PDA

View Full Version : There is no level-scaling in DX:HR!



Pinky_Powers
18th Jan 2011, 22:17
Apparently, there is no form of level-scaling at all, just Difficulty Settings.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/01/18/deus-ex-human-revolution-wont-have-dynamic-difficulty-of-any-kind/

Irate_Iguana
18th Jan 2011, 22:21
Although this is good news, I have to question, once again, why this couldn't have been answered earlier. You know, back when we all wanted to know several months ago.

El_Bel
18th Jan 2011, 22:25
We have three difficulty settings: Easy, Normal and Hard.


What happened in Deus Ex difficulty?

Kodaemon
18th Jan 2011, 22:26
It could be a lie. Just saying.

Also:

1. lol, Anfossi's so hardcore.
2. what was the guy's actual name? I've seen it rendered as Sebastien Bich, Sebastien Bisch and... Matt Birch?

NKD
18th Jan 2011, 22:29
Erm, did we ever think there was going to be dynamic scaling in a mostly linear game?

You only need dynamic scaling for sandbox completely non-linear games where people need to be able to tackle certain missions in whatever sequence they want.

Kodaemon
18th Jan 2011, 22:34
You don't need third person for climbing ladders either.

Irate_Iguana
18th Jan 2011, 22:35
Erm, did we ever think there was going to be dynamic scaling in a mostly linear game?

Yes, we did. Thanks to this wonderful exchange;



games.on.net: And can you tailor the difficulty, or is it one size fits all?
Sebastien Bisch: It’s one difficulty to rule them all.
games.on.net: Does it dynamically scale?
Sebastien Bisch: It scales based on how much experience points you have, and how you level up within the game.

ZakKa89
18th Jan 2011, 22:40
Thank god even though Max Payne 2 had some really well done level scaling if I remember correctly. Am I right?

Kodaemon
18th Jan 2011, 22:44
2. what was the guy's actual name? I've seen it rendered as Sebastien Bich, Sebastien Bisch and... Matt Birch?

Looks like it's Sebastien Bisch after all, and he must have been drunk, since his linkedin profile says he's working for EM.

Pinky_Powers
18th Jan 2011, 22:53
What happened in Deus Ex difficulty?

They originally described the three settings as Easy, Normal and Deus Ex. So, Deus Ex is Hard or Realistic. It's just a name. It's the number of settings that matters.

Seeing as EM went out of their way to give us the information about the Deus Ex Difficulty, I'd wager it's more accurate than what you might get in an interview. So it's probably still in.

NKD
18th Jan 2011, 23:12
Yes, we did. Thanks to this wonderful exchange;

I saw that, but I assumed he meant that depending on how you build your character, you'll make things easier or harder on yourself. Turns out thats probably what he meant after all, since it is unlikely that he'd be that uninformed about the game. Of course he also made no mention of Easy/Medium/Hard, so who knows.

Deus_Ex_Machina
18th Jan 2011, 23:16
Of course there's no level scaling in DXHR!

Since when does any developer put in level scaling in a First Person/Third person shooter? :D

Kodaemon
18th Jan 2011, 23:20
Since Max Payne at the very least. Well, not exactly level scaling but still, dynamic difficulty. For level scaling, see Mass Effect.

St. Mellow
19th Jan 2011, 00:02
Since when does any developer put in level scaling in a First Person/Third person shooter? :D

Bethesda.

Well, I guess it's good news... but as Iguana pointed out, this completely contradicts an earlier statement.

EDIT: Never mind, I actually clicked the link now. XD

BigBoss
19th Jan 2011, 01:56
Apparently, there is no form of level-scaling at all, just Difficulty Settings.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/01/18/deus-ex-human-revolution-wont-have-dynamic-difficulty-of-any-kind/

Thank moses, I hate hate HATE level scaling.

Tecman
19th Jan 2011, 01:59
Seeing as EM went out of their way to give us the information about the Deus Ex Difficulty, I'd wager it's more accurate than what you might get in an interview. So it's probably still in.

http://www.shrani.si/f/3F/vk/VeHGl3c/difficulty.png
That clears that up. :)

Shralla
19th Jan 2011, 03:32
Thank moses, I hate hate HATE level scaling.

