared and skilled out, then it makes it entirely viable versus a lower-tier difficulty mob.

    So I can reiterate;
    Monsters scale, they do not scale to you.
    You scale up to 160cp (without bonuses), at which point you can continue to progress up to 810cp(with bonuses).

    Most skills in the game are not designed to one-shot mobs, but contextually can based on a player build and gearing that's done for the express purpose of doing so, and it's not going to universally one-shot everything, because not all mobs are made to be the same level of difficulty. 

    Scaling does not mandate all mobs are of the same difficulty. A 160 cp rat is still way easier to kill than a 160cp troll. Just as well, veteran tier mobs are 160cp, but fundamentally higher stats/skills than their counterparts.

    Hope this clears up some confusion.
    [Deleted User]
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Torval said:
    Scorchien said:
    Iselin said:
    Scorchien said:
    Scorchien said:
    You can back and forth all day with everyone on this , But for some people ( i am one) Scaling games are easier , and yes they are developed targeting a casual demographic ..

      Shooters matter little to me here and have 0 consideration by me when discussing MMORPG , its apples and oranges , and they dont share many systems , the rest of your post is completely wrong and moving goalposts ..

        once again the point when i entered this discussion was  from Iselin comment of

     "I 've never seen an MMO where people can't solo some or most of the content that is made for groups at their level. But in traditional non-scaled MMOs it's even easier by just outleveling the content. It's how even the worst of the worst used to solo world bosses in ESO before scaling."

       I merely stated Facts that  , that statement is not true and provided evidence of it , the rest of your interjection , means little and does not apply to ,

    The Fact that in those games i listed Noone could solo the content at level when it was released ( outlevleing content does not need to be discussed here ) its like kicking kittens ..

        So once again ,

       You could not solo Dungeons in EQ2 at there release ( go try to solo even Black Burrow at level on Kaladim ) let me know how you make out ..

        You could not solo Dungeons or World Bosses in Rift at there release

        You could not solo Dungeons in Anarchy at there release..

       You could not solo Dungeons or World Bosses in Vanguard

         etc...

        Every where else you want to detract the conversation to just does not matter to that discussion

    Again, challenge has nothing to do with scaling.  It is design choice to make a game easy. You could have scaling with zero content soloable which cannot be done with vertical level.  That is because levels will make old content solo.  Meaning scaling has more difficulty potential.  
    Again it does , when the scaling content  that we have and actually exists intended for groups is being soloed
    How many times does someone else need to post that they hate scaling because they can't go to the lowbee areas and feel like a god, one-shotting everything, for you to get that in non-scaled games it's even easier?

    The only argument against scaling that makes half-way sense to me is losing the feeling of progression argument. And IMO, that's just an example of when it's done poorly or in a game that is not well suited to scaling.

    Everything is easier just doesn't work for me as an argument that is a consequence of scaling because the only part that is easier is not having mobs that are a higher level than you but by the same token you also do not have any that are lower level. 
    First , that has never ever been something ive done or care to do , i dont enjoy kicking kittens , I dont ever go back to lower zones for that .. at all, ever .. I know some do enjoy that.. Its weird to me , because it no challenge , I always try to push my char/build to its limits , which i found more enjoyable in ESO before T1 IMO ..Now people here can argue with IMO till they are blue in the face , but IMO they would be wrong all day ..

      And there are several that make sense to me and others that scaling is not as enjoyable, so why is that a problem for some , Many folks Dont like scaling for a variety of reasons , it does not need to be White Knighted ...

      Scaling games feel easier for me , why is that a problem for some .. Its like some here are defending there girl friend over it , guess what , she has flaws and others may point them out .. Its OK .. you can still love her
    That may not be you Scorch or a few others like you, but for most everyone it is the reason. Most people in the thread want to trivialize content via progression.
    Yea i actually really dislike it , i know ive been leveling alts , and i would have some high level come in and wipe a zone , and i always thought , WTF is the point of that .. Never have understood that mentality..

