>"S/V don't need level scaling cuz you can get sense of accomplishment by beating a high level boss!"
> The Rest of the game when you do things out of order:
>"S/V don't need level scaling cuz you can get sense of accomplishment by beating a high level boss!"
>no level scaling
>get a few challenging fights
>level scaling
>get literally zero challenging fights
wow great solution op
in theory every fight should be challenging with proper level scaling and well-crafted enemy teams
>in theory every fight should be challenging if levels become entirely pointless and it becomes impossible for me to lose
yeah sure
>eah i remember that pokemon game that had level scaling and it was no challenge at all!
yeah, BW was awful.
So obvious, i guess it gets you replies though.
>it becomes impossible for me to lose
Have you ever actually played a game with level scaling? Final Fantasy 8, maybe a Pokémon ROM hack with level scaling?
>every fight should be challenging
very few people actually want this. you need to contrast easy fights with hard fights. if the entire game is a struggle most people will get bored or give up very quickly. not even souls games make you suffer through the entire game.
nta but that's a really good point that I hadn't put into words before. It's the kind of thing I was thinking the whole time, but wasn't sure how to say.
Not every fight needs to be challenging.
I'm willing to settle for needing to actually open my eyes to win.
Yeah i remember that pokemon game that had level scaling and it was no challenge at all! Oh wait that never happened and we dont know how gamefreak would handle level scalling.
>No level scaling
>Catch an endgame Pokemon
>Sweep the entire game now
Level scaling prevents you from just doing that and is basically what single player was supposed to be like if you played it normally.
That's why the badge system exists and why high level Pokémon don't listen to you
>level scaling
>Do literally anything resembling playing the game normally
>Sweep the entire game now
wow great solution op
Why do anti-scalefags always assume level scaling means all the enemies have to be equal or under your level? Hell, why do you assume that the only challenge is just levels? You could easily make it so each gym is 10% higher level than your highest level Pokemon.
You could also make gyms use stronger Pokemon because stronger Pokemon matter way more than few level differences.
Also when you catch level 59 Pokemon that’s supposed to be endgame, you can just spam A because you’re gonna be much higher level than all the gyms. Meanwhile with Level Scaling you are at least forced to change your lead Pokemon and even switch some times too.
Youre replying to a troll who accused that poster of being OP like a schizo. Do not expect meaningful conversation out of that freak or anyone who replies like that on this board.
>Why do anti-scalefags always assume level scaling means all the enemies have to be equal or under your level?
Because the anti-scalefag is one person, likely the same fag who shills the exp share so hard. He is literally incapable of arguing in good faith.
>the same fag who shills the exp share
are you talking about the one who yawns?
No, I'm talking about the one who fucks your mother
Exp share all was a good change and I'm tired of pretending its not. It literally made the older games unplayable
>Why do anti-scalefags always assume level scaling means all the enemies have to be equal or under your level?
Because that's what literally all the previous gens were like.
>Hell, why do you assume that the only challenge is just levels?
I never said the only challenge is just levels.
>You could easily make it so each gym is 10% higher level than your highest level Pokemon
Yeah, you could easily make levels pointless and the games piss easy. Thankfully GF chose not to do that.
>It seems someone doesn't understand how level scaling works.
>proceeds to make a post where he doesn't understand how level scaling works
lmao
It seems someone doesn't understand how level scaling works.
Level scaling doesn't mean nothing has a base level and will acomodate your level. Everything still have a base level, but it can scale UP if you get there later.
Meaning Kofu would still be level 30 if you went there first thing in the game, but if you went there last he would be leve 50.
You have no idea how level scaling works
This is a decent idea
>You have no idea how level scaling works
Yes I do.
No you don't
>level scaling can only be implemented in one possible way and it is impossible to do anything better, because I said so!
midwit moment
I'm starting to think that it's less that "people don't want level scaling" but more of the fact that "deep down, we know Gay Freak would implement it in the worst possible way"
But the problem is that since people are retarded, they can't narrow it down to this distinction and are mistakingly believing that level scaling simply won't work at all. But it's because they don't trust Gay Freak.
SVirgins always do this whenever somebody says SV should have level scaling. they love to ignore the Stadium games that sort of had level scaling but were challenging because of movesets
This guy really spends his whole day writing low quality baits on the pokemon board.
more like whole life
You do realize that you can get a challenging fight with scaling right? Do you think the only mechanic in Pokemon is Level?
So you want to rely on pure chance to accidentally offer a challenge? Seems like a bad idea.
>what are stats
>what are natures
>what are movesets
>what are held items
>what are abilities
There's alot more to pokemon then OOOOH LEVEL NUMBER GO UP!
it's a samefag who wants his thread to stay alive. just talk over him if you want to keep posting.
Then just do that with static levels. Level scaling actively hurts that.
Weird acusation. That's not what a samefag is. An accusation of samefag would mean that I am myself, and also the person you replied to. Which, if that was the case, who do you think you're even warning?
>Then just do that with level scaling. Static levels actively hurts that
No, I want you to shut the fuck up and stop pretending I said any of those words. Moveset, typing, and stats already go a long way in the grand scheme of battling, especially if gym leaders scale up. Example: Clair's Kingdra. Godly typing, powerful moveset, and well rounded stats means that it has very little counters or statistical weaknesses, and the ones it does have can get countered BACK by Dragon Pulse. Even with a level advantage and a super effective attack in Dragon Claw/Outrage, OHKO'ing it like horsea fodder is never guaranteed unless you have a significantly stronger psuedo of your own (which is impossible in HGSS)
TL;DR: Play some pokemom games, you fag
Solution.
Totem pokemon.
Bring boss battles into pokemon. Gym leaders pokemon should be cheating, I would want them to have a free def/sdef boost at least. These are supposed to be boss fights. Half the gym leaders barely have pokemon 2-3 levels higher than the wild pokemon in the area.
Hell give trainers these options to. If the trainer only has one pokemon, make it a totem.
This is fine, but remember that Pokemon is averse to any sort of RPG scenario design.