Why? Never played Max Payne?

FrankCSIS
19th Jan 2011, 03:51
How exactly did it work in Max Payne?

I always found ridiculous how thugs in the first game would suddenly require twice as many bullets to go down, or some serious firepower, while their protective equipment remained the same. Does the scaling have anything to do with this? If so, it sucked. If not, it sucked anyway. Human beings on later stages shouldn't suddenly be more bullet-resistant because the game is nearing its end.

I don't recall having this issue in the second game though.

motsm
19th Jan 2011, 04:09
I was really hoping for 4 or more difficulty levels. A single mode above normal is always an absolute joke. :hmm:


Why? Never played Max Payne?Yeah, because we all know the player leveled in Max Payne. Why even compare the systems knowing full well they are entirely different?

DXeXodus
19th Jan 2011, 05:56
Well thank goodness that there is no level scaling. That was one of my major gripes when Bethesda released Oblivion after the brilliant Morrowind. I missed running into a cave and getting completely taken down only to return a few days later once I had levelled up a bit more. Much more satisfying that way.

In general I would consider level scaling to be a bad idea. Can't seem to remember it in Max Payne 2 though to be honest.

Pinky_Powers
19th Jan 2011, 06:40
Well thank goodness that there is no level scaling. That was one of my major gripes when Bethesda released Oblivion after the brilliant Morrowind. I missed running into a cave and getting completely taken down only to return a few days later once I had levelled up a bit more. Much more satisfying that way.

This was one of the things that made Fallout New Vegas so good. The beginning of the game was such a struggle, but eventually you could take out ten guys with ease. But even after you were all powerful, there were still areas of the Waste which would kick you in the teeth.

K^2
19th Jan 2011, 06:40
Erm, did we ever think there was going to be dynamic scaling in a mostly linear game?

You only need dynamic scaling for sandbox completely non-linear games where people need to be able to tackle certain missions in whatever sequence they want.
I'd say, not even then. If you try a mission too early and it's too difficult, it's your own damn fault. If you found it late, and it's too easy, oh well.

It works well enough in WoW, and you cannot get more open sand-box than that.

mad825
19th Jan 2011, 07:26
erm, no surprise?

it's only been Bethesda who's been doing this so how is this news?

Why? Never played Max Payne?

Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment ≠ level scaling

the whole point of Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment is to make it not too hard and yet not too easy. I Like this idea although it needs better implementation, it can also be found in UT if you select it.

K^2
19th Jan 2011, 07:45
And Bethesda fails at it. Every time. Hard. I don't know why they keep doing it. Hope it's not in Skyrim.

NKD
19th Jan 2011, 08:27
I'd say, not even then. If you try a mission too early and it's too difficult, it's your own damn fault. If you found it late, and it's too easy, oh well.

But then your game is no longer non-linear, and should not be advertised as such. It would have an intended progression path, and you are punished for doing anything outside of that path.

If the only thing open about your world is the ability to walk around, you've failed at making an open world. You've made Mafia II, where theres a city entirely wasted because there's only one or two things to do at any given point in progression. There it's hard-coded, but the same thing happens if 99% of the content is too hard or too easy at any given time. You're left with just a handful of stuff that is enjoyable to do, and the game is no longer non-linear in anything but the strictest technicality.


It works well enough in WoW, and you cannot get more open sand-box than that.

On the contrary, you go even one zone "ahead" of where you should be, the quest givers won't give you all the quests, and the mobs will be too difficult to kill efficiently. WoW, especially post-Cataclysm, is supremely linear. There is a distinct zone progression. It might as well have levels like a shooter. The only thing sandboxy is your ability to travel around.

VectorM
19th Jan 2011, 08:45
Dragon Age had level scaling too.

Irate_Iguana
19th Jan 2011, 08:46
And Bethesda fails at it. Every time. Hard. I don't know why they keep doing it. Hope it's not in Skyrim.

Yeah, about that. It's in. Although they claim it's along the lines of Fallout 3.

VectorM
19th Jan 2011, 09:15
They should just copy what Obsidian did with New Vegas and be done with it.

