800k people don't seem to mind difficult overworld

Franchise408

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

@trackdemon5512

What a total red herring argument. No one is talking about group content. People are not asking to force veteran zones on anyone. People are saying they would like an OPTION to do SOLO quest content in veteran mode by themselves. Yet you are calling them out as selfish, and citing group dungeons as a reason?

Then you resort to saying people who don't agree with you have a "god complex?"

Why can't you just accept that you have no say in what goes in the game, that other people have different opinions than you, and that it doesn't do you any harm for people to have an option to play the way they want?

Except Overland isn’t Solo Content. It’s ALL Group Content. Except for extremely rare instances the server is coded to put other players with you. Too few players in this instance means merging into a single one. This isn’t other MMORPGS where you can somehow get a server all to yourself.

Those solo instances are self imposed: Dungeons and Arenas. Beyond that you’re in a zone with everyone else. You’re not special in that respect. And if you had a difficulty slider it means nothing if every other player comes in and ruins your solo crusade. You can’t do anything about that.

And the God Complex refers to a fact that in virtually all RPGs your skills, levels, gear, and attributes effectively render you a God in said world. There is no infinite challenge. You hit a wall, have nothing to do, and in single player games you usually end up quitting.

Chrono Trigger allows you to replay the same game over again, choose different options for different endings. There are still a finite amount of endings and your power never goes beyond a point, and the game never adjusts to match because it’s impossible.

Adding an OPTIONAL toggle for veteran solo questing content would be good for the longevity of the game with proportionally minimal investment. @WhyMustItBe

Why don’t you have the developers explain how much it cost for them to change the game from its original form to One Tamriel’s universal scaling? Now tell them to go back to that, but individually, on what essentially is an entirely new game since what it was several years ago.

https://www.ign.com/articles/eso2-zenimax-online-studio-head-talks-possibility-of-elder-scrolls-online-sequel-ign-unfiltered

- When asked whether ESO might one day become unable to be updated, forcing either a rebuilt version "from the ground up" or a sequel, Firor said, "We're obviously doing our job right if you haven't noticed, but we're tearing down the engine, one room at a time, all the time." Firor laughed. "So the engine right now is much different from when we launched. It could never have scaled to what we do now. So we're constantly, behind the scenes, making it better." -

If overland is group content then... shouldn't it provide a challenge to encourage said grouping?

As it is, grouping is a detriment to overland content.

SilverBride

Nagastani wrote: »

New World is similar to how ESO originally was, all its doing is showing us there is a problem and the problem is never going to get fixed if we keep making excuses for it.

ESO was failing which is what led to One Tamriel. ESO is now doing better than it ever has according to Rich Lambert. Why would they change this?

TequilaFire

I mostly see the same 3 or 4 people just going back and forth.
I put my money on Rich. lol

Mandragora

Maybe this is really just triggered defences and responses because of reasons stated here. But maybe it would be enough to lower it by making some valleys more dangerous (as someone stated here already). I cannot see any other option aswell, on the other hand a bit more dangerous place add some kind of spicy version of "horror danger" and NPCs would warn you about it - like it was in Morrowind, if it would be immersive - like it is in Craglorn now - valley of dangerous criminals, or nasty monsters with no quests, just maybe some overland quest and the rest would be as it is now (maybe with even lower amount of mobs) - for casuals, maybe that would be good compromise. I don't think that would be enough for them, but maybe it is better version for everyone because of variability?

Nagastani

SilverBride wrote: »

Nagastani wrote: »

New World is similar to how ESO originally was, all its doing is showing us there is a problem and the problem is never going to get fixed if we keep making excuses for it.

ESO was failing which is what led to One Tamriel. ESO is now doing better than it ever has according to Rich Lambert. Why would they change this?

As I had said, there are still some great things about ESO. Its subjective whether or not we agree or disagree on our feelings regarding One Tamriel's affects on the game overall. However, to be frank we could probably easily agree there was some good and some bad that came from One Tamriel. This sentiment has also been voiced by others as well so its not just me saying what I like or dislike, its subjective.

However I tell you one thing I do know, is I really enjoyed those difficult fights from the overland content. The game was beautiful and real to me. My class skill choices seemed to matter like it was a life or death decision you know. But right now, hah, I don't have to care. I could not even slot skills and just run around and kill Trolls ... like they was slow moving target dummies. There's no reward for thinking or trying or using your brain and I have no reason to care.

