800k people don't seem to mind difficult overworld

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

It doesn't matter if I go out with no gear and only punch mobs to death, the fact that the enemy doesn't change from me doing this, and they remain so basic and underwhelming to fight, that still makes the fight dull and forgettable no matter how long I drag the fight out for.

That's because they are basic mobs that are part of the base game, not veteran trial bosses.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It doesn't matter if I go out with no gear and only punch mobs to death, the fact that the enemy doesn't change from me doing this, and they remain so basic and underwhelming to fight, that still makes the fight dull and forgettable no matter how long I drag the fight out for.

That's because they are basic mobs that are part of the base game, not veteran trial bosses.

Being part of the base game isn't a good reason to keep them that way. ESO has a very engaging combat system that has players like me hooked, but everywhere we look in overland when trying to explore or quest, it is like a completely different game. You go from dynamic fights where you need to react to things, to a turn based game where the player isn't bound by the same delays the enemies are. The game's improved over time and ZOS has learned how to make fights more interesting, without some of those improvements being passed to overland, preferably to an optional mode as to not ruin the experience for those who enjoy it as is, then overland will continue to be something that a fair number of players avoid or leave the game because.

Amottica

Franchise408 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

I would recommend picking up this conversation next week when things have cooled down.

Because either side aggressively telling each other “You’re Wrong“ isn’t going to go anywhere.

There have been numerous threads on this topic and nothing has changed. If anything the opposition has only become stronger with less supporting the idea.

I know it is a disappointment to some, but the majority don't want this, and it is just not feasible. Waiting a week isn't going to change that.

It is plenty feasible.

The foundation of the game changed once already due to player feedback. Persistent games make changes all the time, even if devs do say something won't happen. These changes absolutely are feasible, and we will continue to speak out in favor of them for as long as it takes.

In this case, the devs have not said it would not happen. They (Rich) has said it already happened players pretty much avoided the more challenging vet zones. This is the reason he gave for the game-changing before and seemed to indicate and he said the data, that the overwhelming number of players do not want to enjoy the story without struggle or difficulty. He specifically said the data does not lie.

Rich also added that the game has never been more successful than it is today and seemed to attribute that to the current design.

So yes, they may change the game again but Rich strongly suggested that the business side of things suggest this should not change anytime soon.

cptqrk

So, you want more difficult mobs, like different mechanics. Not just more damage/HP correct?

This takes money and resources. Something you keep saying is easy to do. Something ZOS keeps saying is not easy to do. It's their game, I would suspect they know better than you do.

Have you taken into consideration, that your personal 'difficulty slider' will affect other players?

ESO now has a great system in place that prevents kill stealing. If you did damage, you have a chance to loot.

Now put that into your scenario. You engage a mob, with your special "hard mode" slider activated, another non hard mode player comes along. What difficulty should the mob be set at?

If your setting, the normal mode player gets one shot by the 'special hard mode tactics' that the mob now has.

If their setting, you get the same old easy to kill mob.

You can not have a built in difficulty slider that will not effect other players around you. This would be like only the person that hit the hard mode scroll on the final boss in a dungeon would be the only one dealing with the hard mode difficulty. Doesn't work that way for a reason.

To implement your slider or toggle would mean you would have to be in a different instance, thus splitting the community. Something that has clearly be explained as something ZOS does not want to do.

Why do you want hard mode over world anyway? You don't seem to care about the story (the main focus of the over world) nor do you mention the crafting material gathering, or scrying, or anything else over world related.

You want hard mode just for the sake of it?

Or are you bored levelling alts to get to the 'end game' of trails and Vet hard mode dungeons? Levelling is easier for you because you can spend all your CP from your main character on a level 1 character. If end game is all you care about, make a tank or healer character, and spam random dungeons and do daily crafting writs with XP scrolls then respec to your preferred skills/role.

Hell, I have a healer that's hit level 34 and haven't even left Vulkhel Guard yet. I haven't even gone after Lyris.

I'm sorry, but you will either have to find a harder game to play or deal with 'easy over world' mechanics.

/rant end

CP5

1. If it was a different instance there wouldn't be "kill stealing" nor would people not wanting extra mechanics see them. Look at literally every dungeon and trial, different instances have different rule sets, there isn't a case where one random player was looking to do a normal banished cells run getting thrown into a vet instance. Since even zones are already broken into separate shards (not everyone whose on the server in reapers march are in the same version of it), a "vet instance" would simply be a shard of the zone where like-minded players would face similar challenges, no impact on others and no magic 'server hit' since a zone instance is a zone instance, separate rules or no. So no, not a personal slider, just a different version of the zone.

