800k people don't seem to mind difficult overworld

Dark_Lord_Kuro

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

Dark_Lord_Kuro wrote: »

It would be a waste of ressources
There is a reason vet overland was removed from the game in the first place

800k player dont seem to mind? How about the rest of the 19 millions?

The Vet Overland never existed. What are you talking about?

Never heard of the original cadwell silver and gold?
Those were harder version of the base game zone wich just like today version varied by alliance

Dark_Lord_Kuro

Franchise408 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

New World has an incredibly challenging open world and it's refreshing to say the least after playing The Elder Scrolls Online for years where the hardest thing about most of these quest chains is walking to the objective.

The most logical course of action is very simple. Players who enjoy difficult and challenging overland should play games like New World. Those who enjoy a more relaxing overland story experience should play games like ESO. It is not logical to expect either type game to completely change their base game to adapt to individual players.

Like ESO already did?

You already have stated that ESO changed once. So by that logic, it wasn't logical for you to expect the game to change to adapt to individual players like you.

But it did. Because people like you spoke out and got the game changed to something you wanted it to be.

Now, people like us can speak out in an attempt to get the game changed back to something that we prefer, which it originally was.

And without those change the game wouldnt be as popular as it is today

WhyMustItBe

SilverBride wrote: »

A player specifically asked for an option to give people the choice, to which Rich replied that it is not as simple as just flip a switch. Neither specifically used the word "toggle" but that is exactly what is being described.

So I listened to more of the stream and yes, someone did ask a follow up question. The original question was:

Jeulen: "Could we please get a vet mode for delves? and quests..."

Rich: "So, we had that, Jeulen, at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out and we put the challenge into world bosses and into solo arenas and into dungeons and trials."

But then a few questions later Jeulen asks the follow up I missed before:

Jeulen: "Would it be an option to give people a choice?"

Rich: "Uh, it is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a ton of work, and then as lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you're not going to get anything out of it why do it, you know? The satisfaction is there sure, but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time. So like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it."

So, to be completely fair and honest, Rich says no to veteran only zones like they were before with Cadwell's Silver and Gold. Then when asked about an OPTION he doesn't explicitly say no, but rather sort of talks about how it would be a lot of work. Then he reiterates why they changed the original veteran only mode.

My interpretation of this is that they don't necessarily want to invest the time and effort to do it, but if the numbers start to show that a lot of people are asking for a difficulty slider they might consider it.

Dark_Lord_Kuro

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

.


Cadwell Silver and Gold were just other faction's content but harder, ?

Just like adding a toggle would onlibe current zome but harder

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

The reasons Cadwell Silver and Gold were removed were systemic and certainly not "because players hate difficulty". This sort of revisionist history taking place is ridiculous to anyone that actually played the game at launch.

I played at launch. It was a real struggle doing Cadwell's Silver and Gold. I stuck it out and completed it once on one character, but it was so unenjoyable that I swore to never do it again.

Rich Lambert really summed up my experience when the said the following:

“People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff. I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.”

So, like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3rds of the game was never played by players so we changed it.”

They also said in an interview that the vast majority of the playerbase was moreso into the story side of things.

Edit:

The vast majority of our player base loves the exploration, loves the lore, loves the story side of things. So we focus a lot of our time and effort on that. Two of our four major updates every year are focused on story and exploration. The other two are focused on quality of life, are focused on group-oriented activities with the dungeons or adding new systems.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2021/10/04/eso-deadlands-new-world/

Thanks for that link!

trackdemon5512

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A player specifically asked for an option to give people the choice, to which Rich replied that it is not as simple as just flip a switch. Neither specifically used the word "toggle" but that is exactly what is being described.

So I listened to more of the stream and yes, someone did ask a follow up question. The original question was:

Jeulen: "Could we please get a vet mode for delves? and quests..."

Rich: "So, we had that, Jeulen, at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out and we put the challenge into world bosses and into solo arenas and into dungeons and trials."

But then a few questions later Jeulen asks the follow up I missed before:

Jeulen: "Would it be an option to give people a choice?"

Rich: "Uh, it is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a ton of work, and then as lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you're not going to get anything out of it why do it, you know? The satisfaction is there sure, but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time. So like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it."