Now if we're keeping score, maybe One Tamriel made them some money and that's just fine. I'm happy for them. But it also cheapened the game's value as being a realistic experience. Like I said... why even have this content if I can wipe everything with one skill or a couple of lazy, thoughtless, heavy attacks with no risk. Reward must always follow risk, not reward with no risk... and overtime... I'm concerned that many people will start to see their investment in other games was wasted because their rewards have no real value compared to New World, which rewards ingenuity and forward thinking when planning a raid or setting up your economy.

That's why I enjoyed playing Zelda 2 for NES. I know that's a solo game but I actually felt like I accomplished something when winning against a boss or finding those hidden powerups. Or other games like Fallout 4.. its real nasty business fighting your way into Boston. You know, it provides interesting gameplay that keeps people coming back to meet the challenge and to build different things. I know I kind of rambled here but anyways.

trackdemon5512

Franchise408 wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

@trackdemon5512

What a total red herring argument. No one is talking about group content. People are not asking to force veteran zones on anyone. People are saying they would like an OPTION to do SOLO quest content in veteran mode by themselves. Yet you are calling them out as selfish, and citing group dungeons as a reason?

Then you resort to saying people who don't agree with you have a "god complex?"

Why can't you just accept that you have no say in what goes in the game, that other people have different opinions than you, and that it doesn't do you any harm for people to have an option to play the way they want?

Except Overland isn’t Solo Content. It’s ALL Group Content. Except for extremely rare instances the server is coded to put other players with you. Too few players in this instance means merging into a single one. This isn’t other MMORPGS where you can somehow get a server all to yourself.

Those solo instances are self imposed: Dungeons and Arenas. Beyond that you’re in a zone with everyone else. You’re not special in that respect. And if you had a difficulty slider it means nothing if every other player comes in and ruins your solo crusade. You can’t do anything about that.

And the God Complex refers to a fact that in virtually all RPGs your skills, levels, gear, and attributes effectively render you a God in said world. There is no infinite challenge. You hit a wall, have nothing to do, and in single player games you usually end up quitting.

Chrono Trigger allows you to replay the same game over again, choose different options for different endings. There are still a finite amount of endings and your power never goes beyond a point, and the game never adjusts to match because it’s impossible.

Adding an OPTIONAL toggle for veteran solo questing content would be good for the longevity of the game with proportionally minimal investment. @WhyMustItBe

Why don’t you have the developers explain how much it cost for them to change the game from its original form to One Tamriel’s universal scaling? Now tell them to go back to that, but individually, on what essentially is an entirely new game since what it was several years ago.

https://www.ign.com/articles/eso2-zenimax-online-studio-head-talks-possibility-of-elder-scrolls-online-sequel-ign-unfiltered

- When asked whether ESO might one day become unable to be updated, forcing either a rebuilt version "from the ground up" or a sequel, Firor said, "We're obviously doing our job right if you haven't noticed, but we're tearing down the engine, one room at a time, all the time." Firor laughed. "So the engine right now is much different from when we launched. It could never have scaled to what we do now. So we're constantly, behind the scenes, making it better." -

If overland is group content then... shouldn't it provide a challenge to encourage said grouping?

As it is, grouping is a detriment to overland content.

As @WhyMustItBe posted before:

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."

And I don’t know about you but 99.99% of players can’t solo Harrowstorms or Dragons. And while base game world bosses were designed around then gated zone levels every World Boss since Orsinium was designed for players of all levels to collaborate. Thieves Guild was the first zone to be designed without player level in mind. And since then the game has been a blast.

Btw, the only thing I can think of in the Overland that actively scales to your difficulty, namely how well you perform, are Summerset geysers. If you have a hard time you get an easy final enemy. If you solo easy or there is a good group/mob there you get a harder one. Problem is the zones go dead as players migrate and I don’t see those hardcore players going back for any difficult thrill constantly. There is a point when they all just go back to let this be easy, let me get this done fast so I can do something else in a zone that isn’t dead.

Elsonso

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

Adding an OPTIONAL toggle for veteran solo questing content would be good for the longevity of the game with proportionally minimal investment. This seems like a no-brainer to me and I have no doubt that when the devs realize just how much increasing demand there is for this, and that it doesn't affect other players that don't want it in any way, they will consider this a worthwhile addition.

Go watch the previous SlashLurk streams. All of them. Listen to what Rich says when asked a question about the game. All the questions, not just the ones on this subject. If you are paying attention, you will see that answers to other questions have a bearing on the answer to this one. Everything is connected.

My guess is that, when you are done, you will have a different perspective on this subject.

