Installera Steam
logga in
|
språk
简体中文 (förenklad kinesiska)
繁體中文 (traditionell kinesiska)
日本語 (japanska)
한국어 (koreanska)
ไทย (thailändska)
Български (bulgariska)
Čeština (tjeckiska)
Dansk (danska)
Deutsch (tyska)
English (engelska)
Español - España (Spanska - Spanien)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanska - Latinamerika)
Ελληνικά (grekiska)
Français (franska)
Italiano (italienska)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesiska)
Magyar (ungerska)
Nederlands (nederländska)
Norsk (norska)
Polski (polska)
Português (Portugisiska – Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugisiska - Brasilien)
Română (rumänska)
Русский (ryska)
Suomi (finska)
Türkçe (turkiska)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamesiska)
Українська (Ukrainska)
Rapportera problem med översättningen
Diskussionsregler och -riktlinjer
Anmäl detta inlägg
"All rewards in form of gold, Artifacts and Items are level-independent, and therefore fixed."
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/915084-the-elder-scrolls-iii-morrowind-game-of-the-year-edition/54959611
The leveling up system is the same, but enemies don't level up with you, all that changes is spawns might spawn stronger creatures and random loot in dungeons can be better.
I believe being meta is selecting things you will use less often as in you will level up slower as you major while every thing you do most often as major, so you can get the most out of your level ups
I played Oblivion several times with different characters, standard and self-made ones (fighters, mages, and fighter-mage mixes, as far as leveling plays a role). I chose the attributes and skills for the ones I created myself according to their class (weapon-, armour-related for fighters, spell-casting related for mages), and followed the same principle when the characters leveled up by choosing the attributes which I thought needed improving the most (no level 1 till the end, no rarely used skills as major skills or similar strategies). I played the base game without mods, and also with mods like Oscuro's Oblivion Overhaul and Martigan's Monster Mod (which tend to make the game more difficult). And I never touched the difficulty slider. When I completed the main quest my character was always at level 30-35, and I didn't find playing overly difficult. Challenging, yes, I couldn't do everything when I wanted to do it, and less so in the way I wanted to do it, but I never met unsurmountable obstacles. If one approach didn't work, another did.
Is it possible that some (or many) players simply have a clear perception how the game should work, and this game doesn't meet their expectations? Or have found a strategy to be successful and think it's the only one that works? I found that playing Oblivion is manageable, if you adjust to the game rather than expecting the game should adjust to you (and complain when you notice it doesn't). No offense intended.
With that said, I don't find the leveling system of Oblivion optimal (and I do prefer Morrowind's), mainly because it's sometimes immersion-breaking (after leveling up, the monster world around you may change dramatically - a bit simplifying: minotaurs instead of rats, or undead instead of bandits when you level up from level 5 to level 6, for example, just while you rest for an hour).
That plus the handful of creatures which level up with you like ogres and xivilai. By level 40-50 they are damage sponges that fake forever to kill and your combat skills capped out like 10 levels ago and your gear isn't getting any better.
But yeah my biggest gripe with oblivion level scaling isn't difficulty, it's that it's dumb. You walk up to an ayleid ruin at level 2 and it's imps outside, there's no point in even going in, it will be 100% imps and the loot will be iron and leather.
1) Morrowind - almost no scaling at all.
2) Oblivion - almost everything is scaled.
3) Skyrim - 50/50 of scaled/not scaled things. Kind of hibryd of 1 and 2.
Explanation is pretty simple too:
1) With Morrowind devs just were too unskilled as game designers. It was an ancient era of the game design. Modern approaches were not yet discovered and polished. So they just used no scaling coz it was the simplest and the most obvious way.
2) With Oblivion they got the idea, a very good idea obviously, to scale things. But they still were unexperienced so they overdid it.
3) And at last with Skyrim they had learned their lessons and made a hybrid system. It was kind of a middle ground. You could say it was like golden standard of some kind.
Expectations often destroy fun. So good player should always adapt to the game. There are not so much games ever created which are capable to adapt to any player. Such games would be like Mona Lisa among games.
so i will try:
Similar systems
Morrowind put you with Stronger Stats for the start
Morrowind allow infinite training with trainers making easy to score +5
Morrowind have higher max level making it easier to get ALL 100 stats
I don't understand what "modern" means in this context. Just from reading posts on TES forums I get the impression that today's players expect games to hold their hand, to tell them what to do (quest markers, for example) and that all fights can be won (sometimes even in the way players want to fight). I know I'm exaggerating, but if this is "modern", then I prefer the old-fashioned approach with its uncertainties, challenges, but also excitement and suspense.
Monster leveling ideally means that your enemies get stronger with your character, equally, a little more or a little less. Difficult to balance, and often meaning that fights are always more or less the same - new weapons, new spells, etc, but equally difficult. The non-leveling approach for monsters, often used in older games (have you ever played, say, Daggerfall? not totally unleveled, but you can find way-too-difficult monsters in the dungeons from the beginning), exposes you to enemies of an often unpredictable power, sometimes region-dependant (thus keeping players away from regions they are not supposed to visit yet).
Both approaches are not ideal, and, like you say, mixes are probably not a bad idea (with that said, I still prefer Morrowind and Oblivion over Skyrim).
I wouldn't call any of these methods better or worse than another per se, and that one of them may be the preferred or most successful one today tells more about the players than about the method.
At least for me, the monster-leveling approach chosen for a game rarely decides whether or not I like the game. We're back to adaptation: It's a feature of the game world, and I, the player, have to adapt to it (or stop playing this game). "Love it or leave it", as the saying goes :-).