So, to be completely fair and honest, Rich says no to veteran only zones like they were before with Cadwell's Silver and Gold. Then when asked about an OPTION he doesn't explicitly say no, but rather sort of talks about how it would be a lot of work. Then he reiterates why they changed the original veteran only mode.

My interpretation of this is that they don't necessarily want to invest the time and effort to do it, but if the numbers start to show that a lot of people are asking for a difficulty slider they might consider it.

It’s becoming rather clear that you’re now cherry picking points in trying to thread the needle and that there is room for a toggle.

You completely skipped over the middle of what he said in between which I posted here before in full.

“People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff. I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.”

“I totally hear you on the difficulty thing. I like things to be more difficult. But the data doesn’t lie. And we have never been more successful than where we are today. And a lot of that has to do with just how much freedom players have to go an experience story.”

“And yes, go look at Craglorn. There’s not a lot of people in Craglorn and that’s not super difficult but it’s more hard than the regular overland.”

"Uh, it is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a ton of work, and then as lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you're not going to get anything out of it why do it, you know? The satisfaction is there sure, but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time. So like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it.”


It’s extremely clear that a toggle and returning to an overland with increased difficulty are not in the cards. To this day Craglorn isn’t played by the population an amount anywhere close to the other zones. To this day people don’t want to do Imperial City or the Cyrodiil zone quests because of the artificial difficulty spike created by other players.

I’m sorry that you want to find a silver lining but it doesn’t exist. After 8 years, over 25 billion hours of live testing (several years of at least 1 million players playing regularly), millions of hours of pts and beta testing, and financial results both negative and positive, the ship has sailed.

SilverBride

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

But then a few questions later Jeulen asks the follow up I missed before:

Jeulen: "Would it be an option to give people a choice?"

Rich: "Uh, it is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a ton of work, and then as lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you're not going to get anything out of it why do it, you know? The satisfaction is there sure, but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time. So like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it."

So, to be completely fair and honest, Rich says no to veteran only zones like they were before with Cadwell's Silver and Gold. Then when asked about an OPTION he doesn't explicitly say no, but rather sort of talks about how it would be a lot of work. Then he reiterates why they changed the original veteran only mode.

My interpretation of this is that they don't necessarily want to invest the time and effort to do it, but if the numbers start to show that a lot of people are asking for a difficulty slider they might consider it.

Thank you for taking another look at that. I can't say that I interpret it the same though, because I still see this as more of a "no" than a "maybe".

Aelthwyn

Please please don't make it any harder. Some of us aren't here for the skillful pressing of buttons in the right sequence, some of us are more interested in the characters and questlines, or the fashion and housing design, some of us prefer to play solo and don't want to need group members to go anywhere, some of us never even set a toe into the 'higher end content' and would appreciate still having a place to actually Be. There are a lot of aspects to this game and people have different things they're here for, so let's not make every place all about the same thing, eh?

Jeremy

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

A player specifically asked for an option to give people the choice, to which Rich replied that it is not as simple as just flip a switch. Neither specifically used the word "toggle" but that is exactly what is being described.

So I listened to more of the stream and yes, someone did ask a follow up question. The original question was:

Jeulen: "Could we please get a vet mode for delves? and quests..."

Rich: "So, we had that, Jeulen, at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out and we put the challenge into world bosses and into solo arenas and into dungeons and trials."

But then a few questions later Jeulen asks the follow up I missed before:

Jeulen: "Would it be an option to give people a choice?"

Rich: "Uh, it is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a ton of work, and then as lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you're not going to get anything out of it why do it, you know? The satisfaction is there sure, but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time. So like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it."

So, to be completely fair and honest, Rich says no to veteran only zones like they were before with Cadwell's Silver and Gold. Then when asked about an OPTION he doesn't explicitly say no, but rather sort of talks about how it would be a lot of work. Then he reiterates why they changed the original veteran only mode.

My interpretation of this is that they don't necessarily want to invest the time and effort to do it, but if the numbers start to show that a lot of people are asking for a difficulty slider they might consider it.

It’s becoming rather clear that you’re now cherry picking points in trying to thread the needle and that there is room for a toggle.

You completely skipped over the middle of what he said in between which I posted here before in full.

“People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff. I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.”