2. Money and resources went into the companions system. VO for all their comments in the world, the ability to unlock and set up skills for them, their own unique type of gear. How many players are using that system? What was its end goal? Just as much weight can be thrown either way for or against companions being implemented as a vet overland. Some people would love either, some couldn't care less, some would use either for a short time and others would swear by them. Equally unnecessarily and both valid to be added to the game.

3. I want to enjoy questing again. When wrothgar came out I had done every side quest throughout the zone before hitting the main one and liked my time getting used to the area. Now though, I tried to do the western skyrim quest and when the pompous vampire stood on the cliff and said "You can ask me a question and I will ask you one in return" my first thought was "how many arrows can fit in your face."

The enemies have plot armor, they need to for the quest to work, but there isn't even the illusion of a threat anymore, so when each quest is filled with fights against inept opponents and the parts between fights are full of npcs harping on how doomed we all are, when I know that if I were to fight the big bad then and there it would all be over, the story loses what weight it could otherwise have and leaves me feeling like I'm just wasting my time cleaning up trash npcs couldn't be bothered to deal with.

4. As for Rich's comment, he was talking in regards to old gold and silver zones. These zones, and old craglorn, both were more challenging by health and damage alone, which can be replicated by gimping yourself but doesn't result in fights being more interesting. Combine that with the fact that silver zones were locked until you do one massive quest chain and gold requires the silver main quest to be done and it's no wonder those zones were quiet.

With the ability to go anywhere with One Tamriel combined with fights actually worth taking part in, a vet overland could encourage some people who only log in once a week for trials to log in more and actually enjoy the world rather than be bored by it.

Auztinito

What’s funny to me is that players haven’t considered the power gap to be the problem on the game’s to easy for them.

I’m sorry. You’re super build where you can 2-3 shot a boss is the problem. Players hitting high dps like 20k+ is the problem. If they actually cut down the ceiling and cut out 80% of the power gap of players. You’d definitely have less chance to one-three shot those boss fights.

Here I am at 24 feeling good about my playing of where I kill a boss in a reasonable amount of time until a CP+ player comes in and 2 shots boss.

CP5

There is a power gap, for sure. Honestly, 20k is how much damage most of my skills deal on the norm, but that's just part of running end game content with decent gear. Overland doesn't need that to be made easy. For example, get a 2h weapon and slot carve, maybe morph it to brawler, then hold the light attack button to do endless heavy attacks. At any point during this heavy attack animation, hit carve and your character will cast it once the heavy lands, then start the next heavy attack after carve lands. Voila, more shielding than pretty much any enemy can deal with, all the stamina you could need through the heavy attacks, and aoe damage to deal with groups of enemies.

Experience playing the game, with the desire to improve and challenge oneself is what it takes to trivialize overland, not 'super builds.'

trackdemon5512

CP5 wrote: »

1. If it was a different instance there wouldn't be "kill stealing" nor would people not wanting extra mechanics see them. Look at literally every dungeon and trial, different instances have different rule sets, there isn't a case where one random player was looking to do a normal banished cells run getting thrown into a vet instance. Since even zones are already broken into separate shards (not everyone whose on the server in reapers march are in the same version of it), a "vet instance" would simply be a shard of the zone where like-minded players would face similar challenges, no impact on others and no magic 'server hit' since a zone instance is a zone instance, separate rules or no. So no, not a personal slider, just a different version of the zone.

2. Money and resources went into the companions system. VO for all their comments in the world, the ability to unlock and set up skills for them, their own unique type of gear. How many players are using that system? What was its end goal? Just as much weight can be thrown either way for or against companions being implemented as a vet overland. Some people would love either, some couldn't care less, some would use either for a short time and others would swear by them. Equally unnecessarily and both valid to be added to the game.

3. I want to enjoy questing again. When wrothgar came out I had done every side quest throughout the zone before hitting the main one and liked my time getting used to the area. Now though, I tried to do the western skyrim quest and when the pompous vampire stood on the cliff and said "You can ask me a question and I will ask you one in return" my first thought was "how many arrows can fit in your face."

The enemies have plot armor, they need to for the quest to work, but there isn't even the illusion of a threat anymore, so when each quest is filled with fights against inept opponents and the parts between fights are full of npcs harping on how doomed we all are, when I know that if I were to fight the big bad then and there it would all be over, the story loses what weight it could otherwise have and leaves me feeling like I'm just wasting my time cleaning up trash npcs couldn't be bothered to deal with.