      I dont get how that would make someone feel like they have accomplished something, challenging yourself , dying  then learning from the experience and beating it is much more rewarding IMO .... Kickin kittens not so much ..
    [Deleted User]
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    AlBQuirky said:
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    <snip>
    The ideal is to have freedom and challenge, the world as a wilderness, with a wide and broad range of difficulties and threats, leading unto death.
    <snip>
    This right here says in a nutshell why I dislike scaling. When scaling arrives, variety leaves.

    In the many, many ESO examples, it seems that variety comes in the way of solo vs group. I may be wrong but that's how I'm reading it.
    I find this a bit of an odd take.

    What of their comment indicated any dynamic that wasn't either solo or group? All experiences fall into one or the other. Things like puzzles, traps, unique mob mechanics and behaviors, etc all still have relevance in scaling content. Perhaps more so again when player's can't simply over-level and break the intended risk of those challenges.
    All I can say is, "So what if players can over-level an encounter and 'break' the intended risk of those challenges?" Why would you care? How does that effect you?
    Then my counterpoint would be "So what if some mobs are easy and other mobs are hard in a scaled system? Why would you care if players only chased the easy targets? How does that affect you?"

    The reason I brought it up was as the point that their complaint rests on the very same misnomer you just tried to point at me.
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    Limnic said:
    AlBQuirky said:
    <snip>
    The ideal is to have freedom and challenge, the world as a wilderness, with a wide and broad range of difficulties and threats, leading unto death.
    <snip>
    This right here says in a nutshell why I dislike scaling. When scaling arrives, variety leaves.

    In the many, many ESO examples, it seems that variety comes in the way of solo vs group. I may be wrong but that's how I'm reading it.
    I find this a bit of an odd take.

    What of their comment indicated any dynamic that wasn't either solo or group? All experiences fall into one or the other. Things like puzzles, traps, unique mob mechanics and behaviors, etc all still have relevance in scaling content. Perhaps more so again when player's can't simply over-level and break the intended risk of those challenges.
    All I can say is, "So what if players can over-level an encounter and 'break' the intended risk of those challenges?" Why would you care? How does that effect you?
    Then my counterpoint would be "So what if some mobs are easy and other mobs are hard in a scaled system? Why would you care if players only chased the easy targets? How does that affect you?"

    The reason I brought it up was as the point that their complaint rests on the very same misnomer you just tried to point at me.
    So you play your preferred "scaled" games and I'll play my preferred "leveled" games. I'm not convinced that scaling is the end-all be-all in gaming. I don't need to be :)

    Since I don't play MMOs for the fighting, having a "challenge"at every turn doesn't interest me. Have that fear, though, that interests me.

    PS: Your other post DID explain a bit better about "CP" and all that. It still sounds like "levels" to me, or at least "progression" of characters.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    AlBQuirky said:

    PS: Your other post DID explain a bit better about "CP" and all that. It still sounds like "levels" to me, or at least "progression" of characters.
    Shhh, Don't call them levels! :)

    But they kind of are in exactly the same way Paragon points in Diablo 3 (if you're familiar with that system that ESO shamelessly copied)  are a post level cap advancement system that are still very much like mini levels.

    It's a system that lets you allocate passive bonuses to damage, mitigation, healing and a lot of other things, that ramps up slowly so you don't feel one or two much but when you have several hundred points they make a big difference.
    gervaise1[Deleted User]AlBQuirkySteelhelm
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Well you can't exactly scale content if there's no levels to scale.

    And of course there's character progression. There's nothing about scaling content that inherently prevents progression.
    AlBQuirkyPhry
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,198
    Iselin said:
    AlBQuirky said:

    PS: Your other post DID explain a bit better about "CP" and all that. It still sounds like "levels" to me, or at least "progression" of characters.
    Shhh, Don't call them levels! :)

    But they kind of are in exactly the same way Paragon points in Diablo 3 (if you're familiar with that system that ESO shamelessly copied)  are a post level cap advancement system that are still very much like mini levels.

    It's a system that lets you allocate passive bonuses to damage, mitigation, healing and a lot of other things, that ramps up slowly so you don't feel one or two much but when you have several hundred points they make a big difference.
    Scaling is what you make it.  Using one game is like comparing saying apples are all fruit. Level scaling can be drastically different depending on how you design it. 

    Level scaling seems like a half step.  It can be done but a lot of unnecessary work to me.  If it fails to give level seekers their power and horizontal people still feel shoehorned into grinds what is the point?