“I totally hear you on the difficulty thing. I like things to be more difficult. But the data doesn’t lie. And we have never been more successful than where we are today. And a lot of that has to do with just how much freedom players have to go an experience story.”

“And yes, go look at Craglorn. There’s not a lot of people in Craglorn and that’s not super difficult but it’s more hard than the regular overland.”

"Uh, it is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a ton of work, and then as lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you're not going to get anything out of it why do it, you know? The satisfaction is there sure, but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time. So like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it.”


It’s extremely clear that a toggle and returning to an overland with increased difficulty are not in the cards. To this day Craglorn isn’t played by the population an amount anywhere close to the other zones. To this day people don’t want to do Imperial City or the Cyrodiil zone quests because of the artificial difficulty spike created by other players.

I’m sorry that you want to find a silver lining but it doesn’t exist. After 8 years, over 25 billion hours of live testing (several years of at least 1 million players playing regularly), millions of hours of pts and beta testing, and financial results both negative and positive, the ship has sailed.

The Craglorn example has been to beat to death, and it's not applicable here. It was just one zone, and it was always silly to think players were just going to stay in Craglorn all day repeating the same dailies.

You would have a similar effect if they released just one veteran dungeon. Would it be popular? No. Because people would want to run all the other dungeons for gear and to complete their quests. Same principle here.

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

Jeremy

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

An OPTIONAL Veteran Version of the Overland content would be nice for those who want one (like me). And there is no good argument against having one either.

8 years of good arguments against it. See every developer comment about it. Look up financial articles about the bad first year of ESO. Look up every subsequent article about Wrothgar as a turning point and 2016-2017 where ESO hit its stride. Then ask every player here that was around during Beta/launch how they feel.

ALL EXCELLENT ARGUMENTS AGAINST AND WHY THERE IS NO VET OVERLAND OPTION TODAY, even as a toggle.

Nope. 8 years of bad arguments against it. I've yet to see a good one.

As far as the developer comment, it's trying to compare apples to oranges. So I don't find his comment any more persuasive than the rest of the arguments made against it. A lot of people play games to have fun - not to be as "efficient" as possible. So his whole logic stems from a false assumption. People do Veteran Dungeons all the time. They would do Veteran Zones too. I know I sure would, so would many others.

So he is just wrong. Simple as that. The problem with their past attempts at Veteran overland was that their design itself was flawed. If they simply approached it like they do already with dungeons, and give each zone a Veteran equivalent with slightly better rewards, players would play in them.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

They would be ghost towns.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

They would be ghost towns.

Then why aren't veteran dungeons ghost towns?

I would be careful not to assume just because you aren't interested in veteran content that means no one else would be either. Just the mere frequency this topic comes up on here should be proof enough of that.

WhyMustItBe

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

It’s becoming rather clear that you’re now cherry picking points in trying to thread the needle and that there is room for a toggle.

You completely skipped over the middle of what he said in between which I posted here before in full.

“People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff. I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.

You seem more interested in "winning" than having a conversation. I'm not fighting with you man, this is not some sort of competition. The above quote was in response to the first question. That is just a fact. You can choose to interpret it to mean he probably would say no to the second part, but that is all it is. Your opinion.

I'm honestly not sure why you care so much how other people interpret what he said or what other people like. No one is going to "win" this imagined conflict and neither of us has any say over what makes it into the game. So, how about we just agree to disagree?

I see his words as saying no to mandatory veteran overland, and maybe (but it would be a lot of work) to an optional toggle. You can choose to interpret it however you personally feel like.

Deal?

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

They would be ghost towns.

Then why aren't veteran dungeons ghost towns?

I would be careful not to assume just because you aren't interested in veteran content that means no one else would be either. Just the mere frequency this topic comes up on here should be proof enough of that.

Veteran dungeons and overland are two completely different things. Veteran dungeons are there for experienced players who want a challenge. Overland is there for everyone, including players new to ESO, to quest and to tell the story. There is no direct comparison.

Just because this topic comes up on the forums a lot does not mean the majority of players want it. This is what we call a "vocal minority".

Kamatsu

Jeremy wrote: »

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

*Falls off chair* You know, I've seen this exact same argument before. Over on the Guild Wars 2 forums prior to Heart of Thorns. "Make the overland harder, it'll be popular! I promise you, ppl will love having a harder time getting around and more difficult fights!"

