From M&M 6 on that may be possible to an extend, certainly not for the older ones. However, a lot of that has to do with glitching mobs into obstacles and trying to break the game - while that may be fun or a welcome challenge for some players, it's certainly not what I'd consider a defining point of "roleplaying".

And yes, you have that in TES. Morrowind had daedric ruins with set high-lvl Dremoras in it, practically guaranting an daedric weapon, even for a lvl 1 char.
Skyrim has fixed high-lvl enemies too. I managed to get a ebony war axe with a lvl6 char where it appears in leveled lists starting at level 36.

You just have to know where, but that's not different from M&M 6 - you need to know where those high-lvl areas and -chests are in the first place. That is gaming the system, but has hardly anything to do with roleplaying.

Noooo,I am not talking about exploiting bugs or cheap tactics. I mean that there are always higher level enemies available you can test your mad setups and combat tactics against which will reward you with great loot and monies to fight even better enemies.

Higher level enemies with great loot and more money.... yes, it's there in TES games - to a degree. As mentioned before, you can get high lvl items, knowing where to look for.
More money probably doesn't work out because of level scaling, yes. But then again, you can't (and don't have) to buy that much better equipment - we're not talking about Diablo here. You get to a point where you can find it by playing the game and you don't need it before. The balancing in that department worked pretty much on all TES games.

The thing is, you can't balance a open world game with lvl-set enemies. You either lock players out of certain areas / quests forcing them down a given path, use level scaling (TES way) or risk that the encounters are getting boring the longer someone plays. And you absolutely can't balance a 20+ hours play through against a 50+ or more hours one - not without level scaling.
But hey, if someone thinks he has found the magic key for doing so - please share.

One of the bigger complains Skyrim received, was that certain parts weren't accessible. [url=http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:The_Gauldur_Amulet]The Gauldur Amulet[/url] for instance, received a lot of complains because you HAVE to join the College of Winterhold to gain access to a specific dungeon. Otherwise you can't complete it.
And guess what? The same guys claiming Skyrim being dumbed down, without meaningful consequences and made to much catering for casuals, claimed lazy design because of it - one (unwanted) consequence and it's lazy design.....

Yes Oblivion was waaaay off with level scaling. That's simply not true for Morrowind or Skyrim. And as shown above, just adding fixed levels doesn't make a better game.

If you want higher level enemies to test your mad skills and tactics to get great loot and monies to fight even better enemies.... with all due respect, stay with Diablo or Dark Souls. I prefer a world where I can actually roleplay.

The old games like MM6,Realms of Arkania or Fallout worked perfectly well, there was no locking out of areas, you could go there, look at everything and fight them if you were good enough, regardless of level. If you call that magic key, fine, I call it old school game design.

First: no locking out in M&M6 while adding the caveat "if you were good enough" is exactly the contrary.
Second: RoA and Fallout had no world in between the major hubs / dungeons / questpoints. Random encounters cover it nicely, but still doesn't change that.

Skyrim: Rags to Riches is a video series of a guy in Skyrim, chasing his dream of living in the most expensive manor in Skyrim. However, he added specific stipulations: no quests, no guilds, no killing dragons. He can't fight, can't go on adventures and he doesn't have any shoes.

I can play as a farmer or a goods peddler, completely ignoring / not triggering the mainquest, getting to lvl80 without ever seeing a dragon after the intro. I can play as a dedicated healer relying on my companions to do the dirty work, a reckless warrior staying away from anything magical which includes healing spells, a easily distractible archer who eats 3 times a day what he hunted himself and can't pass on any cave he stumbles upon....

This. Is. Role. Playing. Getting phat loot isn't. No matter what your definition of RPG is. And you simply can't do that in other games. Or at the very least, nowhere near to that degree as you can in TES series and nowhere as good as in Skyrim. And yes, level scaling is a big part of that, as it doesn't restrict me in going anywhere, doing what ever I want, when I want.

Well, I disagree with the OP that the enemies scale up to your level.

The reason is because the enemies level depend on the level of the dungeon you are in.

If you are finding too hard to fight the monsters on level 10, then start the dungeon (monsters do respawn after a certain amount of levels) and you will fight level 1 monsters again and you will see how easy it is (of course, don't expect high level drops) but it will help you increase your xp until you are comfortable enough to fight the lower level monsters.

It's not like FF7 or FF8 that as you gain levels, no matter the area you fight monsters, they also level up with you.

And it is also not like Diablo that the monsters don't respawn, then again, in Diablo you could start a new game and import your character at the same level it was.

BTW, who derep Licurg?