    But difficulty is not tied to the system.  It is tied to the design.  I think everyone who has real interest in how the genre works at least to conceptualize or make bare bone game design of all types. 

    For example, easy visual of level scaling difficulty being hard.

    NPC have no default level.  NPCs are scaled to whatever level you are.  NPC are categorized by difficulty. 

    No challenge: small mice, frogs, turtles can be one shot. 

    Easy challenge raccoons, dogs, children ?, goblins.

    Medium challenge wolves, orcs, regular men.

    Hard challenge elite men, elite orcs, direwolves. 

    Elite(group or elite solo) challenge ogres, trolls, hobbits. 

    Elite+(group only) challenge lich, drake, direbears. 

    Raid(raid level) level dragons, elder lich, elemental.  

    You could have it set that each quarter of levels after 50(50, 75, 100 max) elite and below NPCs lose a ranking.  So at 50 elite NPCs become hard. At 75 they become medium.  At 100 they become easy.  Alternatively they could remain the same challenge the whole game or just have no challenge and ever NPC is the same. 


    Steelhelm
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432
    Iselin said:
    AlBQuirky said:

    PS: Your other post DID explain a bit better about "CP" and all that. It still sounds like "levels" to me, or at least "progression" of characters.
    Shhh, Don't call them levels! :)

    But they kind of are in exactly the same way Paragon points in Diablo 3 (if you're familiar with that system that ESO shamelessly copied)  are a post level cap advancement system that are still very much like mini levels.

    It's a system that lets you allocate passive bonuses to damage, mitigation, healing and a lot of other things, that ramps up slowly so you don't feel one or two much but when you have several hundred points they make a big difference.
    hehe My bad :)

    I thought of CP as "Character Points", which to me means spending them in skills and abilities, which it seems I understood correctly :)

    Also, Limnic is perfectly right. No levels/progression, no need for scaling :)

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Not in skills and abilities (at least not in the sense of core stats nor active abilities), only tiny improvements to specific stats that can accrue over time.

    And mostly just levels as correlation to scaling. Progression is a suite of mechanics that can and does exist in many forms outside of vertical systems that scaling does not affect or apply to.
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    ESO shows why scaling works, it would not surprise me in the least if the primary reason why Blizzard is doing a 'level squish' down to max level 60, is so that they can fully implement level scaling in WoW to the same degree it is in ESO, it might even work! :o
    [Deleted User]
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,263
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,198
    Level scaling as implemented in EQ clones also exists only because of the flaws of those games, which is very heavy reliance on levels and a huge power increase associated to them.
    Both UO and AC1 didn't need level scaling, because the influence of levels was nowhere close of the one in EQ clones. A skilled played in AC1 could beat the odds.
    A level 80 with a skilled player at the keyboard could kill those level 666+ mobs in Valley of Death solo.

    And there's a reason why ESO's scaling works so well... because the game after One Tamriel is the closest to AC1 yet.
    Not only is there great power gains but artificial power platforms to give overwhelming advantages to higher level beyond the number gains.  Like EQ for example if you were far enough apart you could be hit for some overkill amount.  
  • madazzmadazz Member RarePosts: 2,100
    Depends on the game. Anyone who thinks there is a clear cut yes or no just hasnt played a game with whatever side done right.
  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 7,432
    edited June 2019
    Level scaling as implemented in EQ clones also exists only because of the flaws of those games, which is very heavy reliance on levels and a huge power increase associated to them.
    Both UO and AC1 didn't need level scaling, because the influence of levels was nowhere close of the one in EQ clones. A skilled played in AC1 could beat the odds.
    A level 80 with a skilled player at the keyboard could kill those level 666+ mobs in Valley of Death solo.

    And there's a reason why ESO's scaling works so well... because the game after One Tamriel is the closest to AC1 yet.
    I agree. I've never been a fan of "character levels." Most of the time, it made little sense in the scheme of gaining skills. I wish I would have played UO instead of EQ, for I am a proponent of skill progression through usage.