I'll remind you of what happened. The game did not become more popular after making things harder. They hemorrhaged players and lost close to 70% of their revenue. They had to reverse direction fast, nerf the difficulty, and apologize for listing to ppl like you. Had they not done so, Guild Wars 2 would have been shut down by NCSoft within 6-12 months - that is just how bad the revenue drop was.

You can go to most modern MMO's that have a somewhat easy overland with optional 'harder' content. Guess what is the least played? The harder content.

WoW launch & BC - less than 10% touched the hard content
FFXIV - only a small % of players do the current-tier Savages & Ultimate's
GW2 - only a small % stayed in non-nerfed HoT, only a small % did the 'raids' that ANet produced in GW2.

Here's the thing - and this has been mentioned by both other players and ESO devs: Had the 'harder' type of content been truly popular and well played, ESO wouldn't have gotten rid of it. Had it been workable and attracted enough players... we'd still have some form of Cadwells Silver & Gold, likely more hard dungeons,. etc.

But ESO doesn't have them anymore. Because the difficulty was not popular. People didn't want to do Cadwell's Silver & Gold. People didn't want to do the original Craglorn. Only a small % of players do the current harder content - ie trials, DLC dungeons, etc.

While there are players who enjoy more difficult combat and gameplay, you're a vast minority when it comes to a big expensive MMO like ESO... an MMO where the company behind it looks to profitability. Guess what's not profitable? Catering to hardcore, raiders or those small % who like hard combat/content.

Even the WoW dev's & management realized this, even though their focus was on the raids due to the leads & such being raider's themselves... the base game was still accessible to casual players, casual players could still experience the majority of WoW's content with just some time needed. Thus WoW became the huige success it was (this was one of the bigger/main reason's, there were others as well).

I laugh whenever I see ppl say "Make the content harder! It'll be popular I promise!" because ~15-20 years of many different MMO's either succeeding, failing, or having turbulent times due to difficulty changes... has shown that no, it won't be popular.

trackdemon5512

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

It’s becoming rather clear that you’re now cherry picking points in trying to thread the needle and that there is room for a toggle.

You completely skipped over the middle of what he said in between which I posted here before in full.

“People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff. I get that there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things.

You seem more interested in "winning" than having a conversation. I'm not fighting with you man, this is not some sort of competition. The above quote was in response to the first question. That is just a fact. You can choose to interpret it to mean he probably would say no to the second part, but that is all it is. Your opinion.

I'm honestly not sure why you care so much how other people interpret what he said or what other people like. No one is going to "win" this imagined conflict and neither of us has any say over what makes it into the game. So, how about we just agree to disagree?

I see his words as saying no to mandatory veteran overland, and maybe (but it would be a lot of work) to an optional toggle. You can choose to interpret it however you personally feel like.

Deal?

Except your interpretation is flat out wrong and you, and others, are willfully omitting facts to try and give weight to your argument.

As to an overland toggle let’s look at another ESO developer:

@realelistix 7/14/22
Oh! Oh! Did you guys see the LOTRO landscape difficulty sliders they've done for that MMO? Since we're talking about difficulty, what about people who want to be challenged by the content they enjoy the most like the stories you craft for us?

@thefinninator (Mike Finnigan - Lead Encounter Designer for ESO) 7/14/21
We get this question or request a lot too. We built overland content to be inclusive because as an MMO we want to unify as much of the player base as possible in a given zone. Difficulty sliders and settings are a detriment to that.

Mike has been working on this game for years. He knows the deal with it.

I’ll add some further context. Earlier this year LOTR started testing difficulty sliders on their legendary servers. Those servers are restricted to VIP members (equivalent to ESO+ subscription holders) and like some of y’all are requesting the difficulty of enemies is increased and leveling has been slowed compared to the base server standards. These legendary servers have been around for a few years now.

Here is the important part: the developers of that game have noted that the populations of these servers are far far lower than that of the regular servers. That they have had to close legendary servers due to lack of players.

Besides from their own experience, the ESO developers can extrapolate data from LOTRO that though yes, some players want increased adjustable difficulty, it’s such a small number that developing such just isn’t worth it. The only reason why these players even get the option is because they can be sectioned off and they pay for that.