Well aware. But that would probably be the solution for scaling.
Personally I hate open world shit like this. Either do scaling or put more purpose into your world and design a set path.
>Either do scaling
Fuck no.
>put more purpose into your world
Yeah, more thoughtful design is better. "Make the game better" isn't really actionable advice though.
>and design a set path
HAHAHAHAHA no. What a stupid idea, make an open world game but make it linear.
>HAHAHAHAHA no. What a stupid idea, make an open world game but make it linear.
Linear or open world pick one.
You can't have a vast open world where you can go anywhere and do what you want. And also be linear?
Designing a set bath doesn't mean you can't explore. For example, you take the unova map, shit's a circle.
But you could easily add tons of little paths and caves and explorable spots.
If you're that set on doing free exploration, take monsterhunter world as a starting point.
The maps are built vertically instead of it being a vast open field of fuck and all like rise.
That's perfect for pokemon. Make an area compact and vertical, put more purpose in what's there. You can lock off areas with HM things.
Nothing you did refutes the greentext you replied to. Instead of discussing how to make genres that you don't like more like genres that you do like, just accept that you don't like them and play something else.
What's the point of arguing about scaling then if the answer is fuck no?
there's no room for discussion there.
I genuinely think scaling is fine, it stops you from just walking over everything you see, lets you actual experience the area, instead of just spamming the A button.
Because you're obviously and apparently wrong, and wrong to such a vast degree that the very idea of doing it that way is laughable. That's why the answer is just fuck no.
Then explain why scaling is bad.
No. Read the entire thread, or look at literally any other game.
I accept your admittance of defeat and apology and wish you a nice day.
Negative scaling is retarded, but bosses should absolutely be brought up to the player's levels.
This.
Keep the bosses with their levels, but if the player, idk, beats Eri or Grusha first, then the early game bosses should scale up
Even in the anime it's canon that the gym leaders will scale to you. It doesn't even need to be level Scaling. Just assign 8 teams to each gym leader and have them use the one depending how many badges you have. There are so many simple solutions why they fuck didn't they do ANYTHING
But it's plastered all over the marketing that it's your adventure and you can do anything in any order.
> Bug and Grass Gyms with 3 low level Pokemon after I've beat all gyms before them.
>
You would still be able to do them in any order though? Them having appropriate level for the player actually gives you more freedom, not less.
>Assing 8 teams to each gym leader and have them use the one depending how many badges you have.
Such a simple and elegant solution that would be easy to implement and everyone would applaud game freak for such a "revolutionary" feature.
That they themselves approved to be explained in the Kanto nostalgia bait special
I just wish there actually was an 80+ level area that just fucks you over but the highest level area is like 50 and you can beat that with a good mid thirties team which you get just by playing normally.
Only challenging fight was Pepper cause I did his quest first for the mobility upgrades.
Why don't they add a hard mode like in Black 2 and White 2?
Cuz Gamefreak think Children are stupid and don't deserve good games
>Why don't they add a hard mode like in Black 2 and White 2?
It's not the player's job to balance a game, it's the developer's job to balance a game. A good game (such as SV) should have one difficulty setting. It is the difficulty that it is because that is how Game Freak made it. Bad games have difficulty settings and give players options.
>Why don't they add a hard mode like in Black 2 and White 2?
Because GF doesn’t design the game for people to be replaying the games over and over they want people to minmax their Pokemon in the post game for the raid events pvp trading etc.
Open world is a meme and it took GAYFREAK to prove it definitively
I think it's more that they did it wrong. If you can tackle everything out of order and they still have a specific level to them, then you've fucked up.
I think there were more concessions made than the level-scaling issue for the facilitation of the open world. Turning the entire game– and not just the gyms– into a check-list wasn't a worthwhile price to pay for an open world experience in my opinion; especially since the team star stuff was just the same thing copy and pasted 5 times.
Even worse is how the game acknowledges that you are in your last Gym or last Tema Star base, yet the boss is sending legit lv 20s base stage mons
I'm not expecting the wild mons and normal trainers to scale, but at the very least the leaders should have different teams depending on your progress
Even worse considering that GF made normal trainers not be mandatory anymore, so you could very well go to a late or mid game gym/star base as your first
instread of level scaling i kind of wish there was like a new game + where everything is comp tier hand crafted teams that are an actual challenge, so for the casual people doing a fun mono run or some shit can still do that in the base playthrough the new game + could be where they make the game a legitimate challenge, or at the very least give us a difficulty selector when you are making your character, like normal mode and pokemon master difficulty with everything in the game being as hard as possible.
No, you can't have NG+ in a pokemon game because it's it's a game for children and difficulty can't be a thing.
Has anyone played with other people?
>Was blocked by psychic terrain
>but it failed
>impacts of the barrier
The game is clearly out your challenge range
open world is a meme
No matter how you try to spin it, there is no valid excuse to not have level scaling bosses/gym leaders.
It's pure laziness to not have this feature and goes directly against the open world "go where you want do what you want WHEN you want" concept.
If I get up to ice chud at level 15, his pokemon should be around level 20 and give me a run for my money
>GAME FREAK PLEASE MAKE THE GAME EASIER FOR ME I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE MY BRAIN
lmao
You like bad game design and should go play a bethesda game or something. Actually even they have areas featuring strong enemies that'll tear your asshole a new one so they're out too.
Even dark souls does this even if their fans refuse to admit having areas near the start with enemies that one-shot you is meant to lead you in other directions.
>no valid excuse to not have level scaling
In your opinion. Personally I'd rather not have every fucking trainer "be at my level" when I have a bunch of level 100 pokemon. You people fail to understand that this is not an RPG iwht 6 static characters its an RPG with HUNDREDS of characters to select from and you can generate more of them whenever you want, game freak doesn't want to put you into a situation where you can't use a low level pokemon without relying on a higher leveled one for extremely obvious reasons: not only is it not balanced its also paves the way to creating various ways you can soft lock yourself in the game unless they make catching a pokemon a 100% chance everytime or some janky ass fuck shit like the game scaling down when you release your highest leveled mon completely ruining the xp progression.