4. As for Rich's comment, he was talking in regards to old gold and silver zones. These zones, and old craglorn, both were more challenging by health and damage alone, which can be replicated by gimping yourself but doesn't result in fights being more interesting. Combine that with the fact that silver zones were locked until you do one massive quest chain and gold requires the silver main quest to be done and it's no wonder those zones were quiet.

With the ability to go anywhere with One Tamriel combined with fights actually worth taking part in, a vet overland could encourage some people who only log in once a week for trials to log in more and actually enjoy the world rather than be bored by it.

1 ) You are NEVER getting separate overworld instances. That has NEVER been a thing and never will. [snip]

2) Are you endgame? Companions aren’t made for you. They’re designed for casuals. Designed for players to do overworld content without assistance from other players. Made to help solo world bosses and delves. Made to help players who roll as tanks and healers more quickly get overworld done instead of taking forever. Made to fill slots in normal dungeons. They are not for the hardcore player.

3) The story quests may seen thin (that’s your personal opinion) but due to the nature of the game it’s impossible to be made incredibly detailed or difficult. There’s essentially a rule in place that all overworld content needs to be able to be completed by all players with any build they make. Furthermore lore/immersion is priority and not combat. Adding things like hard mode banners is only for veteran dungeon and trials.

4) No. Rich’s comment was in response (and explicitly noted as such) to the fact that he and the rest of the development team are constantly asked about increased overland difficulty and have been for the last several years. It comes up, they examine it, and every time it’s a no. Not just because of the technical aspect but because it’s not what the active game population wants.

I cannot stress how much in-game data the developers have. It goes beyond just tallied numbers to being able to identify trafficked areas versus the seldom visited. It goes on and on what they have and it continually informs choices. They know a vet overland won’t accomplish anything.

[edited for baiting]

ke.sardenb14_ESO

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

ke.sardenb14_ESO wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

ke.sardenb14_ESO wrote: »

As a working adult, I understand there is a limit to what you can and can not put into a game, but the lack of content designed with endgame players in mind is slowly killing the trail and PvP community.
I don't think anyone is asking for overland to play like vMA or vVH(although I'd love it) but something akin to Craglorn. Something not that difficult, with options to challenge those interested in exploring.

Except that even today, several years after its introduction, Craglorn remains unplayed in a statistically significant way. It’s the least engaged zone by a wide margin outside of trials. Even though the content has been adjusted so that you don’t need groups players don’t do anything there despite incentives such as motifs. Players don’t even like hunting for skyshards there.

That says a lot. It says that difficult content is a turn off for the majority of players. They don’t just ignore it but avoid it. So it’s a waste of resources to develop a new functional difficulty standard that most players will avoid.

The content a game provides fosters the community that plays the game. When the game provides around 4-5 new hours of content that could be considered difficult a year, how likely is it for that game to retain players that value that that of content? And, if the game can't retain players that like more challenging content, how much engagement can be expected for the the challenging content already present? Now consider if a game provides 50-70 hours of simple content a year, how likely will the game be able to retain players that value that content?

Except you cant put a time value on hard content with ESO. If you were to play through the vet DLC dungeons each year AND you were very good you may experience 4 hours of playtime. But if you’re not a super apex player it’s much more time than that. And even if you are apex you have speed modes, no deaths, hard modes, trifectas. The multitudes of other small achievements.

And then there is the yearly trial. Vet trials aren’t done in one hour the first time, esp if you go in blind. And the same trifecta achievements? C’mon.

ESO provides more than 80 hours of story content alone per year between its two story DLCs. And veteran content has no time value. But if you’re able to do the hardest designed content in just 4-5 hours then what good is vet overland doing for you? It can’t be the same difficulty as a trial? That makes no sense.

So that is a bit of a disingenuous defense of the content. I guarantee to you a player with even a moderate amount of skill could complete all of the dungeons(dlc and base), before they could complete all of the factions, let alone the dlc zones. That is like telling someone a bathtub full of soup and a single apple are the equivalent amounts of food because you don't have teeth.

CP5

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

1. If it was a different instance there wouldn't be "kill stealing" nor would people not wanting extra mechanics see them. Look at literally every dungeon and trial, different instances have different rule sets, there isn't a case where one random player was looking to do a normal banished cells run getting thrown into a vet instance. Since even zones are already broken into separate shards (not everyone whose on the server in reapers march are in the same version of it), a "vet instance" would simply be a shard of the zone where like-minded players would face similar challenges, no impact on others and no magic 'server hit' since a zone instance is a zone instance, separate rules or no. So no, not a personal slider, just a different version of the zone.