That can’t be done with ESO. You’re all on the same megaserver being matched up and divided. The developers are not adding extra megaservers or creating instances where you can scale content. Doing so adversely splits the player population and wastes resources. And grouping yall with all the other general players is pointless because their unaffected difficulty will outweigh your self imposed detriments.

Instanced Veteran overland content and difficulty sliders are never coming to ESO. The system has been completely overwritten and content long since designed to not incorporate such.

WhyMustItBe

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Except your interpretation is flat out wrong and you, and others, are willfully omitting facts to try and give weight to your argument.

You're the only one arguing here. No one on the dev team has explicitly said no. That is a fact. Human beings can change their mind at any time. That is a fact. You have no say in what gets added to the game. That is a face.

Why are you trying to argue who's opinion is right?

I would like to see a veteran mode toggle for overland. You don't. Both points of view are equally valid.

If you can't accept that I don't know what to tell you.

Katlefiya

SilverBride wrote: »

Just because this topic comes up on the forums a lot does not mean the majority of players want it. This is what we call a "vocal minority".

And it is mostly the same people that start these discussions over and over again. Looking at you, Vhozek!
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/profile/discussions/Vhozek

Maya_Nur

When I've started to play in 2016, monsters seemed hard and even scary to me (couldn't handle even two at a time😳), but nowadays with simplified leveling system and tons of guides overland enemies become a joke 😩

I understand that there are mostly casual players so why not to make scattering of enemies more smart? 🧐 Not just to throw one here and another there, but ,for example, to leave fields safe and make forests dangerous? Let cities with guard patrols nearby be zones for chilling and to make some ruins or fortresses with bandits hellish? 😈 By the way some enemies like grey wolves can be easy but their monstrous versions like dire wolves twice harder while now there is no difference at all... 😭

trackdemon5512

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Except your interpretation is flat out wrong and you, and others, are willfully omitting facts to try and give weight to your argument.

You're the only one arguing here. No one on the dev team has explicitly said no. That is a fact. Human beings can change their mind at any time. That is a fact. You have no say in what gets added to the game. That is a face.

Why are you trying to argue who's opinion is right?

I would like to see a veteran mode toggle for overland. You don't. Both points of view are equally valid.

If you can't accept that I don't know what to tell you.

Yes. The dev team has said no over and over again. They smooth it over so it doesn’t sound hard and you don’t quit but it’s a very hard no on all fronts.

Talk about beating a dead horse, this is a topic that has popped up on these forums for the last 7 years. “Overland difficulty toggle”. “Put in Vet Delves”. “Self Nerfs!” The carcass of this horse has been beaten so throughly that the resultant glue is a permanent fixture on these boards.

If developing a difficulty toggle or veteran overland was so easy the developers would have done it ages ago. Instead they spent years working on CP system 2.0 to address the power creep. They spent it on new trials, dungeons, and arenas with extremely hard challenges. I mean if your character can get Godslayer then what, you somehow expect overland to give ya that same thrill? They spent the time on antiquities, companions, transmutation, reconstruction, jewelry crafting, classes, housing. Heck even creating a functional Armory system that works across all platforms took years as they admitted.

And speaking of platform, the game as it is today has only the barest of similarities to what the original was. The developers have said that it has been completely torn apart and rebuilt. That if it were still essentially the same original game but with just add-one for content that it wouldn’t even function on home gaming consoles.

They spent the time on creating a wide breadth of activities that gave the game depth, story, and something to always do instead of repeating the same content but making it needlessly more difficult.

There is no “going back” to tiered zone play. Those systems were overwritten and discarded. You and others can say that they would like to see a difficulty slider or such for overland but it will never happen with ESO.

And going back to how all this started if you or others think that it should be ESO acquiescing to this repeated whim then perhaps it’s best that y’all spend some time over in games like LOTRO or New World and see if that really works for y’all.

If it doesn’t, well ESO will be here until at least the map fills out and we get a Shivering Isles chapter. It will be here because the game’s current model is successful and it’s financially viable. And something like your asking for and being implemented in both LOTRO and New World has either been shown to not be viable (pre One Tamriel/low pop LOTRO servers) or too premature to state that it’s the future (has NW even been out a week yet?).

spartaxoxo

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

They would be ghost towns.