>scaling down
Yuck. Be gone from me casual.
Hi yawnnie!
Hes getting sloppy
Honestly I am genuinely glad game freak is not retarded enough to listen to level scale fags. Imagine finding level 90-95 wild pokemon and generally being unable to get anything at a low level.
Wild Pokemon don't need to be scaled, literally just boss trainers.
How to do level scaling in this sort of game:
>Gyms ordered e.g. 1-8 by how distant they are from the starting area
>E.g. Bug Gym is close and the first; Ice Gym is far away and the last
>The rate at which each Gym scales varies by how many badges you have
>If you do either the Ice or Bug Gyms first, they will have Pokemon that just about equal your highest level, with the higher Gym having maybe 1 or 2 mons about 1 or 2 levels higher
>If you do the Bug Gym last, it will have Pokemon that are slightly above your highest level by ~1/2
>If you do the Ice Gym last, it will have Pokemon that are well above your highest level by ~8-10
To make it even more interesting, the order in which you do the gyms should affect the biodiversity in your region. So if you beat Bug first, you'd get access to exclusive Bug Pokemon. This could be a good social feature.
>example of game with adaptive scaling to the player
Skyrim
>example of game with set enemy stats that don't adapt to suit you
Elden Ring
Hmmmm... Which was the better game experience...
Skyrim
Despite being way older, despite several new Bethesda RPGs existing, despite new Elder Scrolls games, people still talk about Skyrim.
Meanwhile almost everyone has forgotten about Elden Ring.
Also neither is turn-based nor resemble Pokemon outside of having stats and items.
Even saying this ironically is enough to completely ignore any opinion you have on the subject.
The absolute STATE of Anti-levelscalingfags
>B-b-but muh wild pokemon!
But we didn't say we wanted wild pokemon to be scaled only with badges and boss trainers.
>BUT YOU DON'T GET IT I HAVE TO USE MY LEVEL 4 SHITMON AGAINST THIS LEVEL. 60 SHILLMON! IT'S LE CHALLENGING!
Ok retard.
The big joke is of you fags is the ever shifting goalpost. None of you ever suggest the same thing, none of you have the same idea of how it should work. Ans that's just so convenient for you, because when one of you meets a counterargument, another can jump in and say "well that wouldn't effect MY idea!" So then that person gets a counterpoint, and then someone else with another idea jumps in. And it's endless, and you all get to pretend that you're each the only person who's thinking of it the right way, because there's no way to actually pin you down and refute you anonymously.
We have never shifted the goalpost you guys are just retarded.
You personally may not have, but that is meaningless to what I've said.
Let's just take a look at one example then;
Here
is someone asking for scaled wild encounters. And then there's you here
saying that even arguing against scaled wold pokemon is stupid, because no one would suggest it. You see, you're not all asking for the same thing, you get the benefit of always being able to tag in and tag out whenever someone gives a counterargument against you. It's pointless to argue with you like this.
Yes so that Anon is retarded are I agree. My suggestion is how it would work like how alot of Hacks do it (Which is scaling by badges and boss trainers)
Also can agree with this tbh
Sorry *So I agree
You don't get to play like you're some honest participant after making your caps lock rage bullshit, criticizing people for arguing against actual arguments that were made and pretending they're arguing with the air. You were wrong twice, once about random encounter scaling being brought up, and again about goalposts being moved. You don't get to just pretend it didn't happen and shove your head in the sand to move on.
Well ok gay so much for deciding to agree with you on something.
Salty that you were identified as a bad faith participant who can't be trusted. You'd think actually owning up to being wrong would be a start to refuting that label, but no you lash out instead, reinforcing the label as true. You aren't worth listening to.
>Decide to calm down and agree about someone on my side being dumb
>Told "I'm pretending" because I chose how to argue because some of YOUR side are acting no better than my "caps lock rage bullshit"
>Call you a gay
>"Why Anon I can't believe you're such a bad faith cunt how could you"
How about you stop talking your self in the mirror with that "You aren't worth listening to".
Putting caps lock rage in quotes is just another example of your disingenuous attempt to ignore what you said before. It's here, in case you forgot
and you're still ignoring being wrong before. Go outside.
Anon, calm down and stop schizoposting.
What would you have done to make the game more interesting?
Illiterate retards who just want mindless posting to bait. Imagine being upset that someone actually read the posts and thought about what they meant instead of just shouting into the void.
Go jump off a sky scrapper head first if you cant stand the thought of multiple people discussing different ideas about how scaling in a pokemon would work.
I'm sorry that you can't read, but it isn't my problem.
Meds or suicide. Choose.
So how would you have made the game more interesting?
I like the system we have. The only change I'd make is maybe spread out the levels further, so the end game would be a higher level, and each challenge along the way would be slightly higher to maintain the same percentage difference. Like stretching an elastic band with marks along the length of it, each mark moves slightly too. Other than that, I'm satisfied with a game that doesn't scale.
It is a bit of a loaded question though, isn't it? It's not really the topic for discussion, how interesting the game is or isn't. And it has a lot more angles to consider than just the level scaling.
The problem with stretching out the levels is that it would filter even more noob kids and casuals. There is no winning with GameFreak, and you will keep playing a baby game if you just stick to mainline.
I disagree, seeing as we moved off of having 8 badges and instead have all of them. Stretching out the leveling range gives you the space to have more distinct challenges. Working within this range was fine for 8 challenges, but not anymore.
I think your system would be challenging to implement in a totally open-ended game. Maybe if there were clusters of open areas?
What, like Legends Arceus? I'd be fine with that. There was a nice expectation of what you're in for per area, with some legitimate dangers in the alpha pokemon. I think it would work in a SV style game, but I'd be ok with this too.
You guys are huge gays holy shit shut the fuck up. nobody cares about what you think about "moving the goal post" of a hypothetical idea when people are simply just discussing their ideas. Go have a nice day if you dont have the will power to stay out of the thread about an idea you disagree with.