JoylessTuna
19th Jan 2011, 09:32
And Bethesda fails at it. Every time. Hard. I don't know why they keep doing it. Hope it's not in Skyrim.
Oblivion had quite decent level scaling i found. Mudcrabs at level 3 where easier to defeat then lets say, a mountain troll. There were many shrine missions that i had to go back on. Fallout 3 also did it nicely. bethesda are good rpg makers, no matter their fame and mistakes(cough giving obsidian rights the NV.)

Shralla
19th Jan 2011, 09:37
Yeah, because we all know the player leveled in Max Payne. Why even compare the systems knowing full well they are entirely different?

If you want to get *****y, then I'd like to point out that this entire topic is about difficulty scaling and not level scaling, but everybody is calling it level scaling.

motsm
19th Jan 2011, 10:27
If you want to get *****y, then I'd like to point out that this entire topic is about difficulty scaling and not level scaling, but everybody is calling it level scaling.I do believe your mistaken. The original quote that started this entire thing, (below) describes scaling based on the characters experience points and character leveling.


Sebastien Bisch: It scales based on how much experience points you have, and how you level up within the game.

mad825
19th Jan 2011, 10:36
Dragon Age had level scaling too.

Now that I think about, Mass Effect also has level scaling :eek:

Kvltism
19th Jan 2011, 10:44
No scaling? Sanity has prevailed.

K^2
19th Jan 2011, 12:13
Yeah, about that. It's in. Although they claim it's along the lines of Fallout 3.
FO3's system was kind of broken as well. Not as bad as Oblivion's, but taking something that's obviously inherently bad for a game, and just trying to fit it in better is not the way to go. But hey, look where I'm saying that.

Anyways, as long as they remain mod-friendly, I guess I don't care about these things too much. If the system will be too bad, I'll just install a mod that fixes it, just like I did with Oblivion.

Gaunt88
19th Jan 2011, 12:18
Now that I think about, Mass Effect also has level scaling :eek:

Only on the harder difficulties. Normal, as far as I remember, it was just boss characters who scaled with you.

Personally, I think level scaling might be OK if it effected the positioning/number/type of enemies and not just made all the same enemies tougher. As said above, that removes the awesome feeling of getting beaten by some monster, then coming back days later with 4 more levels and a better sword and trouncing it.

Shralla
19th Jan 2011, 20:36
I do believe your mistaken. The original quote that started this entire thing, (below) describes scaling based on the characters experience points and character leveling.

Yeah, but they were talking about the difficulty of the enemies increasing, not the "level," which doesn't exist in this game.

motsm
19th Jan 2011, 21:24
Yeah, but they were talking about the difficulty of the enemies increasing, not the "level," which doesn't exist in this game.The differences in that are just semantics.

If the game raises the enemies level, they become more difficult as a result. If the game cuts out the middle man since enemies don't have levels and simply makes them more difficult, I don't see that as being a change worth mentioning. The important part of level scaling, the part that they explicitly said was included, is that the difficulty scales based on the players level.

I really don't care to argue about it anyway, just leave it.

Cronstintein
20th Jan 2011, 00:17
But then your game is no longer non-linear, and should not be advertised as such. It would have an intended progression path, and you are punished for doing anything outside of that path.

If the only thing open about your world is the ability to walk around, you've failed at making an open world.

I'd say the truth of this statement varies strongly with how wide your available choices are. Because taken to the extreme what I interpret you saying is, "in an 'open world' you should be able to go straight to the boss and kill him." Which is obviously silly (or is it? Hmmm :scratch:). Anyway, you can certainly have an open world w/o scaling. GTA, morrowind, and the vast majority of games operate this way.

Most 'open world' games have a very linear main mission line; it's only the ability to move around and do side-quests that makes them open.

BUT if you only have one available area where you can operate at a time... I'd say the 'openess' of the world is a failure. The speed at which you gain power has a lot to do with this. With a slower power progression you can have several areas with similar but slightly differentiated difficulties. This allows the player to choose how (s)he wants to play the game.