Don't take my word for it. Go watch and listen.

trackdemon5512

Mandragora wrote: »

Maybe this is really just triggered defences and responses because of reasons stated here. But maybe it would be enough to lower it by making some valleys more dangerous (as someone stated here already). I cannot see any other option aswell, on the other hand a bit more dangerous place add some kind of spicy version of "horror danger" and NPCs would warn you about it - like it was in Morrowind, if it would be immersive - like it is in Craglorn now - valley of dangerous criminals, or nasty monsters with no quests, just maybe some overland quest and the rest would be as it is now (maybe with even lower amount of mobs) - for casuals, maybe that would be good compromise. I don't think that would be enough for them, but maybe it is better version for everyone because of variability?

They have that. They’re called Public Dungeons. They offer tougher enemies and bosses than the general overland. And after a while they go dead too.

colossalvoids

SilverBride wrote: »

Nagastani wrote: »

New World is similar to how ESO originally was, all its doing is showing us there is a problem and the problem is never going to get fixed if we keep making excuses for it.

ESO was failing which is what led to One Tamriel. ESO is now doing better than it ever has according to Rich Lambert. Why would they change this?

Change what? Would this game become less popular if suddenly there was a veteran instance main quest option with actual combat involved? Or would it bring more experienced players in for questing and would stop reviewers be it YouTubers or else bashing quests as a bad meme because boss is dead before making his first line despite being hyped up as an ultimate world threat?

Even more radical stuff like actual full vet overland isn't going to change anything in a negative way, aren't they talking about 19mil players all the time and vet population being non existent? Doesn't sound like population divide at all.

Also anti-vets are casually toss around Rich quotes probably without actually watching more of his streams, for example exact same week he was talking Craglorn and how he loves the zone. And how he actually want to make another one in similar fashion but with lessons learned from the past so it's already going against a lot of what people seem to take too literal. Game development is fluid, things change as demand grows. Pvp complaints were swept under the rug and now pvpers are gone for the most part and they've commited to work on that department. So people are legitimately asking for stuff they see necessary, if devs don't see it now they might see it necessary tomorrow.

SilverBride

@colossalvoids I have already spoken to most of your points in previous posts, but I will address what you reported as Rich's statement about Craglorn. (I would appreciate a link to the source, please.)

Rich stated in the recent Twitch stream some of us have linked that ESO was built with difficulty in mind and that he personally likes difficulty, so I am not surprised that he would state that he likes Craglorn.

But he also stated that 2/3 of the game (Cadwell's Silver and Gold) was not being played so was removed, and that Craglorn today still has a low population even though it's not as difficult as it was before One Tamriel.

He went on to say that there are a lot of players who want difficulty, but a HUGE amount that don't, and that the numbers don't lie and ESO is doing better than it ever has.

This doesn't mean that things won't change in the future, but with a huge casual playerbase I don't see it happening.

Kiralyn2000

Franchise408 wrote: »

It used to be a staple of MMO's and gaming in general that new content was designed for the players that had been playing it. It was higher level content designed for the veterans of the game. Of course there was always content for newer players to keep interest in growing the base, but it was also interested in retention as well.

The only other MMO I've played through multiple expansions was WoW (vanilla through Cataclysm, so three expansions?).

It had a multi-tier raiding 'endgame' at the level cap, with increasingly powerful gear in each tier. So your "I quested to the level cap" character might have "level 100" gear, a vet dungeon runner lv125, tier 1 raider lv150, tier 2 raider lv200.

When a new expansion launched, the first zone had to be balanced & playable for people who were just questing through. So, people with lv100 gear. Because you couldn't have a new player trying to get to The New Content suddenly have to stop at gear lv100 to do weeks/months of dungeons & raiding to be able to continue on with the zone quests.

So the new expansion zones were a cakewalk for endgamers who had lv150-200 gear. Sure, the first zone's quests gave out green lv150-175 stuff, but actual raid gear was ESO-gold-level, with more stats, higher stat allocations, and set bonuses. So even several zones in, with Even Better green gear coming from quests, those endgamers were still plowing through it with their previous-cap endgame stuff. Once they hit the new cap, and could start doing the Dungeon/Vet Dungeon/T1 Raid/T2 Raid cycle again, they finally ran into difficulty & progression.
(this was Burning Crusade in 2007, Wrath in 2008, Cataclysm in 2010)


Of course, these were expansions with level cap increases, so yeah - you could only participate in the new content "if you had been playing it." New players had to start at level 1 in the original zones, and go through all the original questing before they could get to the New Stuff. (until "boost to cap" microtransactions were invented, of course.)