They literally only asked for bosses to have different teams based on player progress
Its a problem because the game is poorly designed as game from the ground up. What they should do is make ALL 8 gyms end-level tier gyms, level 60-80, then populate the world with other things to do. You know, like quests? Dungeons? Factions? This game is literally just a boss rush, and it fails even at that.
I don't get why people are arguing against level scaling considering the game lets you go any direction you want, except not really, because you need to go in a very specific order otherwise you wind up in situations like the OP image.
>It'll make the game too easy!
No, forced EXP share makes the game too easy, I had a rotating team of over 10 Pokemon because I didn't want to pass level caps and even then with friendship bonuses I was only ever on the backfoot when I severely handicapped myself. There is no way a Pokemon game can present a challenge as long as EXP all (and no set mode) is present, so might as well let people go in whichever order they feel like and not shitstomp the entire game because the player had the audacity to want to go north instead of west.
I think if they're not going to level scale, then as said, there needs to be high level content in the game that people can tackle at a low level for a challenge, or just do in postgame, because outside of the School Tourney, there's literally nothing left except shiny hunting and raids.
> I don't get why people are arguing against level scaling considering the game lets you go any direction you want
The lack of level scaling is what makes going in any direction I want actually meaningful you dumbfuck. If I just wanted to walk while mindlessly mashing A at everything without any thought I would play Gen 5 instead.
not a single person in this thread has played any game other than pokemon
Are there really people who are against the simple implementation of a mechanic that's existed in the franchise for two decades now
Nah it's a discord meme
>Are there really people who are against making the games pointlessly easier to please DSfags who are afraid of actually losing
yes
Post a picture of yourself overleveling the Battle Tower right now
I don't like how everyone is just ignoring that the Titans also exist and would need to be scaled as major objectives. Factoring them in with the Gyms/Team Star Bosses ends up taking the potential teams needed for every permutation of a player's progression from 13x13 (or 169) to 18x18 (or 369), which is not an insignificant jump at all.
>just give them the level up movesets lol
Early Titans have a moves that they can't normally get at the level you fight them (Bombirdier has Torment 4 Levels early, Othworm has Iron Tail at 29 when it normally gets it at 43), so that doesn't fly.
Also, early on, Pokemon like Dondozo/Tatsugiri and Great Tusk/Iron Treads would just act like massive statchecks due to them mogging everything that the player would reasonably be using at that point, meaning they'd need definite fine tuning in order to feel fair as a potential first/second/third/etc. boss. You really shouldn't underestimate the amount of work it'd take, especially with how rigid the devcycle of Pokemon games even are. I'd like well done level scaling too, but that just isn't feasible with how SV was made and anything they would've hacked together in the short time they probably had to even finetune difficulty when progression was set in stone would've more than likely made the game even more unbalanced.
If you can't come up with 3 reasonable different ways to scale the titans in like 20 seconds, that's on you anon.
>If you can't come up with 3 reasonable different ways to scale the titans in like 20 seconds, that's on you anon.
The problem isn't that it'd be unreasonable to scale a titan, the problem is that, below a certain level point, they'd need to be really careful with how certain ones are designed lest they just end up being not worth the trouble in the eyes of most players, which inevitably defeats the point while compounding on the fact that you're also designing a litany of other early-game teams and even later-game ones (though those would inevitably easier because the player's higher strength and increased teambuilding options would let the designers be a bit more blasé with what they give the major objectives).
>I don't think you need to scale the titans at all, especially since they're the way you unlock raidon upgrades. In fact, I think the ideal solution would be to make it so that the titans and star raids do not scale while the gyms do
That's just fixing only 1/3rd of the problem though. In fact, if a player gets it in their mind during the gyms that everything would scale this way, do a few of them in succession, and then decide to focus on another storyline only to find out that it didn't, then the problem really didn't change from the base game's progression in the first place. You're just undermining the game's "go anywhere" rhetoric in a different way.
I don't think you need to scale the titans at all, especially since they're the way you unlock raidon upgrades. In fact, I think the ideal solution would be to make it so that the titans and star raids do not scale while the gyms do. That way you get the best of both worlds while also better fitting established concepts in the series (gym leaders having multiple teams to adapt to their challengers and some trainers naturally being stronger than the others which could have been a source of conflict for the weaker star bosses)
>I don't like how everyone is just ignoring that the Titans also exist and would need to be scaled as major objectives
People have suggested minimum levels and then the Pokemon scaling upwards.
> Factoring them in with the Gyms/Team Star Bosses ends up taking the potential teams needed for every permutation of a player's progression from 13x13 (or 169) to 18x18 (or 369)
People throw this number around as lot as if there's any actual meaningful difference between something being the first and something being the second gym leader
>ohh nooo, they need to program the gym leader having lv. 13 pokemon, and then program the gym leader having lv.20 Pokemon! Aaiieeee how will a small indie company handle that workload!
Reminder Pokemon games used to have full blown battle facilities with dozens upon dozens of teams where just about every single Pokemon had some kind of competitive set even if they were shitmons in the Battle Factory. This isn't even getting into how the games already do exactly this with random NPC trainers that scale throughout the game. I really and truly believe giving every gym leader a set of 8 teams is not nearly that tough a feat.
>arly Titans have a moves that they can't normally get at the level you fight them
Pokemon has a history of giving enemy trainers otherwise impossible Pokemon, remember Lance's hacked Dragonites or Ghetsis' hacked Hydreigon?
>Also, early on, Pokemon like Dondozo/Tatsugiri and Great Tusk/Iron Treads would just act like massive statchecks due to them mogging everything that the player would reasonably be using at that point
The player character has a team of 6 Pokemon and access to items. If a player cannot defeat a powerful enemy then they should leave, level up and come back. The assumption the player should just win every fight first try is part of the reason the games suck so bad now.
>People have suggested minimum levels and then the Pokemon scaling upwards.
That...doesn't help much? You'd still get your shit kicked by Great Tusk or Iono by going there first/second/third. At best that alleviates the existing problem where people go up one side of the region and then try out the other only to steamroll the bosses, but not so much in the opposite direction. It'd just feel half-assed.