Baldur's gate II does this in a really awesome way. (before you go on the linear section, chapters 3-6?) The starting city is huge, with many many many quests. The order you do them isn't forced on you, but you will certainly have a hard time with a couple of them if you try to do them first. Are they impossible? Not usually, but the difficulty varies based on the players choices. As it should! Scaling makes player choice mostly meaningless. Keeps the difficulty flat and boring.

Personally, I would prefer added high-level monsters to an area rather than supernatural buffing of enemies I've been killing all game. I find boosted rats to really stretch my ability to be immersed and quite lame in general. Oblivion did everything wrong regarding scaling. I would have had no problem if instead of rats there were werebears or something in caves. Or large bandit troops with decent mages in them and archer teams. But giving all bandits glass armor after level X was somewhat ridiculous.

TL;DR scaling sucks :whistle:

EDIT: I also really hate how in fallout/oblivion your difficulty slider changes *both* healths in opposite directions. So if I want to be somewhat fragile my enemies have to be fort knox. Gimme two sliders, dammit!

Senka
20th Jan 2011, 00:38
, "in an 'open world' you should be able to go straight to the boss and kill him." Which is obviously silly (or is it? Hmmm :scratch:).

You should have the opportunity to, however it should obviously be bloody difficult / borderline impossible. As long as that was realistic within the game.

Cronstintein
20th Jan 2011, 01:47
I think ideally, if I were to design a game that way, I would add an element of mystery to it so you wouldn't know who the boss was right away.

But on a second playthrough you could head straight for him if you wanted.

Romeo
22nd Jan 2011, 09:14
And Bethesda fails at it. Every time. Hard. I don't know why they keep doing it. Hope it's not in Skyrim.
Read the latest Game Informer.

...Then breathe, and pray that they come to their senses. I must say, it's odd being on the same side as you for once. lol

IdiotInAJeep
28th Jan 2011, 03:15
I don't even know who's side I'm on.

BigBoss
28th Jan 2011, 06:03
They should just copy what Obsidian did with New Vegas and be done with it.

That's a shining example of how to make a game.

mentalkase
31st Jan 2011, 00:13
But giving all bandits glass armor after level X was somewhat ridiculous.



That was my single biggest gripe with Oblivion. What's the point of hunting around for cool armor and weapons if the enemies have more or less the same stuff? I'd say that almost defeats the purpose of the entire game. The feeling of immersion, the desire to explore, all gone with one extremely bad gameplay element. It really drained me of any desire to play the game.

Rindill the Red
31st Jan 2011, 00:27
That was my single biggest gripe with Oblivion. What's the point of hunting around for cool armor and weapons if the enemies have more or less the same stuff? I'd say that almost defeats the purpose of the entire game. The feeling of immersion, the desire to explore, all gone with one extremely bad gameplay element. It really drained me of any desire to play the game.

I remember trying to secure full sets of all the special armor in Morrowind. The daedric armor was a real ***** to get. But damn, when I finally had it, I was the only m* therf* cker in all of Morrowind to have a full set.

mentalkase
31st Jan 2011, 01:06
I remember trying to secure full sets of all the special armor in Morrowind. The daedric armor was a real ***** to get. But damn, when I finally had it, I was the only m* therf* cker in all of Morrowind to have a full set.

Exactly. It's like "Look at me the great warrior and treasure hunter! Oh ... that bandit has the same armour? :("

sonicsidewinder
31st Jan 2011, 01:28
in an 'open world' you should be able to go straight to the boss and kill him.

Lol i pictured being able to do just that before Far Cry 2's release.

IdiotInAJeep
31st Jan 2011, 02:40
That game was a horrible dissapointment.

BigBoss
31st Jan 2011, 05:41
Lol i pictured being able to do just that before Far Cry 2's release.

Me too......and then when I could only see him in cut scenes, and Not being able to kill him really really REALLY sucked. God I hate that game.:mad2:

jason95821
31st Jan 2011, 06:14
i never new deus ex ever had leveling lol i kinda like it how it is just obtain new skills and better wep and move on :lmao:

Senka
31st Jan 2011, 06:53
^ wut?

VectorM
31st Jan 2011, 11:17
Herpety derpety derp derp.