Best Of
Re: No Steam logo?
That's a fair question. We'll follow up with our web team to see if there is a reason it isn't there, or if it was just left off for some reason.
Re: The dungeons on TESO have therefore become fast food... what if, a solo dungeon?
htltrashb16_ESO wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »htltrashb16_ESO wrote: »
Which, apart from the trials?
Quests that require standing on plates, activating levers together...
You can do them solo now. No need to activate plates at the same exact time. I've done the entire questline 100% solo.
Koshka
5
Re: Extremely Low Midyear Mayhem Turnout, Why?
I’ve spent plenty of time in Cyrodil and have no qualms about doing PVP but repeating a stale event twice a year was already a bad idea.
To have the stale event after a weeks long fresher version with better rewards the previous month shows just how badly ZOS understands their players and their own game.
Maybe they really just didn’t care if this event flopped. No reason to give PVP’ers one more thing to be unhappy about if they did something PVE instead.
I hope this gets through to ZOS though. All these repeated events need to be refreshed. “Been there done that” is a sure death knell for any game.
To have the stale event after a weeks long fresher version with better rewards the previous month shows just how badly ZOS understands their players and their own game.
Maybe they really just didn’t care if this event flopped. No reason to give PVP’ers one more thing to be unhappy about if they did something PVE instead.
I hope this gets through to ZOS though. All these repeated events need to be refreshed. “Been there done that” is a sure death knell for any game.
Re: Rush of Agony
Teeba_Shei wrote: »Dark Convergence has no target limit, making it ideal for bombing PUGs. In contrast, Rush is capped at six targets. Dark Convergence also automatically stuns enemies, while Rush does not provide crowd control—you'll need to bring your own stun and a gap closer to use it effectively. Additionally, Rush puts you at greater risk by forcing you into melee range, whereas Dark Convergence can be safely deployed from a distance.
If they were to change it, it would probably just automatically CC the same way dark convergence does, which would be a buff for rush not a nerf.
Dark Convergence:
Pros:
No target limit – hits unlimited enemies in range
Automatically stuns all affected targets (built-in CC)
Can be activated from a safe distance
Ideal for bombing large groups (especially PUGs)
Rush of Agony:
Cons:
Hits a maximum of 6 targets
Does not apply any crowd control (requires separate CC)
Requires a gap closer to trigger
Puts you at risk by forcing you into melee range
Claiming that adding CC immunity to Rush would be a buff is wild lol
Re: Rush of Agony
Teeba_Shei wrote: »Dark Convergence has no target limit, making it ideal for bombing PUGs. In contrast, Rush is capped at six targets. Dark Convergence also automatically stuns enemies, while Rush does not provide crowd control—you'll need to bring your own stun and a gap closer to use it effectively. Additionally, Rush puts you at greater risk by forcing you into melee range, whereas Dark Convergence can be safely deployed from a distance.
If they were to change it, it would probably just automatically CC the same way dark convergence does, which would be a buff for rush not a nerf.
Dark Convergence:
Pros:
No target limit – hits unlimited enemies in range
Automatically stuns all affected targets (built-in CC)
Can be activated from a safe distance
Ideal for bombing large groups (especially PUGs)
Rush of Agony:
Cons:
Hits a maximum of 6 targets
Does not apply any crowd control (requires separate CC)
Requires a gap closer to trigger
Puts you at risk by forcing you into melee range
No a cc on it would definitely be a nerf and rightfully so imo.
Re: More on the Microsoft lay offs, it's grim.
dk_dunkirk wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »
As one tech CEO put it, to paraphrase, AI is always available, it never needs to eat or sleep, and it doesn't need benefits.
And that's frankly an alarming mindset for all people because the scale of job loss that this can create if left unregulated and unchecked is unprecedented.
As a 30-year full-stack developer who uses "AI" every day, I don't know what these people are smoking. I have to fight with it to get it to do even simple things most of the time, and half the time it looks right, it's still wrong in subtle ways. I'm good at what I do because I understand the problem domain intimately, and can ask the right questions. Coding the answer is a relatively small part of the solving the problem. And yet I'm worried that I, too, will be made redundant because some middle manager thinks I am replaceable with a Copilot subscription.
This really seems like the way of things: unbridled 'progress' for progress' sake without the safety rails of logic keeping it in check. I know there have already been lawsuits because some HR AI bot has hallucinated some refund or other thing to a disgruntled customer, and then the courts ruled that if the company's putting all their trust in AI to fix things that they are then beholden to promises that the AI makes.
Things will keep going like this until something big happens. I'm talking that some company has their wonderful AI solution make one tiny little hallucination that ends up costing the company billions. Once a company is seeing that cheaping out on labor by trusting a machine bites them in the backside to the extent that no human ever could, then we'll see people come around to AI as a tool instead of AI as a replacement.
Jurassic Park still said it best: "You were so concerned with whether or not you could that you didn't stop to think whether you should."
Re: More on the Microsoft lay offs, it's grim.
They had literally just gotten the green light to expand Blackbird's team and gotten positive and enthusiastic feedback about it.
Microsoft explicitly stated the cuts were not performance based and that they are pivoting their business strategy as a company. They have made several cuts to that exact effect over the years to a lot of their games and subsidiaries. They have simultaneously publicly pushed AI and game pass.
It seems very obvious that Microsoft doesn't really want to make much in the way of new games any longer. They want to buy up IPs, put them on game pass, and concentrate on building out AI guided experiences in their existing IP. A new engine for creating games, which was one of the things that attracted them to Blackbird and why it was taking them so long, doesn't fit into that vision.
