login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Help us translate Steam


Secondly you clearly know nothing of mobile RPG, your comments confirm it. And the cases you quote makes wonder if QW is as good than a classic ported to mobile, which means nothing because most of those ports are totally faithful. For dev of Templar Battleforce it is no way representing well what are mobile games, even less streamlining.
For the UI it's just the first Spiderweb game of all time with a coherent UI, previous was less streamlined with crap aspects on UI, but use mobile tag or streamlining makes no sense.
Otherwise for the simplification of the games, that's in part true, but it's bad knowledge of Spiderweb games to think QW is simplified compared to Avadon series. At least party building is deeper and more complex, it is a lot more open, there's more combats involving some special management.
This game has an incredible fluidity in its gameplay but it's not superficiality of plenty mobile games.
Again don't use mobile tag, you clearly don't know the topic. RPG mobile games is mainly ports of classic and ports of multi os releases. That have nothing mobile. And then there are real mobile RPG and I don't think Trese Brothers still quality since 2012 when they did a kickstarter with a clear multi os release, including mac/windows/linux. It's only before they was doing mobile games, no RPG (doesn't match mobile), and you clearly played none.
I played pure mobile RPG, they can be fun but very small, or with very repetitive fillers. If there's exceptions they are exception, not representing mobile RPG.
Scaling is really bad. Full game i was killing enemies with 3 shots. Very rare 4 or 2, almost always 3. I got power, they got more defence.
In Avernum each dungeon is unique.
I disagree on most dungeons being mines; there's a few swamps (haunted or inhabited by various monsters), forest and villages dungeons.
Explore is very dependent of filling density and quality, it's not just a matter of size. But I wont compare I don't remind well enough.
Now Avernum 1 is quite far in past and forgot it too much but some years ago, it was still my favorite and I never found Avernum 2, 5 and 6 on par with it. Need play 3 and 4, a day perhaps. I appreciate many different type of RPG, for me Avernum 1 is no match for Dragonfall for example, its width and openness won't change it, Dragonfall will always be a much better RPG this including much better combats.
Personally I hope the scaling isn't infinite and that the game won't scale weak enemies (like those in the first areas of each vassals) till the end of the game, because it makes character progression rather meaningless (2 hours in I was killing those in 2-3 hits, if 30 hours in it still takes 2-3 hits, that's disappointing)
All enemies are scaled.
They are always -1 level of your party.
(With some exceptions: there are enemies of set level, mainly defending Nisse hideouts, they are minimum 12 lvl, but they do scale if you reach higher lvl than 12).
It's possible this game did the scaling not that well, but smart scaling have min scaling so you can't rush everywhere, scaling variations that is combats are scaled but not at same difficulty, and there are optional max scaling, and there's many other aspect.
QW at least have diversified difficulty for combats, and no all enemies aren't the same all along the game.
What's not saying your comment is some combats are significantly harder.
Moreover I have doubts you can rush level 1 to second areas of regions, and many more case you couldn't rush that easily at level 1. I didn't tried so can't be sure, but I have doubts it's that basic than what you quoted.
Its depends on the area: for example, at level 15, at the Vol gate it's level-1, but in the second area of the Ahriel it's level + 1. I think it's tunned so that you can't rush everywhere, with minimum levels.
What I was complaining was standard enemies from the beginning of the game staying at the same level as you, so there's no feeling of getting better for fighting those particular enemies.
I've played more and it look like it's slightly better (smart scaling). I agree that there is a diversified difficulty, but I still feel the scaling remove some sense of character progress
Sense of character progression is no way through easier combats, never, scaling or not. This aspect is valid if you fail, grind many level, try again. I don't think this game suffer this problem or very marginally.
At the end the best smart scaling target all problems and can achieve skip all problems and solve all problems from non scaling and very open.
For QW I feel that even if it's not the best smart scaling, it targets well enough problems to be much more open and work overall better than without scaling.
Scaling potential problems:
- Rat as strong than a dragon
- Grinding achieving nothing.
- Impossible to beat area for a player no matter the level.
- Ability to rush everywhere at low level destroying world feeling.
- No impossible to beat area at some precise levels.
- All combats feel be the same difficulty.
Some problems are harder to target but min scaling, max scaling and difficulty base can allow target a lot of problems, it's that simple and after it's a matter to setup well the open world:
- Grinding achieving nothing, design a game not allowing grinding really and this temper heavilly the problem, problem partially solved. Then you add max scaling that only a player option can disable, problem fully solved.
- For impossible to beat combat no matter the level, everything has a max scaling, if not it's a player option, problem solved.
- To not allow rush everywhere at low level it's very easy, min scaling targets that perfectly, problem solved.
- To have dangerous impossible to beat areas until late level, again it's very easy; min scaling, problem solved.
- To avoid all combats feel have the same difficulty, base design of combats require a base difficulty, this isn't changed by the scaling (harder still harder, easier still easier) and max scaling provide a point where party level up with broke this original difficulty design, problem solved. And no it's not just +1 -1 level when combats have a hand crafted design.
This let the problem of scaling and enemy types. Max and Min scaling already target this partially. Sometimes number of enemies can allow temper the problem. Have visual variation of an enemy type for lower levels and higher level allow temper the problem. Human type enemies allow play pn equipment and even skills without feel weird like a rat as dragon. Some RPG with smart scaling even used enemy type change with scaling, it's a bit an ideal solution but it involves problems on combats design and it is clearly expensive and more AAA game solution.
One point of scaling is it's complex to design difficulty when party allow so many different building, the result is a combat could be harder for a party at higher level. Its more a problem of difficulty design in RPG.
Instead of being a blind advocate against scaling, consider request better scaling system which doesn't mean no non scaling system. I wrote "blind" because in my current opinion, QW looks like a very wrong target for that "crusader" because I think the scaling is fairly well done and target most problems, sometimes with design tools different than those I listed above.
No, sir.
No sir.