So that's one big difference between ESO and all the other MMOs, that's the real issue - it's the One Tamriel / horizontal progression thing. Since there's no level cap increase, and everyone having to throw out all their gear and replace it with new stuff, with new "goblins" and "bog dogs" that are 10 levels tougher than the same overland shmoes from the previous expansion... you have no difficulty reset, no progression reset.

Maya_Nur

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

You want solo hard content? Go solo a dungeon. Then solo it on vet. Then get every achievement in solo arenas. Then add to that challenge by finding 3 others and getting every vet achievement in dungeons/arenas. Then finish it off with every achievement for vet trials. And if you somehow do that, before a new DLC is released, we’ll then you’re in the 99.9999% of ESO players doing things the developers don’t expect the vast majority of players to do. And there is nothing else to do for ya except to tell you to nerf yourself.

[snip]

Sorry, but I can't agree with you as your suggestion is more like a manipulation. The reason why people (me included) ask for more difficult overland because far more diverse then dungeons and trials (as for me most of them are mind numbingly repetetive and bosses are overpowered with health which makes them more boring then challenging).

[edited to remove quote]

DMuehlhausen

I do think the Overworld content needs to be bumped a little. I'm not saying to Craglorn, though another vet level / group zone would be nice. I just don't think you should be able to run around and pick like 50 mobs and not have to worry about dying at all either. There should be a little risk if you want to do that.

As for the group zones, people will say Craglorn failed and that just isn't true. In true MMO fashion people blitzed up to max level, then complained when they didn't like a challenge due to not right gear, or enough skills, nobody to group with or whatever. Then the Devs knee jerk reacted to the sub 1% of players that had reached that point and nerfed it into the ground.

Had they just waited another 6 months or so the zone would have been full with people doing stuff making it easy to get groups and find help making the zone more exciting.

SilverBride

Maya_Nur wrote: »

The reason why people (me included) ask for more difficult overland because far more diverse then dungeons and trials (as for me most of them are mind numbingly repetetive and bosses are overpowered with health which makes them more boring then challenging).

So dungeon and trial bosses are boring because they are repetitive and the bosses are overpowered? How would veteran overland be any different? It would still be the same World Bosses and Harrowstorms being killed repeatedly only even more overpowered.

Overland is not an alternative to the challenging end game content that is already in the game.

Marillea

ESO has a huge variety of players though. I remember seeing a pool not that long ago, and many are in between 40 and 60+ years old, and they might enjoy a simply more relaxed environment that this game is very easily providing.

With this I am not saying that if you reach a set age you can't or aren't an hardcore player, but for example me and my fiancé recently got ESO to my mother in law, and oh dear she has huge difficulties fighting a single add, and navigating the map.

If a veteran overland was to be implemented, It would have to be a toggle for sure.

spartaxoxo

Callosum wrote: »

More players leaving means less money for the content that you like. Our money actually maters for the content that you want if you haven't realized it.

Not when the players that leave because they didn't get what they wanted are vastly outweighed by the people who would leave if they did. Losing 2/3rd of your playerbase to please 1/3rd is a loss, and that's the kind of thing going on here.

This game is vast majority casual players who don't like or use challenging content. Devs have flat out said that. So that has to be taken into account.

Personally that is why I want debuff food.

trackdemon5512

Maya_Nur wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

You want solo hard content? Go solo a dungeon. Then solo it on vet. Then get every achievement in solo arenas. Then add to that challenge by finding 3 others and getting every vet achievement in dungeons/arenas. Then finish it off with every achievement for vet trials. And if you somehow do that, before a new DLC is released, we’ll then you’re in the 99.9999% of ESO players doing things the developers don’t expect the vast majority of players to do. And there is nothing else to do for ya except to tell you to nerf yourself.

It’s the everlasting god complex conundrum of RPGs.

Sorry, but I can't agree with you as your suggestion is more like a manipulation. The reason why people (me included) ask for more difficult overland because far more diverse then dungeons and trials (as for me most of them are mind numbingly repetetive and bosses are overpowered with health which makes them more boring then challenging).

Except Overland isn’t anywhere as diverse as dungeons, trials, and arenas. Seriously the content is just retreads of the same stuff over and over and over.

Dungeons and trials are where interesting mechanics are introduced and challenges come. With the DLC dungeons no two bosses are the same and they go through phases. That can be done because there is a limit to damage that can be taken. With overland that’s pointless because a group can just swarm a boss with 15 ppl and take em down.