It's not just about "will this make money." It is also about "does this fit my brand," and "which brand strategy will make the most money."
Blackbird was likely to have made money or they wouldn't have been expanding it's budget right before they suddenly canceled it and it would not have been a project they were internally excited about. Which is what they were when ZOS met with them last and it is why they were all shocked by the sudden job loss.
The problem with it, at least as it seems to me based on actually available statements by both parties, is that it no longer fit into their brand strategy and they no longer believe new game creation engines that rely on creatives are needed because AI will be replacing that. And they believe investing into AI will be more profitable than investing into creatives.
As one tech CEO put it, to paraphrase, AI is always available, it never needs to eat or sleep, and it doesn't need benefits.
And that's frankly an alarming mindset for all people because the scale of job loss that this can create if left unregulated and unchecked is unprecedented.
Microsoft explicitly stated the cuts were not performance based and that they are pivoting their business strategy as a company. They have made several cuts to that exact effect over the years to a lot of their games and subsidiaries. They have simultaneously publicly pushed AI and game pass.
It seems very obvious that Microsoft doesn't really want to make much in the way of new games any longer. They want to buy up IPs, put them on game pass, and concentrate on building out AI guided experiences in their existing IP. A new engine for creating games, which was one of the things that attracted them to Blackbird and why it was taking them so long, doesn't fit into that vision.
It's not just about "will this make money." It is also about "does this fit my brand," and "which brand strategy will make the most money."
Blackbird was likely to have made money or they wouldn't have been expanding it's budget right before they suddenly canceled it and it would not have been a project they were internally excited about. Which is what they were when ZOS met with them last and it is why they were all shocked by the sudden job loss.
The problem with it, at least as it seems to me based on actually available statements by both parties, is that it no longer fit into their brand strategy and they no longer believe new game creation engines that rely on creatives are needed because AI will be replacing that. And they believe investing into AI will be more profitable than investing into creatives.
As one tech CEO put it, to paraphrase, AI is always available, it never needs to eat or sleep, and it doesn't need benefits.
And that's frankly an alarming mindset for all people because the scale of job loss that this can create if left unregulated and unchecked is unprecedented.
Re: Server Performance for MYM has been really poor
Yeah, performance has been notably worse this time around while MYM has typically been the best periods we experience.
I don't know that it's purely Cyrodiil, though. My Guildies have mentioned things being ''sticky'' in overland content of late, too.
I do know that a single Ball Group or especially two+ at a time are just chewing things up like crazy in Cyrodiil this week, way more than normal. I typically have really good framerate but this week it's been an occasional unplayable slide show when they're doing their Ball-y things during primetime.
I don't know that it's purely Cyrodiil, though. My Guildies have mentioned things being ''sticky'' in overland content of late, too.
I do know that a single Ball Group or especially two+ at a time are just chewing things up like crazy in Cyrodiil this week, way more than normal. I typically have really good framerate but this week it's been an occasional unplayable slide show when they're doing their Ball-y things during primetime.
Re: It's time to reshuffle the other three base game classes
madmufffin wrote: »GloatingSwine wrote: »madmufffin wrote: »Daedric Summoning(Tank) - Add Rune Prison or Encase. Either would work but I'm leaning towards Rune Prison as the cc component feels more tank oriented and taking the only outright heal from the class out of the healing line feels icky. I'd revert the nerfs to Bound Aegis as well since major resolve is in no way more valuable than 8% mag and minor protection. Passive wise the line already is pretty tank oriented, so I don't think it needs much change.
There's a problem with Daedric Summoning as the tank line which is that summons demand a slot on both bars and "what am I going to do with all these spare skill slots" is not a question tanks get to ask.
So even if they brought utility to the table for tanks you wouldn't be able to use them, and the only tank utility on this line right now is Atronach for team berserk.
Yeah the summons are largely worthless, but historically Clanfear has been the tank pet. Add in bound aegis, hardened ward, rune prison/encase, and atro and it makes it so that flappy bird is the only kinda dead slot as a tanking option.
Clannfear would be the tank pet because of the self heal, but you can source self heals now without tying up two bars, and your other changes functionally kill summoner as a viable thing, because the command-the-summons skill is now not on the summons line.
There isn't really an easy fix for this whilst summons retain their slot greed.
Re: It's time to reshuffle the other three base game classes
madmufffin wrote: »GloatingSwine wrote: »madmufffin wrote: »Daedric Summoning(Tank) - Add Rune Prison or Encase. Either would work but I'm leaning towards Rune Prison as the cc component feels more tank oriented and taking the only outright heal from the class out of the healing line feels icky. I'd revert the nerfs to Bound Aegis as well since major resolve is in no way more valuable than 8% mag and minor protection. Passive wise the line already is pretty tank oriented, so I don't think it needs much change.
There's a problem with Daedric Summoning as the tank line which is that summons demand a slot on both bars and "what am I going to do with all these spare skill slots" is not a question tanks get to ask.
So even if they brought utility to the table for tanks you wouldn't be able to use them, and the only tank utility on this line right now is Atronach for team berserk.
Yeah the summons are largely worthless, but historically Clanfear has been the tank pet. Add in bound aegis, hardened ward, rune prison/encase, and atro and it makes it so that flappy bird is the only kinda dead slot as a tanking option.
Clannfear could provide like Major Vitality while summoned or something. Right now, it's just a two-bar burst heal that every other tank class gets in a single bar slot. So it needs some extra pizazz.