Then why aren't veteran dungeons ghost towns?

I would be careful not to assume just because you aren't interested in veteran content that means no one else would be either. Just the mere frequency this topic comes up on here should be proof enough of that.

This forums skews to more experienced and hardcore players, so things like this will always skew that direction.

One only need to look at the massive drop-off of people doing vet dlc dungeons vs normal dungeons to see that vet content is enjoyed by a pretty small minority of players.

It's just not something must people want to deal with. I do think some of this is design though.

trackdemon5512

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

If they were to release a Veteran Version of every zone so players could actually go there to work on the quests they were currently doing they would be popular I promise you.

They would be ghost towns.

Then why aren't veteran dungeons ghost towns?

I would be careful not to assume just because you aren't interested in veteran content that means no one else would be either. Just the mere frequency this topic comes up on here should be proof enough of that.

This forums skews to more experienced and hardcore players, so things like this will always skew that direction.

One only need to look at the massive drop-off of people doing vet dlc dungeons vs normal dungeons to see that vet content is enjoyed by a pretty small minority of players.

It's just not something must people want to deal with. I do think some of this is design though.

You know the deal. Vet is run until the achievements and gear are gotten. After which there is no point. A prog team stops running content unless they start selling runs.

Despite players clamoring for harder content it’s like Rich says, they’ll go right back to the easier, faster content. Or they just get frustrated, say the game doesn’t cater to them, and then quit. Usually on these forums where we see that nonsense forum post closed in about 20 minutes.

Elsonso

SilverBride wrote: »

Thank you for taking another look at that. I can't say that I interpret it the same though, because I still see this as more of a "no" than a "maybe".

I agree, the player base in this game seems to be trending in the _other_ direction.

I doubt that a significant number of people will ever rise up and request two or more levels of overland difficulty.

One comment that I am certain that I heard Rich make on this subject is that everything is hand tuned. That means that they can't just slap a switch in, or even change some setting and globally increase or decrease overland difficulty. They would have to go in and do that work manually, and that would take months on a game this size. For the record, I would have done that differently. The game I worked on, back when I worked on games, had a global bias that I designed for mob values. It was a risky thing, but it allowed for a global change in monster difficulty without hand editing every one of them things.

SilverBride wrote: »

Just because this topic comes up on the forums a lot does not mean the majority of players want it. This is what we call a "vocal minority".

The forum is an "echo chamber". My fear is that the forums become so out of touch with the majority of players that ZOS begins to bias against what is said in here. This is why I have started to use other venues for feedback.

Maya_Nur

Elsonso wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thank you for taking another look at that. I can't say that I interpret it the same though, because I still see this as more of a "no" than a "maybe".

I agree, the player base in this game seems to be trending in the _other_ direction.

I doubt that a significant number of people will ever rise up and request two or more levels of overland difficulty.

One comment that I am certain that I heard Rich make on this subject is that everything is hand tuned. That means that they can't just slap a switch in, or even change some setting and globally increase or decrease overland difficulty. They would have to go in and do that work manually, and that would take months on a game this size. For the record, I would have done that differently. The game I worked on, back when I worked on games, had a global bias that I designed for mob values. It was a risky thing, but it allowed for a global change in monster difficulty without hand editing every one of them things.

SilverBride wrote: »

Just because this topic comes up on the forums a lot does not mean the majority of players want it. This is what we call a "vocal minority".

The forum is an "echo chamber". My fear is that the forums become so out of touch with the majority of players that ZOS begins to bias against what is said in here. This is why I have started to use other venues for feedback.

Which one for example? Is there a place where devs come and ask players something or at least watch feedback silently becide forum? 🤔 I won't believe they read comments under the youtube videos/

Hallothiel

Jeremy wrote: »

An OPTIONAL Veteran Version of the Overland content would be nice for those who want one (like me). And there is no good argument against having one either.

Would you be willing to pay extra for it?

Otherwise if it is not something that the devs think is viable, either financially or technically or numbers wanting this, why should resources be spent on it?

Maya_Nur

Hallothiel wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

An OPTIONAL Veteran Version of the Overland content would be nice for those who want one (like me). And there is no good argument against having one either.