>ohh nooo, they need to program the gym leader having lv. 13 pokemon, and then program the gym leader having lv.20 Pokemon! Aaiieeee how will a small indie company handle that workload!
And in that jump they might warrant an evolution, new party member, change in moves, etc. All this seems to do is encourage lazy boss design where a large chunk of the game's major roadblock's difficulty are decided by the strength of what happened to be the Pokemon's last learned moves by level-up-A problem that I remember people shitting on Red and Blue for quite a bit.
>Reminder Pokemon games used to have full blown battle facilities with dozens upon dozens of teams where just about every single Pokemon had some kind of competitive set even if they were shitmons in the Battle Factory
The scaling for a Pokemon in a Battle Tower is a lot easier than the scaling of the Pokemon on a major roadblock that the player needs to progress past explicitly because it's a controlled environment playing under certain rules in a point where the player is expected to have already stopped progressing strength-wise and know their shit, and even THEN any given facility has a massive chunk of poorly made mons with shitty sets or IVs that you'd be loathe to actually use if you weren't pigeon-holed into it, meaning that they can't even balance properly under these circumstances.
>That...doesn't help much? You'd still get your shit kicked by Great Tusk or Iono by going there first/second/third.
How is this a problem exactly? The game does a perfectly good job of directing you in the "intended" direction, with weak trainers and low level Pokemon. If someone goes off the beaten path, sees a giant dinosaur elephant, runs up to it and gets smacked for it, tell me why exactly that's a bad thing, remember, this can happen in vanilla SV too.
> At best that alleviates the existing problem where people go up one side of the region and then try out the other only to steamroll the bosses
This is the entire reason people are suggesting level scaling in the first place, I fail to see how the inverse, someone running into a fight they're not ready for, is actually a bad thing, or a worse situation than the pic in the OP. Have you played an open world game before?
A good recent example of this is TOTK's Gloom puddle hand dudes, the first encounter with them you're likely to get fucking mopped up, and for a big part of the journey, your best option is to run the fuck away from them, but if the player is smart, they can still take out a gloom puddle even at a "low" level. The exact same mindset can apply to Pokemon, casuals get smacked and run away, hardcore people get the challenge they're looking for, everyone wins.
>And in that jump they might warrant an evolution, new party member, change in moves, etc.
And? God forbid Gamefreak has to design bosses. The introduction of Tera alleviates most of this headache, by the way, as most Gym Leader ace Pokemon rely on TM moves anyways (Trailblaze Sudowood, Charge Beam Mismagius, etc) the most that would need changing is Iono going from Charge Beam to Thunderbolt.
Fuck me, you even re-challenge all the gym leaders in postgame with full teams anyways, why are we pretending this is a massive undertaking?
>How is this a problem exactly? The game does a perfectly good job of directing you in the "intended" direction, with weak trainers and low level Pokemon. If someone goes off the beaten path, sees a giant dinosaur elephant, runs up to it and gets smacked for it, tell me why exactly that's a bad thing, remember, this can happen in vanilla SV too.
>go anywhere, do anything!
>can't do that in base game
>anon proposes change that means you still can't do that in base game
>this somehow fixes the issue
Do you think Territorial Rotbart is just, like, what the entirety of Xenoblade 2 should've been or something? A game's major objectives being presented in an open space with explicit dialogue encouraging you to go about it any way you want while simultaneously discouraging you from doing this is a problem in both the current version and your half-measure, the fundamental problem has not been fixed. I have no idea what you mean by that shitty gotcha at the end either, given I already said I'd prefer properly done level scaling to none.
>This is the entire reason people are suggesting level scaling in the first place,
Then they're retarded. The purpose of it in SV shouldn't be to just bolster a specific group of weak objectives, it should be to encourage the player to actually fight things in their preferred order wholesale.
>Have you played an open world game before?
Yeah, including ones with some of the worst done difficulty scaling in the industry (like BotW), so I know full well how much half-assing a system like this can hurt a game in the long run.
>A good recent example of this is TOTK's Gloom puddle hand dudes
You mean those things that, by and large, aren't even required to BEAT the game? I've played ToTK dude, I'm sure most people here have, and it barely fixed shit from BOTW's poorly done scaling, where enemies can go from doing reasonable-to-no damage to taking you down to oneshot protection on a whim simply because you played the game too much
>>can't do that in base game
...Why not? You can very easily beat a titan with weaker Pokemon, half of the argument from anti-scale people is getting into fights while underleveled. You're arguing that it would be hard to lower the levels of titan Pokemon, and I'm saying they wouldn't need to be.
>Do you think Territorial Rotbart is what the entirety of XB2 should've been?
XB2 had open exploration but the areas are unlocked in a linear fashion, this is not the same as SV where you have access to almost the entire region right off the bat.
>A game's major objectives being presented in an open space with explicit dialogue encouraging you to go about it any way you want while simultaneously discouraging you from doing this is a problem
I fail to see how the game warning you that an enemy is potentially way stronger than you is a bad thing, I understand saying in the sense that you do need to fight the titan to progress the story, and the player "shouldn't" need to run away from a main story boss, but I'd also argue part of the appeal of an open world game is potentially being in an area where everything is much stronger than you. With scaling, the only thing that changes is that now you can do the hard stuff, and the rest of the game isn't invalidated because of it.
Your argument would only work if there weren't a suggested path that's...relatively easy for the player to follow. It is not hard to see when you're out of your depth in this game, as strong wild Pokemon and trainers appear, if someone presses on underleveled in spite of this, then what happens next is on them. Tusk is pretty deep in the desert, for example.
>fight things in their preferred order
Which, without scaling, fucking sucks, if you fight Grusha early because you wanted to go to the ice area, now every gym is cake. You've tuned the playthrough into an extended cutscene because you're so far ahead of the curve and there's no system bar boxing your entire team to get it back.
I'd like to continue arguing but Teal Mask just released and I'm gonna play that before I have to hit the hay.
If this thread is still alive by tomorrow after I'm done for the day I might chime in again.