How accomplished would any of you “I need my difficulty slider” players actually feel when just one person shows up to beat a boss? Now when 7 people show up? What’s the challenge? What will you ask for next? Private instances? This isn’t that game.

kargen27

"PvP needs immediate rework"

"Patch notes barely has one page of fixes and it will take about 6 hours?"

"please add PvP only servers"

"Stop Complaining or just simply leave"

"The future of this game become questionable"

"Make the game harder!"

"Whats the point of weapon swap when it does not work?"

"Why Wars soo laggyy these days?"

"Bots are stealing the iron ore"

"Better give us something for this downtime 6 HOURS NOW"

"Surely you could find a better time to patch than Australian prime time?"

"Please add a mini-map"

"Better Communication is Needed"

These are all threads in that new games forums. Also some talk about hoping ESO gets the lag fixed so they can come back. Turns out the PvP over there isn't what people expected. The big battles are mostly invite only and are scheduled so no just popping in when your schedule permits and getting into an epic battle. You sign up for the war in advance and then you hope that the leader doesn't kick you to allow members from his own company to fight instead. If you are not in a large company and an elite member of that company you may never get to participate in what is suppose to be the main feature of the game.

SalamanNZ

Time for ZOS to take a step back and review what everyone is saying. There is so much that needs fixing. From the Lag in Pvp. The crazy new meta sets. Overland content that becomes stale once you have multiple alts.

Look what happened to WoW. So many times did blizzard dumb it down to cater for the casual player. So what happened. The main player base migrated to new games. Some gave up on MMORPGs altogether.

If you want to maintain and build upon your player base listen to the players and you will grow a good game into a better game that everyone enjoys 😉

trackdemon5512

kargen27 wrote: »

"PvP needs immediate rework"

"Patch notes barely has one page of fixes and it will take about 6 hours?"

"please add PvP only servers"

"Stop Complaining or just simply leave"

"The future of this game become questionable"

"Make the game harder!"

"Whats the point of weapon swap when it does not work?"

"Why Wars soo laggyy these days?"

"Bots are stealing the iron ore"

"Better give us something for this downtime 6 HOURS NOW"

"Surely you could find a better time to patch than Australian prime time?"

"Please add a mini-map"

"Better Communication is Needed"

These are all threads in that new games forums. Also some talk about hoping ESO gets the lag fixed so they can come back. Turns out the PvP over there isn't what people expected. The big battles are mostly invite only and are scheduled so no just popping in when your schedule permits and getting into an epic battle. You sign up for the war in advance and then you hope that the leader doesn't kick you to allow members from his own company to fight instead. If you are not in a large company and an elite member of that company you may never get to participate in what is suppose to be the main feature of the game.

Last week, immediately after the game for which this forum topic is about went live, an individual posted about how said game’s PVP was the future and the ESO would be wise to emulate it. I won’t link to that thread as the topic was met with immediate backlash and the OP asked for it to be closed.

I will however quote one of their suggestions advocating for open world PVP like said game:

“1.) Get rid of the One Tamriel scheme and make it so players have to commit to a faction and if you come to enemy territory you will be attacked by faction players and guards. What this means is if you are a member of a rival faction you can not own trading hubs or houses in enemy territory.”

Flash forward to today and this article on Kotaku:

https://kotaku.com/new-world-patch-adds-important-message-dont-be-a-***-1847809499

Of note I’ll pick out this paragraph:

“ When you split a server’s population into three factions and set them loose to compete over an island nation, hostility spreads like weeds. When two factions are fighting each other, global chat is filled with an amusing yet depressing amount of ill will. Names are called, threats are made. I’ve seen players following other players about town, harassing them in local area chat. Before I disabled local voice chat, which is a horrible feature in a game where hostile factions share the same spaces, I got to hear what sounded like a teen calling out members of The Syndicate using homophobic slurs.”

Geez if only they saw and learned from what ESO with its Three Faction War and other games gleaned from 8 years of live play and data.

How this applies to threads like these:

The developers of ESO have been at this for decades. Many with MMORPG experience from games well before ESO was released. Yes, they go through a trial and error process and learn what works and what doesn’t. But they have a history and the accompanying data to back up the vast majority of their actions.

Matt Firor has openly welcomed competing MMORPGs into the space as they inspire innovation. But at the same you can’t immediately point to something new and say it works and that’s how everything else, everywhere else should be.

Anyone from ESO, WOW, and other games could tell you that you foster a hostile environment with fully open world PVP. And the developers of ESO and other games can tell you that scalable difficulty levels for individuals just do not work in large group environments. The data is there.