Would you be willing to pay extra for it?

Otherwise if it is not something that the devs think is viable, either financially or technically or numbers wanting this, why should resources be spent on it?

It doesn't work like that. Normally the demand creates supply, we ask – company does. That's why advertisement is so aggressive these days – companies want to convince people that them want their product. Just look at the Apple: absolutely useless ten times overpriced products. Do you want Zenimax be that way?

trackdemon5512

Maya_Nur wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Thank you for taking another look at that. I can't say that I interpret it the same though, because I still see this as more of a "no" than a "maybe".

I agree, the player base in this game seems to be trending in the _other_ direction.

I doubt that a significant number of people will ever rise up and request two or more levels of overland difficulty.

One comment that I am certain that I heard Rich make on this subject is that everything is hand tuned. That means that they can't just slap a switch in, or even change some setting and globally increase or decrease overland difficulty. They would have to go in and do that work manually, and that would take months on a game this size. For the record, I would have done that differently. The game I worked on, back when I worked on games, had a global bias that I designed for mob values. It was a risky thing, but it allowed for a global change in monster difficulty without hand editing every one of them things.

SilverBride wrote: »

Just because this topic comes up on the forums a lot does not mean the majority of players want it. This is what we call a "vocal minority".

The forum is an "echo chamber". My fear is that the forums become so out of touch with the majority of players that ZOS begins to bias against what is said in here. This is why I have started to use other venues for feedback.

Which one for example? Is there a place where devs come and ask players something or at least watch feedback silently becide forum? 🤔 I won't believe they read comments under the youtube videos/

The class representatives and other select players who are very vocal and communicative about technical/player issues constantly communicate with the ESO developers.

Also general users through Discord via said Class Reps and influencers. Already some of the Class Representatives on Discord are able to gather feedback and learn of bugs with easily linked videos. They serve as a gateway to the developers themselves, filtering out the repeated inane posts like those clamoring for increased difficulty and putting more prevalent and pressing issues upfront. Said individuals also usually have an insider direct knowledge of what’s being developed anyways and are under NDAs.

Much of these forums is either wildly out of touch, plays too little, extremely vocal about non-issues, or provides inaccurate/biased feedback that it’s not worth it for the developers to usually respond.

See above where I previously linked the ESO Encounter Developer’s (Finn) Tweet response to someone asking about a difficulty slider being added like what’s being done in LOTRO. If you look up the actual tweet, Finn provides a measured simple response equating to “thanks and while we know it’s requested the game would be worse for players if implemented”. That then is just followed by the individual responding that he thinks that Finn, a central lead developer for years here, is wrong and that sliders should still be implemented.

It’s been 7 years of players asking for a difficulty slider/vet overland. It’s not as if the developers have been silent on it like they were with developing systems like Jewelry Crafting or one similar to Dressing Room for all platforms (The upcoming Armory). The developers have repeatedly said flat out no, provided reasons, and these individuals refuse to accept it.

Elsonso

Maya_Nur wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

The forum is an "echo chamber". My fear is that the forums become so out of touch with the majority of players that ZOS begins to bias against what is said in here. This is why I have started to use other venues for feedback.

Which one for example? Is there a place where devs come and ask players something or at least watch feedback silently becide forum? 🤔 I won't believe they read comments under the youtube videos/

When I want ZOS to hear me over the squabble that is the forum, I use "/feedback" in the game. It is usually best to state a problem, not a solution, but some times I can't help myself. These get collected, chewed by someone, and then spit out as meaningful spitballs aimed at The Powers That Be.

Lady_Galadhiel

Katlefiya wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Just because this topic comes up on the forums a lot does not mean the majority of players want it. This is what we call a "vocal minority".

And it is mostly the same people that start these discussions over and over again. Looking at you, Vhozek!
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/profile/discussions/Vhozek

Indeed,some people just like to make it seem that there are a lot of people who would want difficult overland.
That is why they have a need to open topics about it every few days.

temerley

This thread still open? Kekw

Lots of people want 1bar build, ha build, easy build. Lots of people hate weaving.

Lots of casual players so vet overland won’t happen, not even a toggle cause that will make the zone feel empty for newbies and will make it hard to retain them.