..It's out? Oh shit. No we can drop it, I will say as a closing word you actually had plenty of good arguments and I apologize for trying to get a one up, I'm so used to people being assholes during arguments that I'm always prepared to go for a cheap shot, have a good time and a good night, anon
It's all good, it was nice to have a constructive argument on here for once even if we had to cut it short. You have nice night too.
>And? God forbid Gamefreak has to design bosses.
I'm not against GF designing bosses, I'm simply putting forth the reality that they'd have to design 369 of them on the course of a rigid dev cycle. If SV had, like, a whole other year to come out and still had the current system, I'd be right alongside you shitting on it. As is, they handled it like it wasn't open world at all, which is still unideal, but far better than half-assing a measure that can seriously fuck with the player's sense of progression and the game's overall sense of balance, especially since games with far more development time than GF has for two main series new-gen entries combined have tried and failed in this endeavor.
>The introduction of Tera alleviates most of this headache, by the way, as most Gym Leader ace Pokemon rely on TM moves anyways (Trailblaze Sudowood, Charge Beam Mismagius, etc) the most that would need changing is Iono going from Charge Beam to Thunderbolt.
In your shoddy system where the motto of the game continues to fail to be encouraged like it is now, anyways. In a proper one, Iono would have earlier teams that would also need a "Tera ace" that's both weaker and can sport a weaker Electric move that won't snowball off a few unlucky procs on an unsuspecting new player.
>implementing a form of scaling that has weaker trainers level up when you defeat higher-tier trainers is bad for some reason
>killing all sense of progress is bad for some reason
>making the game pointlessly easier is bad for some reason
I'd say the sense of progression comes from things like your Pokemon evolving and getting new moves, and your Raidon being able to go to new places. No one in these threads has given a good counter argument to the fact that massive portions of the game fucking suck if you come to them after you were "supposed" to and are now massively overleveled. It's not actually fun stomping a team of lv. 14s with your lv. 45 Pokemon.
>I'd say the sense of progression comes from things like your Pokemon evolving and getting new moves,
All of which becomes pointless if everything else in the game magically matches them. Funny huh?
As opposed to...them being 20 levels over everything? Do you think a game can only be fun if you have zero chance of losing?
anon is the type of person that self-inserts and then cries tears of joy when the characters ingame compliment his abilities
of course, he'd rather just reach that point by steamrolling the game than actually dealing with trainers that can put up a fight
>as opposed to…your pokemon actually progressing in power thus not making training them completely pointless?
Uh…yes? Are you alright anon?
Wew, I didn't think you'd actually agree with me, I don't know what to say now, I'm a little embarrassed to be replying to you, do you name your trainer ASH? Is Kirito from SAO your favorite protagonist? I bet you hack in 999 Master Balls so you can never miss a capture, wouldn't wanna be challenged, right?
He wants to curbstomp a boss with level 5 shitmons he forgot with a level 56 shillmon yes.
NTA except it doesn't, Do you even know what kind of scaling were talking about? You don't think we are unironically going "Everyone is lv.40 when I'm lv.40" right?
>making weaker trainers stronger instead of leaving them underleveled is "making the game pointlessly easier"
excellent critical thinking skills you have there
>zero chance to fight higher leveled opponents
>”doesn’t make the games pointlessly easier”
excellent critical thinking skills you have there
>the trainers should level up to match you
>WAIT NO I DIDN’T MEAN IT LIKE THAT
wow that other anon was right you scalefags can’t even figure out a consistent argument
wouldnt level scaling mean the levels would scale to be above yours, not the same as yours?
>wouldnt level scaling mean not level scaling?
>this scaling isn't scaling because I said so
lol?
>>zero chance to fight higher leveled opponents
excellent reading skills you have there
maybe you should reread
before you embarrass yourself further
Wait a minute wait a minute, are they unironically thinking that because I was thinking of level caps like how hacks do them.
It can be characterized as bad (arbitrary and lazy) if done without context. The problem is that a lot of commenters are creatively challenged and think that if something doesn't make sense, it can't be attenuated to actually make even more sense.
For example, as the game progresses, there could be a gathering storm that sends bug catchers and lasses indoors, and more rangers/evil team trainers start appearing. Just one example off the top of my head.
Later areas shouldn't be scaled down, but early game should definitely be scaled up. Wild Pokemon should be left intact
The issue with adaptive scaling is you get the "developer intent" trap with player experience. Meaning, there's no sense of danger, because devs make a game that they want people to play. They set challenges that are meant to be beaten. And if they always adjust to your level, you know that whatever challenge you find, it is tuned to be beaten by you. It makes your exploration meaningless, wander in any direction will full confidence that you can handle whatever you find as you are right now. It's a boring and mind numbing game experience.
then just have non-scaled threats in the overworld, they already do this with fully evolved tera pseudos roaming around low level areas anyways. there are plenty of ways to make scaling work, and the alternative, which is what we have right now, makes the open world pointless since your options are either get a little challenge and then shitstomp the game or be forced along a railroad anyways, lest
happens.
The problem with no scaling is specifically the damage formula in Pokemon. A difference of 20+ levels can invalidate most fights, unless you're specifically prepared to e.g. baton pass cheese everything.
Not true, I did the Mela fight a good 15 levels early. It was a hard fight, but I just took a minute to strategize, and then handled it, and it felt very rewarding to do so. The only think it trivialize after that was the bug gym, which I hadn't done yet, and honestly would probably be pretty easy regardless.
One fun "emergent" gym fight is fun and all, but that can be experienced many times over with a good level scaling system.
It can't, because I can anticipate that the gym will be an appropriate challenge for me. I will never be surprised, never have to adapt on the fly.
Level scaling doesn't have to be linear. Lazy ROM hacks do the "highest level" and level cap shit because it's easy. Level scaling can be done at various rates, so an easy gym can be harder than normal if you stumble upon it late, or a hard gym can be easier if you reach it early.
If that deprives some mercurial notion of complete and utter surprise, that's a worth tradeoff. There's still room for surprise, and 90% of encounters aren't rendered useless.