I would argue that as long as you can use loot and stuff for other stuff than just becoming stronger to get even more loot it's actually role playing. Like if I need to buy an expensive, cosmetic clothing to show off to some high noble for a potential relationship (business or otherwise) who if I try to kill at low levels his or her guards will immediately kill me.

Finding loot for the sake of more loot and/or becoming stronger for more loot is however not role playing in my opinion, there's a term for it but I forgot it.

Diablo? ;)

Well what do you mean by locking out? You can go everywhere in MM6 at low levels, you just cant kill monsters, you can explore the scenery, evade the monsters, run away, it does not have a fight or die system. Roa and Fallout have a world, you just dont explore every inch of it first person. But you can stop everywhere, rest and stuff. What does it matter anyway, is that some sort of argument for level scaling?

About looting, why do you not consider it RPG? I cant think of any RPG without loot. Maybe its irrelevant in TES, because everything is the same there. But in other RPGs its a big motivator to kill stuff. I love hunting for artifacts in MM6 or going on a caravan ride in Fallout to score some cool guns.

Skyrim sounds much better than Oblivion, I will try it.

Lets make Final Fantasy 8 a little harder http://www.insanedifficulty.com/board/index.php?/files/file/27-final-fantasy-viii-requiem/

Yes it's not a fight or die system - it's a run or die system. That's hardly "accessible"... and that is, as pointed out, exactly what you can achieve with lvl scaling.

Seriously?
Yes it is a big motivator but for crying out loud, please spell what RPG stands for. Role Playing Game.
My role doesn't change one bit if I replace my "standard axe" with the "deadly axe +2". Or would you consider CoD among roleplaying, because that bazooka you just picked up surely falls under "phat loot"....

I think the term is Monty Haul

Yeah,but without ruining the incentive to level.

Seriously? The old teminology BS again? You roleplay in every game, you play a role in Giana Sisters and Kick Off,too. RPGs are what they are because they come from PnP, and loot is part of it.

Agree with all this. Sadly we owe to some devs (especially Blizzard, I guess) that leveling has become nothing more than an illusion of progress. It's insane. I get it, devs, you're so clever, the balance is supposed to remain similar throughout the whole game but fuck me sideways if becoming the most powerful hero means that now I can take on the blue goblins while in the beginning I of my career I could only take on the green ones. Fuck me sideways if becoming the most powerful warrior in the universe means that now I can take on white dragons while on my first day on the job I killed a yellow one. Fuck me sideways if becoming stronger means remaining the same weakling I was in the beginning.

From a leveling system I expect the following things:
1. Originally challenging enemies must turn into cannon fodder over time and they MUST remain present in the game, else I don't get to feel my progress. And yeah, they aren't allowed to adapt to my skill level, if you friggin' jerks don't want the game to become too easy introduce NEW enemies - NEW like in TOTALLY NEW, not like in red instead of blue. "But we also give them new adjectives like 'furious'..." Fuck adjectives.
2. Being more powerful must mean that over time I can actually take on more powerful foes and powerful doesn't mean different colors and names, it means bigger, more fiendish, more clever, more skilled and ones always fighting in larger groups. And don't throw everything at me in the first part of the game - if on the first stages I get to fight enemies three times as big as me, supposedly so powerful that not even the kingdom's most elite warriors can defeat them, I won't EVER feel any progress. "But Hitchcock said that a movie must start with an earthquake and then..." Well, fuck Hitchcock.
3. The player must feel that he's a weakling early on and he must be made aware of that. That's not possible with a tunnel RPG where the balance is supposed to remain the same. Give the player a chance to make mistakes, to choose the wrong path - nothing is as rewarding as returning to a spot which was unbeatable at first. That's the ultimate badass moment. "But modern game design is about flow..." Well, fuck flow.
4. More options, more friggin' options! As I advance I want the game to gain in complexity. Forcing me to use potions a thousand times as powerful and pricey as the first ones is not new complexity, not a new experience and not progress. I want to get more options, I want enemies with more complex behaviour, I want more skills and not like in "in the end you can throw bolts which basically are like fireballs but deal a thousand times as much damage!". "But according to modern game design the core gameplay has to be simple and remain intact throughout the whole game..." Well, fuck simplicity... and modern game design for that matter.

Seriously, I hate modern game design and that devs explain their decisions with modern game design theory while still working with the standards set in the 90's by Blizzard & Sons makes it even worse. And it's kinda funny that Stalker actually kinda achieved all this stuff without even including a level system.
Seriously? That "every game is an RPG" BS again? And yeah, loot is part of most of them but it's not the most essential part, neither is leveling. It's a friggin' misconception. Games like Stalker and even Outcast are more of an RPG than any game that focuses on leveling and loot. :P