I certainly don't lack incentive to level, not in Morrowind nor in Skyrim. Why? Level scaling works both ways. No matter where you go, it will be worth it. If you're lvl 25 and see a small cave, you're bound to still find something valuable inside. However, you eliminated the possibility of facing enemies that disintegrate when you as much as look in their direction.

Funny you brought up PnP. I couldn't point you to even 1 PnP player, who played mainly for the loot. Story, progression, playing different roles were all more incentive and loot just tools to achieve that.
Story and progression is more or less in any cRPG. Playing different roles however, is for the most cases restricted to set classes. And that's exactly where TES series shines, as it allows you to pick / play in a way beyond that (as pointed out above).

If, for whatever reason, getting super phat loot super early is a main incentive for you then yes, games with level scaling mostly don't work out to well.

You also elimited the possibility of any excitement or a really tough fight you might narrowly win and the warm fuzzy feeling that comes as a reward.

Loot may not be main incentive, but its a very important part of RPGs, just like the other things that are inexplicably called RPG elements, leveling up, a stat system, inventories filled with loot, quests. Note how I dont include story, because every game has that. If you hate the RPG elements, just play adventures.


What? I just said you play a role in every game, or were you just trying to be funny.

Yes loot is an important part of RPGs. They're still just tools and not the defining part of it, at least in my book. You can take a Diablo or probably Dark Souls (not sure, haven't played it) where loot IS a vital and integral part of it. However in both cases, the actual playing a role takes a backseat as it's limited to class / builds / skills. You can't go and play something completely different then what the devs set up. You can't go as a healer, farmer, trader, alchemist.... basically anything that wasn't portrayed as a possible solution to the main quest / goal. You can in TES and that is a different level of roleplaying, that other RPGs simply don't provide.

Excitement or really tough fights? Yes, you can have that - in all TES games. I've heared a lot of crap in that department like "rofl-stomping through Oblivion with a lvl1 char" - failing to increase the difficulty is NOT the games fault. And I still haven't seen that youtube video of someone tackling a mountain lion in Oblivion on 100% difficulty without cheats / goditems. You want a challenge - here you go.

Personally I usually hate level scaling, I can live with it if it's done "intelligently" but that's all, if anything I would say that it is a lot more damaging for open world RPG that it is for more linear RPGs; IMO with open world is usually destroy any sense of role-play after some time.

The opposite is also true though, a very badly done fixed level system (Like the ridiculously broken leveling system in Xenoblade) can also destroy role-play.

I prefer open world where the enemy levels depends of their "locations", in "normal" forest you will find normal low level animals with an occasional slightly higher level bear, but if you go to some cursed evil forest then you will either need to run very fast or be prepared to face high level monstrosity.

This is what I call role playing, fighting some bunnies in a forest at the beginning of the game and then some hours later, in the exact same forest, fighting LV99 bandits wearing a full set of magic armor is not what I call role playing. (Unless of course there is a plot justification of why the forests are now full of over powered bandits wearing armors costing more than the kingdom annual budget)

Nah. There are plenty of weapons and armor you can get right from the get-go that are completely end-game viable, depending on your build (usually either STR/DEX + MAG). In Dark Souls, it's not so much the equipment itself as it is knowing your build, smart usage and upgrading of equipment, and player skill.

Yes and no. You've covered the outside / wilderness area and that surely looks good, but how you gonna apply that to the rest?

Fallout 1 the difficulty clearly scales along the path of the main quest, which is roughly north-south line. In Fallout 2, same thing - game gets progressively harder as you travel clockwise around the worldmap.
Furthermore, both Fallouts rely heavily on the main quest to tell you where to go. Fallout 1 even with time limit to not allow player to stray to far off and Fallout 2 pretends it has a time limit. That way the devs had a clear indication where the player will go and when (at which level) so they can adjust the locations accordingly difficulty-wise.

Now do the same with the extremely open Skyrim (or Oblivion / Morrowind)....

And that's not just the main quest line. For instance, you're in Riften getting back to the Thieves guild and encounter a certain guy that invites you to a drinking contest - you'll end up near Markarth, at the other side of the worldmap from Rifton. Predicting where the player will go and when, to set enemies lvl accordingly? Not possible.

It get's even worse.... dungeons.
How'd you set lvls of dungeons? 1/3 low- (lvl10), mid- (20) and high-level (30+)? Spread it out more like low (up to 20), mid (35) and high (50+)?
How do you counter the effect that all lower dungeons you didn't visited / uncovered before reaching lvl 25 become a nuisance and loot nothing but garbage?

Wait... it's getting even more worse.... guilds.
When does a player join certain guilds? Or not at all? How do we set up all those quest without scaling? A dedicated mage joining the mage guild at lvl 10 versus a somewhat in magic interested player joining at lvl 30?

Can someone even imagine that cluster fuck of a game? No that's not pretty... not at all.

The only way I see how to do that, is setting up specific areas with specific level ranges - or level scaling. And we're back on restricting or open world.