Frankly, what you're asking for is impossible. While that may be true for a linear game, you're asking for a dynamic challenge curve that maintains its nonlinear progression WHILE ALSO adapting the curve to the players level. It's like asking for sunlight that doesn't burn, it just comes with the package deal. There isn't a way to separate these ideas.
>Frankly, what you're asking for is impossible.
Literally impossible.
Yes. The time it would take to design all that, not to mention the manhour budget, would be herculean. It's not possible.
Literally impossible.
I know you're triggered, but showing me that what I say is upsetting you like this is not a counterargument. Cope.
Post elo
I mean, it's like if you hit someone, and their counter strike is to roll on the ground and scream. It doesn't hit you back, it just shows you that you landed a good hit that really hurt. You aren't getting anything out of showing me I upset you like this.
>probably can't crack 1300
no wonder you think everything is so difficult
>it can be experienced many times over if there’s zero sense of danger and it becomes impossible to lose
Except there would be danger and would be possible to lose if you don't prepare
>there would still be danger if we reduced the danger
>Danger is still Danger
Wow Anon you really get it!
No.
Yes.
I wonder how many people arguing against level scaling actually believe in what they're saying versus how many are just going through the contrarian bait motions for (You)s. clearly there's at least some on the latter, considering this thread has a lot of the same obtuse behaviors and speech patterns you see in shit like genwar and exp share threads
it's a shame that every debate on this board has to have some disingenuous autist infesting it
Agreed
Yeah, this post isn't an example of that at all. You're definitely above it all.
To everyone else, you can tell this is bait because he's not replying to any post in particular. He wants you to hear it as if he's talking to you specifically, and then get defensive about it and feed him replies.
what, you want me to mass reply to every post instead?
If you actually were a good faith participant, you wouldn't need to cast such a wide net. Only people who are looking for anyone to reply do that. Goodbye
You're a fucking dumbass for falling for it.
>pointing out that there is a lot of overlap between the arguments in this thread and the arguments that appear in genwar threads makes me not a 'good faith participant'
weird of you to get mad at me for "holier than thou" shit while acting uppity over literally nothing
if you're not one of the people I was referring to (
is exactly one of the people I was referring to, for the record) then you've little reason to get uppity about it, because it isn't as though I accused every anti-scale poster of being a troll
>YOU’RE NOT AGREEING WITH MY TERRIBLE ARGUMENTS? D-DISINGENEOUS! B-BAD FAITH!
I should have known scalefags are gen5tards
So you're just proving him right with that greentexting.
Why is everyone ignoring the EXP question? Scaling things up to your level means that everything offers more exp, inflating your level even further, in a snowball effect. This is literally why BG3 had to buff exp gain to be 150% in the easy mode in the first patch, because the easier enemies didn't give enough exp to progress in the game. This is also why B2W2 easy mode is harder than the challenge mode. It doesn't work out.
depending on how it's implemented, that could be used that as an incentive
>defeating later gym leaders has the earlier ones level up to compensate
>this allows you to get more EXP than you would going through the 'standard' route, allowing your pokemon to gain better moves and evolve comparatively earlier than they otherwise would have, leaving you better prepared for the endgame battles
But there's a snowball effect with it, meaning you accelerate towards level 100 as you go through the game, and eventually cap off and don't progress at all during the last few challenges.
but that would be assuming that the scaling operates by constantly matching enemy levels to that of the player instead of simply strengthening different trainers by varying amounts depending on the way the player progresses through the game
contrary to what what that one autist is trying to claim, scaling is not strictly relegated to equalizing levels, it can cover a pretty big spectrum of adaptive difficulty, and a pretty simple solution is to simply cap out the scaling up to a certain amount.
that said, reaching level 100 during endgame isn't that big of an issue, since by that point there isn't much left to progress toward in the first place. and if they no longer have the means to powerlevel over their opponents, it gives more wiggle room for the final battles to actually present a bigger challenge than otherwise.
Advancing them how, if not by level? Artificially inflating their stats without inflating their levels? I hope you aren't suggesting a personally tuned scaling? Like, giving them better or worse moves/held items? Because with hundreds or even thousands of trainers, that simply is not a feasible task to ask of the devs.
Reaching 100 BEFORE endgame is an issue though. Trudging through the end of the game with no progression is boring as fuck.
>Advancing them how, if not by level? Artificially inflating their stats without inflating their levels?
I'm still suggesting a form of level scaling, just not specifically the kind that involves constantly adjusting the enemy levels to that of the player. more like keeping the 'set' order base SV has, but with doing later gyms early causing the lower tier ones to increase to a similar or higher set of levels in order to ensure you aren't effortlessly curbstomping the rest of the game for daring to want one challenging battle.
>I hope you aren't suggesting a personally tuned scaling? Like, giving them better or worse moves/held items?
for major trainers? creating a handful of variations for each gym leader dependent on what gyms you've defeated is hardly a major undertaking, especially not for an actual, dedicated dev team.
for minor trainers, it doesn't really matter too much, since they're optional and aren't really meant to put up a proper challenge. you could easily just tie their level to a simple equation boosting their level with the number of badges you have.
>Reaching 100 BEFORE endgame is an issue though. Trudging through the end of the game with no progression is boring as fuck.
true, hence why leaving a cap for how high the levels go can still give the player some wiggle room before that point.
Segmented level scaling can be used as one way to do it.
>sakurai is more intelligent than the average gen 5 fanboy on Ganker
least shocking revelation
nice reddit meme, zoomie
>Everyone the disagrees with me is a gen 5 fanboy
>everyone who makes bad arguments that conveniently line up with exactly how gen 5 is designed while crying about disingenuousness and bad faith is a gen 5 fanboy
Correct.
