I'm almost terrified to feel a sense of optimism. But all this is looking incredible and reassuring.

Still not sold on the challenge difficulty and being unintentionally griefed by other people not playing by the same rules, but I appreciate that it is something at least.

This might be too early to talk about as not much information was revealed yet on the stream, but the new Thieves Guild logo is making me nervous. The location is not confirmed, but the logo on the right seems to have a blue color scheme like the Welkynd Stones that Ayleids use. I am hoping instead it is a reference to something else like a skyshard because we see one used on Balfiera in the retired tutorial.

The image that was provided below on stream seems to be Bretonish looking in appearance which I assume hints at the setting, and I am very worried that we will get more Ayleid content in High Rock due to the new TG logo assuming it takes place there. A common complaint is that the Direnni get no spotlight in their own province of High Rock, but Ayleids who have a chance to appear in almost every province have a larger presence than the Direnni. I hope I am proven wrong and that it is not referencing the Ayleids if its High Rock content.

Personally I'm dreading the new trade bar system.

When companies make changes like this, in every case I'm aware of, these kinds of changes result in the customer paying more to get less. Companies restructure their payment/rewards systems to benefit their bottom line, not to benefit the customer.

So we'll see how it goes.

All the torch bugs if they decide to make them available. I hope they will. 🙏

Radiate77 wrote: »

ESO’s overall population has dipped.
Naturally, the PvP population will dip too.

You can say there’s a correlation, but there was almost NOTHING good about 2025 content-wise. The best we got was a mix-up of what existed prior and zero balance shake-ups.

Sure the lack of content certainly didn't help, but I believe one of the main reasons behind the low population is very likely how subclassing was introduced. I've seen this sentiment shared widely not only amongst the PVP population, but the endgame PVE population too. Most of the people I've seen who are absolutely 100% onboard with full, no limits subclassing are those who prefer to play ESO like a single player or roleplaying elder scrolls game, but I think it is important to remember that this IS an MMO and proper combat balancing IS important for the overall health of the game.

It really is a "genie out of the bottle" situation. In the context of ESO as an MMO, subclassing objectively should not have been introduced the way that it was. There should have been limitations or drawbacks to the system in place at launch, and a proper balancing pass should have been done on the scale of what these reworks are now aiming to accomplish over the course of two years. But because they didn't do that, they now have no choice but to take major steps in the opposite direction. They can't simply revert the system, as obviously there would be many people dissatisfied with that and we all have spent tons of hours grinding out subclassing relating things. But they have to do something, and they are absolutely on the right track with the class re-balancing and now these class mastery passives.

Radiate77 wrote: »

You’re absolutely right when you say that they have all the time in the world, 2 years is a long time… assuming they keep up pace on these reworks. I said it earlier, Class Mastery lines are great in the meanwhile, but these Refreshes are solving the imbalance of Subclassing. Why do we need another imbalance, but sanctioned?

We don't know if these reworks will solve the imbalance of subclassing, though. It looks good for dragonknight so far, but who is to say that we won't land back in the same place when all is said and done and every class has been reworked? You have to consider how absurd the power difference is between a meta subclassing build and just about any given pure class at the moment. It isn't even close. A few in-class dependencies like what we're seeing with DK are a start and DK itself may play best as a pure class for now, but once the other classes are also buffed it seems unlikely that in-class dependencies on par with those on the reworked DK will be enough alone to encourage pure classing as a competitive option to subclassing.

I don't see an issue with the further incentive being added with these class mastery options. I think it's a continued step in the right direction alongside the class dependencies within the reworks themselves, and I hope they stay the course.

Radiate77 wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Kallykat wrote: »

I was most interested in the things Jason talked about. I still have a lot of questions, but it was good to hear at least a little more about those upcoming features.

You can always post your questions here. Just know we may not be able to answer specifics until we are just a little closer. But we will also be able to give more clear answers once that content is up on PTS as well.

Kevin you guys are making a bad turn with Class Mastery Passives, I get that the values are subject to change, but this cannot exist post-Refresh.

It can and should. Class Mastery is the right way to tackle the subclassing issues. A pure class build should always be as strong as a subclassing build, if not stronger. Subclassing was meant to diversify the gameplay, not min-max everything else out of existence (which is the case now).

You subclass Sorcerer for your Templar to e.g. get access to Streak, not to combine some passive effects for maximum outcome. That should have always been a pure class thing.

I don't foresee the Class Mastery passives burying anything. They're being implemented as a mechanism to briing pure classes to be on par performance wise with subclassing. Subclass builds that are not utilizing the top skill lines wouldn't be getting buried by Class Mastery. They'll just simply fall short because of sub optimal build choices.

And they outlined their approach to make every class have role focused skill lines to eliminate the current issue only a few skill lines dominating every build. And it sounded like a reasonable approach, even if it will be a while to see it come to fruition.

freespirit wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

I always assumed voice chat was a given on PC if we were being merged in with consoles. Without it, I don't want crossplay. The game is anti-social enough and I'm not going to expect a console player to have a keyboard or use on-screen input.

By the same token PC players shouldn't be expected to use a feature that has never existed on PC for the past 12 years.

If they don't expect to use it, then they shouldn't be in favor of going Crossplay.

I would hate any type of voice chat on PC that was not entirely optional!!

I've been around a long time and I've seen the utter rubbish that can go off in Zone Chat(typed ofc) enough already.

There's very few things that I would consider "game breaking" for me personally but this would be definitely be one!!

As long as it's a toggle or has settings that can be turned off, then fine but I refuse to listen to other people's noise!

Voice Chat is entirely optional. And even when a player does opt to use it, they have to choose which channel they're joining. Area chat is a channel, just like group chat is a channel, guild chat is a channel etc.. Don't want proximity chat? Stay out of the Area channel. That simple.

I always assumed voice chat was a given on PC if we were being merged in with consoles. Without it, I don't want crossplay. The game is anti-social enough and I'm not going to expect a console player to have a keyboard or use on-screen input.

karthrag_inak wrote: »

no thanks. khajiit can think of literally dozens of features he would rather see worked on.

I can't think of anything more important than enabling console players to feasibly interact and socialize with PC players in a crossplay MMORPG.

no thanks. khajiit can think of literally dozens of features he would rather see worked on.