I guess my point is that many of us here echo what the developers have said, understand the data, and encourage y’all to really observe, review, analyze, and then posit about what this game needs before jumping on hype bandwagons and asking to throw a well established game into chaos.

Jeremy

SilverBride 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.

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".

You're just ignoring the entirety of my argument to make an unrelated point.

I am talking about adding an OPTIONAL Veteran version of the overland zones for experienced players who want a challenge while questing. So yes, in that respect what I am describing is exactly the same as veteran dungeons. So by your own logic, if having content for experienced players who want a challenge means it will become a "ghost town" (as you were claiming) then veteran dungeons would indeed be Ghost Towns. But they aren't. So in a sense you are defeating your own argument here by admitting there are players out there who want more of a challenge and who are willing to do veteran content.

And I never said a "majority" of players want it either. You're simply putting words in my mouth. What I said is that by judging by how often this topic comes up, clearly a lot of players want this. And a lot of them do. Whether it is a majority or not wasn't the point nor does it really matter. A majority of players don't do PvP but they still have PvP activities for players to do. So if your point is a majority of players must want something before it should be included in the game I would say that's a very tenuous stance.

Honestly, why do you (or anyone else for that matter) even care if Veteran players who find the normal overland too easy get a veteran equivalent to play in? It will help them enjoy the game more and has no negative impact on you at all.

Deter1UK

Perhaps part of the problem is that the difficulty is so uniform.

One game I played (Asheron's Call) had mobs that hit harder in certain areas so for instance if you needed to get from A to B you planned your route accordingly - the quick way over the mountain was deadly (mobs were more difficult the higher you went) - so you could go round and avoid them but it took longer. Equally mobs got harder the further away from town and roads you were.

Just make them hit really hard in the wilderness. And ramp up their invulnerabilities (fire atros laugh at fire spells so swap to ice or poison for that encounter) It's a simple idea that would add colour to the overland without making it impossible to get around - you just have to be more careful. Of course high end players would walk it anyway but it would be a start.

Jeremy

Deter1UK wrote: »

Perhaps part of the problem is that the difficulty is so uniform.

One game I played (Asheron's Call) had mobs that hit harder in certain areas so for instance if you needed to get from A to B you planned your route accordingly - the quick way over the mountain was deadly (mobs were more difficult the higher you went) - so you could go round and avoid them but it took longer. Equally mobs got harder the further away from town and roads you were.

Just make them hit really hard in the wilderness. It's a simple idea that would add colour to the overland without making it impossible to get around - you just have to be more careful. Of course high end players would walk it anyway but it would be a start.

The current overland is probably fine for beginners or inexperienced players, but it's just incredibly easy for experienced veterans, especially once they get lots of CP and good gear. Too easy to the point it borders on tedium.

I know people say well just do the hard stuff then, like Veteran Dungeons. But the problem with that argument is a huge part of this game and its new content is exploring the overland and doing quests, and Veterans should be able to enjoy that part of the game too. And It would be super easy to fix. All they would have to do is copy and paste the zone and just scale the mobs to a higher level, preferably to what ever the current CP max is. That's basically what they do with dungeons already.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

I am talking about adding an OPTIONAL Veteran version of the overland zones for experienced players who want a challenge while questing.

I fully understand that what is requested is an optional veteran overland. I just don't agree with it.

Ravensilver

SalamanNZ wrote: »

[snip]
If you want to maintain and build upon your player base listen to the players and you will grow a good game into a better game that everyone enjoys 😉

Ok. So if ZOS should listen to the players, then it should also listen to me, right?

I am totally fine with overland the way it is right now. I don't need a change in difficulty. I enjoy being able to casually (yes, I see you shudder at the word...) play through the evening, doing my dailies, gathering my resources, wandering about, opening treasure chests.
I did the Craglorn event. By the time it was done, I was getting mighty tired of constantly fighting large groups of mobs, just to pick one flower.

I'm fine with ESO overland just the way it is.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

I am talking about adding an OPTIONAL Veteran version of the overland zones for experienced players who want a challenge while questing.

I fully understand that what is requested is an optional veteran overland. I just don't agree with it.

If you fully understood it then please don't mischaracterize what I was saying by suggesting I was trying to compare a veteran dungeon to something that is made for everyone. Because I was never doing that. I have made it as clear as I know how - from the beginning - that I am talking about an optional overland zone only for players who want more of a challenge. Which is exactly what Veteran Dungeons are.