>YOU DON'T GET IT, I HATE GEN 5, THEREFORE ANYONE I HATE HAS TO LIKE GEN 5, PEOPLE I HATE WOULD NEVER HATE GEN 5 OR MAKE BAD ARGUMENTS LIKE ME
It's clear antiscalefags and scalefags have two different perceptions of what they mean by "Scaling"
>antiscalefags
>want there to be a sense of progress AND challenge
>scalefags
>want the game to be piss easy (but not obviously enough so they can pretend it’s hard) while also having no sense of progress like their favorite games, BW2
Not all of them want it to be piss easy, and those few will definitely reply to you indignantly. But frankly, enough of them do to characterize the group as having that stance. A lot of them do literally just want an easier game.
Am I living in a bizarro world right now? I thought the reason people brought up level scaling in the first place was because the game as it is now is too easy since you'll overlevel the majority of the fights if you don't go a certain way. How does making weaker trainers catch up to the player make the game easier than just keeping them weak?
People say that, but that's not how the suggested mechanics would actually effect the game. The actual effect is it would result in an easier game, and they refuse to listen to this and advance the dialectic. Honestly I think they just say it would make it harder as a cope, so they don't have to admit it to themselves.
Okay, clearly I'm retarded, please explain to me in simple terms how making it so if you fight the bug gym leader 5th or 6th and gave her a team of like. lv.30s or whatever to match the player, this actually makes the game easier than leaving her with her lv. 12 Pokemon while you're still using lv. 30s. How is her fighting your fully evolved starter with a baby level Teddiursa actually harder? I must be missing something.
Yeah sure, I'd be repeating myself but I don't expect everyone to read every post in the whole thread. Basically, matching levels to the player, even if you have to boost to match them, means the player is always confident that any challenge is fine tuned to their own current ability. There is no need to plan, no need to try, anything will always be at your level. Additionally, boosting levels means boosting exp yield, which results in rapidly advancing in levels at an ever accelerating rate. This is literally why easy mode in B2W2 is so hard, because you can never get ahead, since nothing gives worthwhile exp. You'd have that, but inverted, with level scaling.
I keep reading your post but nothing has answered my question about Katy. You keep talking about "planning and trying" like these games are hard in the first place. Did you actually find SWSH and SV hard?
I remember all the planning I had to do to beat SV, I had to "plan" to box my strong Pokemon because they kept shooting past the next boss' level cap (that I had to look up because this game has an intended order despite being le open world) because of forced EXP All. And even when I could actually use my team in the AI Turo fights I still had the game wiping my ass with the forced Set mode and friendship bonuses.
Maybe you're speaking out against level scaling on a general level, but in regards to Pokemon, I'd personally really enjoy knowing the game is keeping up with me because it means I don't need to fucking box the Pokemon I actually want to use to replace them with EXP sponges. As things are now your options are either
>enjoy being underleveled for a few fights then shit on the rest of the game
>swap your entire team every few minutes to stay underleveled
both suck and would be fixed with level scaling, FACT
You're arguing against a literal retard or very bad bait. He can't conceive that EXP rates can be adjusted.
>Katy
Who? You asked why people think level scaling would be easier, I explained that.
>Did you actually find SWSH and SV hard?
For some fights, yes. I chose to go counterclockwise around the region instead of jumping around, and I hit some difficulty spikes that made me have to actually carefully consider my options and make thoughtful choices.
>I had to "plan" to box my strong Pokemon because they kept shooting past the next boss' level cap
If you had to do this, you did some planning you aren't admitting to. You looked up what you consider to be the best order, and followed that route. Having an easy time while playing with a guide isn't surprising in any game.
>forced Set mode
Oooooh, you're bad faith. I see. I won't be reading the rest of your post, and I'm sorry for the effort I already put in before this point. I'm done replying to you now.
>Who
The bug gym leader from my first post...
>I chose to go counterclockwise around the region instead of jumping around, and I hit some difficulty spikes that made me have to actually carefully consider my options and make thoughtful choices.
Boy this sounds cool if not for the fact that this means you spent a massive part of your playthrough OHKOing everything, the thing I tried super hard to avoid. Going counterclockwise means by the time you hit Mela and Iono, you were so far ahead of them that they were basically not even bosses anymore. If you have fun pretending to be a little kid crushing sand castles then enjoy yourself by all means, but most people would like to have more than 2 good battles their entire playthrough.
>If you had to do this, you did some planning you aren't admitting to. You looked up what you consider to be the best order, and followed that route
You mean the route I had to take to avoid having 10+ level differences like you?
>Everyone that disagrees with me is a gen 5 fanboy
>"scaling doesn't mean matching levels! It can mean maintaining some levels ABOVE the player!!"
>get to gym that is a struggle for your particular team
>try a few times, fail
>decide to prepare, get a TM and gain a few levels
>come back for another attempt
>the gym has scaled up, meaning you didn't advance at all
>It's still just as hard, you wasted your time preparing
>get funneled into use the same pokemon everyone uses to beat this gym, because anything else you could try would just make the gym scale up more
>win, feel like nothing you did mattered for the result, feel empty inside
Wow, fun game design.
So clearly I didn't read enough into this since I don't necessarily agree with scalefags or the hysterics of antiscalefags.
I just want caps like how hacks do it, every badge expands how much you can level thus giving progression. Because while I can get roaming into a endgame level hilariously underleveled in an Action game, in a turn based game like pokemon feels... pointless? Like what much can your level 5 Caterpie do against a lv.50 Rhydon and likewise? That's what I don't get.
>gen 1 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 2 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 3 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 4 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 5 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 6 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 7 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>gen 8 has level scaling
>It's piss easy
>"THE DIFFICULTY WOULD BE BETTER IF THERE WAS LEVEL SCALING GUYS!!"
None of those games have level scaling.
They all do by not being open world.
Level curve is not level scaling retard.
>level scaling is not level scaling retard.
No, they have set levels. Stop being stupid.
These are the same baiting retard. He's not on a side, he just wants (You)s.
>baby game DLC releases
>all the schizo posting stops
You get what you deserve.
Schizo posting did not stop, I don't know what thread you're reading. Anyone actually honestly discussing the game left to go play it. The only reason I didn't leave is because I leant my game to a friend to play.
>dude what if tuaros was colored black LMAO
regional variants were a fucking massive mistake