2. Money and resources went into the companions system. VO for all their comments in the world, the ability to unlock and set up skills for them, their own unique type of gear. How many players are using that system? What was its end goal? Just as much weight can be thrown either way for or against companions being implemented as a vet overland. Some people would love either, some couldn't care less, some would use either for a short time and others would swear by them. Equally unnecessarily and both valid to be added to the game.

3. I want to enjoy questing again. When wrothgar came out I had done every side quest throughout the zone before hitting the main one and liked my time getting used to the area. Now though, I tried to do the western skyrim quest and when the pompous vampire stood on the cliff and said "You can ask me a question and I will ask you one in return" my first thought was "how many arrows can fit in your face."

The enemies have plot armor, they need to for the quest to work, but there isn't even the illusion of a threat anymore, so when each quest is filled with fights against inept opponents and the parts between fights are full of npcs harping on how doomed we all are, when I know that if I were to fight the big bad then and there it would all be over, the story loses what weight it could otherwise have and leaves me feeling like I'm just wasting my time cleaning up trash npcs couldn't be bothered to deal with.

4. As for Rich's comment, he was talking in regards to old gold and silver zones. These zones, and old craglorn, both were more challenging by health and damage alone, which can be replicated by gimping yourself but doesn't result in fights being more interesting. Combine that with the fact that silver zones were locked until you do one massive quest chain and gold requires the silver main quest to be done and it's no wonder those zones were quiet.

With the ability to go anywhere with One Tamriel combined with fights actually worth taking part in, a vet overland could encourage some people who only log in once a week for trials to log in more and actually enjoy the world rather than be bored by it.

1 ) You are NEVER getting separate overworld instances. That has NEVER been a thing and never will. [snip]

2) Are you endgame? Companions aren’t made for you. They’re designed for casuals. Designed for players to do overworld content without assistance from other players. Made to help solo world bosses and delves. Made to help players who roll as tanks and healers more quickly get overworld done instead of taking forever. Made to fill slots in normal dungeons. They are not for the hardcore player.

3) The story quests may seen thin (that’s your personal opinion) but due to the nature of the game it’s impossible to be made incredibly detailed or difficult. There’s essentially a rule in place that all overworld content needs to be able to be completed by all players with any build they make. Furthermore lore/immersion is priority and not combat. Adding things like hard mode banners is only for veteran dungeon and trials.

4) No. Rich’s comment was in response (and explicitly noted as such) to the fact that he and the rest of the development team are constantly asked about increased overland difficulty and have been for the last several years. It comes up, they examine it, and every time it’s a no. Not just because of the technical aspect but because it’s not what the active game population wants.

I cannot stress how much in-game data the developers have. It goes beyond just tallied numbers to being able to identify trafficked areas versus the seldom visited. It goes on and on what they have and it continually informs choices. They know a vet overland won’t accomplish anything.

When ESO first launched, every zone had 3 different instances. Bronze, for your base faction zones, silver for the next batch, and gold for the last. An AD character in Auridon would face low-level mobs, but an EP in Auridon would face mid-tier vet mobs. They do this still with every dungeon and trial as well, and separate Cyrodiil and Imperial City into different instances with different rules each.

Yes, companions aren't for end game content, just as a vet overland wouldn't be for everyone. As I said, both of those things would have those it is for and those who wouldn't care for it at all. We got companions and those required new systems, how could a vet overland, utilizing tech they already have, be much different?

"Lore/immersion is a priority, not combat." ESO is an action rpg with combat around every corner. How immersive is it to walk into a daedra's realm and face less resistance than you do patrolling the outer wall of Wayrest? I lose interest in doing quest when the ancient vampire lord whose been raising an army to take over the world can't even get off his monologue before gargling dirt. That breaks my immersion and interest in the story.

And lastly, if "it's not what the active game population wants," then we'll just keep seeing these threads emerge as passionate players for the game become disillusioned with the game over time as they feel content becomes increasingly disengaging and their passion to keep playing fails. Just like companions, even if it is a feature you personally wouldn't care for doesn't mean it shouldn't exist for those who would use it.