So my comparison was both appropriate and accurate.

trackdemon5512

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride 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.

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".

You're just ignoring the entirety of my argument to make an unrelated point.

I am talking about adding an OPTIONAL Veteran version of the overland zones for experienced players who want a challenge while questing. So yes, in that respect what I am describing is exactly the same as veteran dungeons. So by your own logic, if having content for experienced players who want a challenge means it will become a "ghost town" (as you were claiming) then veteran dungeons would indeed be Ghost Towns. But they aren't. So in a sense you are defeating your own argument here by admitting there are players out there who want more of a challenge and who are willing to do veteran content.

And I never said a "majority" of players want it either. You're simply putting words in my mouth. What I said is that by judging by how often this topic comes up, clearly a lot of players want this. And a lot of them do. Whether it is a majority or not wasn't the point nor does it really matter. A majority of players don't do PvP but they still have PvP activities for players to do. So if your point is a majority of players must want something before it should be included in the game I would say that's a very tenuous stance.

Honestly, why do you (or anyone else for that matter) even care if Veteran players who find the normal overland too easy get a veteran equivalent to play in? It will help them enjoy the game more and has no negative impact on you at all.

We have simply been pointing out that:

1) We have had experience with a Veteran Overland system in which zones had different difficulties and more important players were of disparate power. It was terrible for a community experience

2) The game took a financial hit as a result of the difficulty and trouble of players actually getting together

3) That One Tamriel went a long way toward solving these issues

4) That subsequently released DLC zones that balanced difficulty and put all players on even footing were not only well received but improved profits significantly

5) That developer data, gleaned from not only overland content but player engagement for veteran content, has shown that the vast majority of players enjoy exploration and differentiation over difficulty

6) That the game has been rewritten and the content within tailored to be universally balanced and not subject to scaling

7) That the developers have repeatedly over the years said no and provided reasoning as to why personalized scaled difficulties or veteran overland isn’t coming back

And yet despite the data and 8 years of arguments/evidence against such y’all continue to posit this not only as an argument but something that the game needs. It’s like hearing “we need an AOE taunt” for the last several years in these forums despite the developers telling you over and over that combat has never been designed for you to need such and that asking for it amounts to nothing because it will never happen.

Jeremy

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride 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.

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".

You're just ignoring the entirety of my argument to make an unrelated point.

I am talking about adding an OPTIONAL Veteran version of the overland zones for experienced players who want a challenge while questing. So yes, in that respect what I am describing is exactly the same as veteran dungeons. So by your own logic, if having content for experienced players who want a challenge means it will become a "ghost town" (as you were claiming) then veteran dungeons would indeed be Ghost Towns. But they aren't. So in a sense you are defeating your own argument here by admitting there are players out there who want more of a challenge and who are willing to do veteran content.

And I never said a "majority" of players want it either. You're simply putting words in my mouth. What I said is that by judging by how often this topic comes up, clearly a lot of players want this. And a lot of them do. Whether it is a majority or not wasn't the point nor does it really matter. A majority of players don't do PvP but they still have PvP activities for players to do. So if your point is a majority of players must want something before it should be included in the game I would say that's a very tenuous stance.

Honestly, why do you (or anyone else for that matter) even care if Veteran players who find the normal overland too easy get a veteran equivalent to play in? It will help them enjoy the game more and has no negative impact on you at all.

We have simply been pointing out that:

1) We have had experience with a Veteran Overland system in which zones had different difficulties and more important players were of disparate power. It was terrible for a community experience

2) The game took a financial hit as a result of the difficulty and trouble of players actually getting together

3) That One Tamriel went a long way toward solving these issues

4) That subsequently released DLC zones that balanced difficulty and put all players on even footing were not only well received but improved profits significantly

5) That developer data, gleaned from not only overland content but player engagement for veteran content, has shown that the vast majority of players enjoy exploration and differentiation over difficulty

6) That the game has been rewritten and the content within tailored to be universally balanced and not subject to scaling

7) That the developers have repeatedly over the years said no and provided reasoning as to why personalized scaled difficulties or veteran overland isn’t coming back

And yet despite the data and 8 years of arguments/evidence against such y’all continue to posit this not only as an argument but something that the game needs. It’s like hearing “we need an AOE taunt” for the last several years in these forums despite the developers telling you over and over that combat has never been designed for you to need such and that asking for it amounts to nothing because it will never happen.

Again: your past examples are not applicable here because I am not suggesting they bring back the old Craglorn or Caldwell silver and gold. Those were flawed systems by design.