    However, I just haven't been convinced scaling is good for me, even though those that favor it have been patient with me. It may break your immersion for one opponent (Orc, Rat, Ant, Aunt) to become trivial as you gain power, but it is a measure of my own betterment, personally. I'd rather see "alternate names" like Orc: Pawn; Centurian; Legionnaire; Chief; etc. rather than the same exact same opponent over and over. That's more of an asset problem and doesn't address "scaling" in any way.

    It breaks my immersion when that same Orc (we all know it's the same damn one!) I killed at level 3 gives me fits at level 10. Where did they go for training? Orc War College? Where is this place so I may blow it up? ;)

    I don't want every fight to be a challenge. I want variety from "cakewalk-snoozefest" to "holy- guacomole I'm in deep doo-doo here!" to "Who shot/hit me? (as my loading screen appears). The "scaling" I've seen has just made every fight vanilla, which gets boring after awhile, like all other vanilla "tweaks" to video games. I can't be on my toes 100% of the time. I tire quickly. I need to be allowed to make mistakes and be forgiven. I would have to log after every 3 or 4 fights if every last one was a "challenge." That's probably just my own ineptitude, though :)

    It's great some players like and even enjoy scaling. I'm just not one of them :)

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    That's still the misnomer that scaling prevents progression, which it does not.

    You still can gain new skills, progress in stats on some measure, and even again the gear progression that all feeds into making it so that some generic orc you fought at level 1 is considerably easier to handle at level 10 or especially max.

    This has rather been the constant hitch in the argument. That people keep claiming scaling removes progression, which is simply a false statement. I don't know how many times it's been reiterated at this point the variety of ways in which progression still exists, and as that was even the point of the ESO examples that it is a game with scaling and progression, and we even described exact conditions around the CP levels and how that affects the scaling and ability to handle such mobs over time.

    At this point it feels mostly like talking to a wall whenever someone brings up "but muh progressions" as their argument against it, because it's not a valid argument.
  • Hawkaya399Hawkaya399 Member RarePosts: 620
    edited June 2019
    For me, scaling the content to fit my character, or the reverse of scaling my character to fit the content, isn't good.
    I like to meet the challenges, and retreat/escape if I have to. It's just not fun to "win" if there's an adjustment to make all things equal.
    Ya I dont like it much either. I think I dislike it as much as I dislike handholding in general. Anytime I start feeling like the game designer is trying to guide me or to direct me, I start losing interest. I want it to be my own experience. I want to suffer defeat and loss. I don't want my experience to be casual. I don't want happy smiley faces. Throw me wildly into a mean world and I'll be a lot happier.

    But some people like it. Some people like to be led by a story or hook. This doesn't make them worse as people or gamers, just different.

    What's being discussed here exactly? Because the way I read it is broadly. It's not necessarily level scaling, but CONTENT and WORLD. Do they revolve around the player, made explicitly for the happiness of the player, or do they seem to exist on their own, not necessarily for the enjoyment of the player? I definitely prefer the latter because there's far too much babysitting in games. Game designers, on the whole, are far too cautious. They'll produce awesome gameplay and then ruin it in a month because of overthinking. The biggest problem is they don't wnat to bother anybody. They don't want the player to fuss or be frustrated or to uncertain. They end up overbalancing the game. Any of the dynamic wild things are removed. Dynamic wild things are too much of a challenge for the designer, since they're a wildcard--like gambling--that so easily causes players to get frustrated or lost, or even if they don't, the explanation is obscure. Designers wnat things they can strictly measure and understand. Designers aren't gods. Their knowlege is limited. They favor what they understand and know. If magic were a thing, designers would destroy it because it's too magical.

    The most important thing a game designer cna do for their game is design strong modding support so the players can fix the overbalancing. Players don't make games for a living. They don't have to worry about when the magic fails. They don't have to produce a game for thousands of gamers. As modders, players are seeking what they want individually, and this is what enables the magic to enter the game. Modders can do things commercial game makers will never be able to do very well.

    Magic. It's the thing that can frustrate you or cause you to leave a game and never go back, or conversely, it can be the frustration you actually want. Magic is a thing that can create epic moments, things you'll remember all your life. Magic is good and bad. It's dangerous and supportive. It's heaven and hell.
    Post edited by Hawkaya399 on
Sign In or Register to comment.