[edited to remove quote]

ke.sardenb14_ESO

@Iccotak
I could not agree more, I don't see why improving enemy actions, and tweaking the A.I. Once you have finished a single zone in this game, you have basically seem all of the mechanics you are going to get in overland.

kargen27

"When ESO first launched, every zone had 3 different instances. Bronze, for your base faction zones, silver for the next batch, and gold for the last. An AD character in Auridon would face low-level mobs, but an EP in Auridon would face mid-tier vet mobs."

That wasn't really done with mechanics though. Players characters were leveled different compared to the zones.

"They do this still with every dungeon and trial as well, and separate Cyrodiil and Imperial City into different instances with different rules each."
The difference being dungeons and trials are instanced for a limited number of players in a very small area. The mobs in Imperial City really are not any harder to kill than any other zone. The bosses are tougher on average. What makes Imperial City tough is the other players trying to kill you.
Cyrodiil the mobs are easy to kill when you get away from PvP objectives. Cyrodiil has one popular campaign and Imperial City outside of events is usually fairly empty. Only during events do we get separate instances.

"And lastly, if "it's not what the active game population wants," then we'll just keep seeing these threads emerge as passionate players..."
How do you define a passionate player? There are players that have all the homes in the game and are constantly decorating them. They also decorate other players homes for them. A friend is working towards his ninth master fisherman. He has several accounts on both PC and Playstation and likes creating new characters and doing the story lines. There are people that dedicate hours a day to searching for items to flip in guild stores. There was one player that slept on a bridge for months.

Companions didn't divide the population. A separate vet zone would and that isn't healthy for the game.

temerley

kargen27 wrote: »

Companions didn't divide the population. A separate vet zone would and that isn't healthy for the game.

Yeah, population looks really low and ZOS would not want them to look more barren by dividing the zones into normal/vet.

Dividing the zone also alienates the new/super casual people that won't get help on harder overland contents like world bosses.

Best solution IMO is a food/mythic to nerf yourself like a reverse LFG buff from under 50 dungeons.

PS. Believe it or not there are 1k+ cp people that are super casual/disabled/old people and don't want to stress with builds so even the current overland is very hard for them (IMO they are many hence the popularity of easy sorcs, 1-bar builds, and stuff).

Amottica

temerley wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Companions didn't divide the population. A separate vet zone would and that isn't healthy for the game.

Yeah, population looks really low and ZOS would not want them to look more barren by dividing the zones into normal/vet.

Dividing the zone also alienates the new/super casual people that won't get help on harder overland contents like world bosses.

Best solution IMO is a food/mythic to nerf yourself like a reverse LFG buff from under 50 dungeons.

PS. Believe it or not there are 1k+ cp people that are super casual/disabled/old people and don't want to stress with builds so even the current overland is very hard for them (IMO they are many hence the popularity of easy sorcs, 1-bar builds, and stuff).

The population seems very robust. It is not low at all.

colossalvoids

Amottica wrote: »

temerley wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Companions didn't divide the population. A separate vet zone would and that isn't healthy for the game.

Yeah, population looks really low and ZOS would not want them to look more barren by dividing the zones into normal/vet.

Dividing the zone also alienates the new/super casual people that won't get help on harder overland contents like world bosses.

Best solution IMO is a food/mythic to nerf yourself like a reverse LFG buff from under 50 dungeons.

PS. Believe it or not there are 1k+ cp people that are super casual/disabled/old people and don't want to stress with builds so even the current overland is very hard for them (IMO they are many hence the popularity of easy sorcs, 1-bar builds, and stuff).

The population seems very robust. It is not low at all.

Depends on what you call robust and what healthy population means to you. Good population for the devs isn't equal good population for players.

People would always argue that eso have low or high population based on content they do, how often they play and their overall involvement, even platform. People talking low pop are referring to old and invested players that we're playing every day becoming casual or leaving the game disbanding guilds, not participating in pvp, not creating builds etc. Pretty easy to assume so looking at any leaderboards or amount of guilds doing stuff, ESO logs and so on. People talking high population are generally talking about overland at event / launch times and marketing talks of 19mil players that eso never had as accounts aren't equal players and surely not even close to actual playing numbers.

Eso caters currently to people who bought eso just to check it out, getting accounts number high and hoping they'll get next expansion and couple dlcs later when they will return after couple of weeks but that doesn't mean that population that is always there should be penalised just because of that. If there's a demand for something new for endgame community or just players that are bored ZOS at the very least should rise their ear as those people are mostly the ones keeping eso community up running guilds, guides etc. and in any way promoting their product also helping those new players to become part of the active playerbase, encourage to move forward.