Oblivion is pretty much a different beast regarding improvement by removing or lessening level scaling - probably none would argue that it's NOT been overdone.
But I doubt that any title from Mass Effect or Dragon Age would be improved, by doing so. Again, that automatically comes with either restrictions / narrowing the path you play through or previously skipped content becoming a low-level nuisance with little to nothing to gain.
For example: Dragon Age Origins depending on at which point you go clearing the mess at that circle tower, you get different / higher lvl enemies. With set levels, you may either end up with a lvl5 or lvl15 party going against lvl10 enemies - I wouldn't call that improvement.

Pen and Paper RPGs. They do have level scaling. They depend on level scaling. Quite a few of them also have rough level guidelines for specific areas (enemy strongholds, major towns, other planes), but the vast majority of encounters are tailored to player levels. How would removing level scaling make pen and paper RPGs better?

The above though illustrates the specific trouble with level scaling (or lack thereof). It requires a game that makes proper use of its system, just like every other game part, be it control, graphics, sound, voice or ruleset. If the game makes proper use of its mechanics, the mechanics are good. If it doesn't, the mechanics should be changed to improve the game.

So no, level scaling isn't evil by itself, no more than controller support is.

Which would have been good a thing in Oblivion. I'd been playing it on and off for years before I remembered 'oh, wasn't there something about Oblivion gates I was supposed to do'?

It's like 'Oh my God, weird demon things are coming through portal from another world to kill us all! But while we're waiting, why don't you collect me six rat tails?'

Personally I make a difference between, "environment", side quest and main quest.

I don't mind if the main quests level with you as long as it make sense plot wise and universe wise. For side quest, most of the time it shouldn't be needed, if a peasant offer you a quest to go kill a bunch rats in its attics and you accept it while being at a very high level, then it's your choice, you don't expect those rats to have magically become fire breathing demonic were-rats to accommodate your level.

And why counter that ? The world shouldn't turn around you, if you are high level and find a low level dungeon, just skip it, unless you have something to fetch in it or just want to explore everything. On the other side if every dungeon level with you it kills the immersion as you know there won't be any real surprise, all the monsters will be around your level same with the loot.

To take your mage guild example, if you are an LV99 Arch-mage when you want to join the mage guild then I don't see anything wrong or strange if the quest given by the guild are very easy for you, on the other side if the guild quests in question level with you and have you fight LV99 monsters even thought all the other mages in the guild, including the leader, are around level 10-20 and would never in a million year be able to pass such quests, then it doesn't make any sense.

My biggest problem with level scaling is that more often than not it's used as a easy patch to go around a weak game-play element and/or bad design decision; If the quests become a shore just because you are "over level", then for me the issue is not with the lack of level scaling but with the quests themselves.

That's often the problem with open world RPG; far too often they rely on quantity over quality and submerge the player with tons of semi-randomized fetch/kill quests and for this kind of quest, of course level scaling makes things a lot easier.

On the other side if the quest are more "complex"/well crafted than than, like for example having multiple way to complete them, have an interesting lore attached to them, give you other rewards than just a bunch of XP points and some loot, then, even if you are over leveled, the quest should remain interesting and worth doing.

The possibility of ignoring the main quest / not even triggering it, is one of the strong points in all TES games - at least I see it so. It allows you to do so much more, picking different roles leading in complete different directions, whereas in other RPGs you get to pick which one of the 3 possible paths you follow first, second and third.
It provides options you simply don't have in other games, and that is hardly a weakness for an RPG.

You can point out something like that on pretty much every game....
Witcher 2 - you're supposed to aid a full out attack against a castle, but you can spend time with arm-wrestling and dice throwing.
Mass Effect - too numerous to even start mentioning tasks, while the biggest threat of the universe knocks on your frontdoor, in ME3 even currently attacks Earth itself while you're off... partying?

Right. Though I haven't seen something like that, not even in Oblivion.

Which turns into a "get phat loot" only incentive. And as soon as you have the top tier loot, 90% of the game world is simply uninteresting.

True. However, who you see able to write that Pulitzer prize worthy game with 300+ locations / dungeons?

Edit: And which you'd consider coming closest to that challenge? I'd have to go with Planescape: Torment and Morrowind. Both being pretty unique at their time and only one being a commercial success....

Yeah how? PnP was brought up to illustrate that roleplaying doesnt refer to playing the role of a retail company in Capitalism 2.

I have yet to see a RPG which wasnt better off without level scaling or at least as good without it as with. So yes, level scaling is in itself evil, and not just optional, like controller support.

Pen and Paper RPG. A good DM will make sure that the challenges the players face are adjusted for their levels, so they can neither steamroll everything in their path, nor are they facing a brick wall whereve they go. I won't say that he won't herd them a bit towards where they "have to" go, but the encounters should be scaled according to number and level of players. How would the P&P RPG be better without level scaling? And do assume a competent DM, not a shitty one.

Not sure why you are asking me. I have no idea. What do you think?