What I am asking for is for them do exactly what they have already done with Veteran Dungeons (which has been a success). You can still do your normal dungeons, and players who want more of a challenge can do Veteran dungeons. It's the same concept but for the overland, but without the tedious grind that was associated with veteran ranks or the limited scope of Craglorn.

Now you and others can continue to say people wouldn't do it or that it would harm sales or what ever, but the fact players do Veteran Dungeons indicates to me that people would do Veteran Zones as well, just so long as they were designed in a similar fashion. Because there is a significant portion of the player base out there that enjoys doing veteran content, and that is just a reality.

trackdemon5512

Jeremy wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride 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.

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".

You're just ignoring the entirety of my argument to make an unrelated point.

I am talking about adding an OPTIONAL Veteran version of the overland zones for experienced players who want a challenge while questing. So yes, in that respect what I am describing is exactly the same as veteran dungeons. So by your own logic, if having content for experienced players who want a challenge means it will become a "ghost town" (as you were claiming) then veteran dungeons would indeed be Ghost Towns. But they aren't. So in a sense you are defeating your own argument here by admitting there are players out there who want more of a challenge and who are willing to do veteran content.

And I never said a "majority" of players want it either. You're simply putting words in my mouth. What I said is that by judging by how often this topic comes up, clearly a lot of players want this. And a lot of them do. Whether it is a majority or not wasn't the point nor does it really matter. A majority of players don't do PvP but they still have PvP activities for players to do. So if your point is a majority of players must want something before it should be included in the game I would say that's a very tenuous stance.

Honestly, why do you (or anyone else for that matter) even care if Veteran players who find the normal overland too easy get a veteran equivalent to play in? It will help them enjoy the game more and has no negative impact on you at all.

We have simply been pointing out that:

1) We have had experience with a Veteran Overland system in which zones had different difficulties and more important players were of disparate power. It was terrible for a community experience

2) The game took a financial hit as a result of the difficulty and trouble of players actually getting together

3) That One Tamriel went a long way toward solving these issues

4) That subsequently released DLC zones that balanced difficulty and put all players on even footing were not only well received but improved profits significantly

5) That developer data, gleaned from not only overland content but player engagement for veteran content, has shown that the vast majority of players enjoy exploration and differentiation over difficulty

6) That the game has been rewritten and the content within tailored to be universally balanced and not subject to scaling

7) That the developers have repeatedly over the years said no and provided reasoning as to why personalized scaled difficulties or veteran overland isn’t coming back

And yet despite the data and 8 years of arguments/evidence against such y’all continue to posit this not only as an argument but something that the game needs. It’s like hearing “we need an AOE taunt” for the last several years in these forums despite the developers telling you over and over that combat has never been designed for you to need such and that asking for it amounts to nothing because it will never happen.

Again: your past examples are not applicable here because I am not suggesting they bring back the old Craglorn or Caldwell silver and gold. Those were flawed systems by design.

What I am asking for is for them do exactly what they have already done with Veteran Dungeons (which has been a success). You can still do your normal dungeons, and players who want more of a challenge can do Veteran dungeons. It's the same concept but for the overland, only without the tedious grind that was associated with veteran ranks or the limited scope of Craglorn.

What you’re asking for is either:

Veteran Overland Content
- the developers have said this would split zones into instances unnecessarily and eventually you get zones where a lack of players are doing it. The players who wanted said zones are now upset because they can’t do the content. Craglorn is the live example of this failing hard.

A Difficulty Slider
- the developers say again this would split the population and not only is it not in the best interest of the game as a whole but that the programming of such a system is far more complicated than “just a toggle” as overland enemies aren’t designed for scalability but rather player grouping and cooperation. You can’t be solo instanced and that other players engaging in the shared content will without a doubt render your difficult slider adjustments moot. You may die but they’ll still kill the world boss/dolmen/delve boss/etc and you will gain nothing for it.

The data has been there, analyzed, and the developers have said NO. I would ask players here to stop pigeonholing the data to just that from pre One Tamriel. As we and the developers have said it’s the cumulative data from over 8 years that lets them know what works.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

What I am asking for is for them do exactly what they have already done with Veteran Dungeons (which has been a success). You can still do your normal dungeons, and players who want more of a challenge can do Veteran dungeons. It's the same concept but for the overland, but without the tedious grind that was associated with veteran ranks or the limited scope of Craglorn.

It makes sense that there are levels of difficulty in dungeons and trials and arenas because they are there specifically to provide a challenge.

It does not make sense to put levels of challenge into overland because it isn't.