CP5

kargen27, they had separate overland zones that had the same mobs but at different levels. In dungeons we see that ZOS can not only tweak a mobs level but also what skills they have and what those skills do. That means, combined, they can have a different overland rule set with mobs that have skills swapped out with others, allowing something like this to exist. Overland zones are just like dungeons and trials, only with a higher player cap.

Both for you and temerley, think of the population situation this way. You have 8 instances of Reapers, each one with 80 players (for keeping the math easy). If 10 players in each instance wanted a vet overland they would get pooled into one instance with 80 players, leaving the other 8 zones with 70 people each. If you're really particular, take 70 from one of those instances, spread them around the rest, and you end up with 8 zones with 80 people in them just like before, just with people who are interested in doing harder content together in that one zone not enforcing their version of the game onto others.

As for casual people not getting help on harder content, plenty of people also hate when a higher level player comes in and kills a boss from under them. It honestly shouldn't be expected for an experienced player to come in and 'carry' an encounter, plenty of people would still be in the regular instance, and you wouldn't be any less free to group up with them after such a change were implemented.

Vhozek

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It doesn't matter if I go out with no gear and only punch mobs to death, the fact that the enemy doesn't change from me doing this, and they remain so basic and underwhelming to fight, that still makes the fight dull and forgettable no matter how long I drag the fight out for.

That's because they are basic mobs that are part of the base game, not veteran trial bosses.

Imagine taking all the action out of an action based MMO RPG

Vhozek

If ZoS increases the overworld difficulty, this opens up a good window of opportunity to advertise companions. The game is already easy, you added companions on top of that, why not make it harder now? Buff companion damage or HP if it's a tank. Companions legit fix this issue for anyone who thinks it's too hard, the companions just need to be GOOD.

I proposed the idea of companions like 3 years ago. I said add companions, increase difficulty, have mobs target companions first. The reason I proposed this is because many people were complaining that at the start of the game's release they had to group up with people to even kill a mudcrab, so now you have a permanent group member with companion. I heard there's 2 of them as well but idk, I don't use them and I don't care.
Oh and there's threads talking about a 3rd damn companion. How about that?

The fact that I don't care about companions but I go as far as to propose them should tell you I do care about the game, [snip]. I'm dead serious about topics about this game. I want it to be good.

[edited for baiting]

Vhozek

Sevn wrote: »

[snip]

Sure, you can say that, but I doubt people trying to get you to buy their product can say that or should allow you to even say that. The thing is that changes are made to keep people. Sure, they can't please EVERYBODY, but it's not like people are telling them to shut off the servers and make it a single player game. Difficulty is an easy subject and it directly affects gameplay, especially action based gameplay.

[edited for baiting]

Hallothiel

You say you want the game to be good?

Define ‘good’ - as it seems you want the game to be what *you* think should be good.

And that would be very different for all players. I like the game as it is, I think overland is ‘good’ as it is - why does your version of ‘good’ take precedence over mine?

And those arguing for a vet overland have still not answered WHERE the dev time & resources & expenses will come from - it has been stated that it is not as simple as flicking a switch. But you seem to just ignore that.

Seriously, do you not think if this was a viable proposal, that would increase player numbers & engagement that they would have done it already?!

(Hint: they did; it was a disaster & led to One Tamriel)

SilverBride

Vhozek wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It doesn't matter if I go out with no gear and only punch mobs to death, the fact that the enemy doesn't change from me doing this, and they remain so basic and underwhelming to fight, that still makes the fight dull and forgettable no matter how long I drag the fight out for.

That's because they are basic mobs that are part of the base game, not veteran trial bosses.

Imagine taking all the action out of an action based MMO RPG

Dungeons, trials and arenas are nothing but action so there is plenty of that to be had. Although I've always considered Elder Scrolls more story based.

And what about crafting and writs and housing and roleplaying? These activities aren't "action" but are part of a lot of MMORPG's, which by the way doesn't contain an A for action.

Vhozek

Hallothiel wrote: »

You say you want the game to be good?

Define ‘good’ - as it seems you want the game to be what *you* think should be good.

And that would be very different for all players. I like the game as it is, I think overland is ‘good’ as it is - why does your version of ‘good’ take precedence over mine?

And those arguing for a vet overland have still not answered WHERE the dev time & resources & expenses will come from - it has been stated that it is not as simple as flicking a switch. But you seem to just ignore that.

Seriously, do you not think if this was a viable proposal, that would increase player numbers & engagement that they would have done it already?!

(Hint: they did; it was a disaster & led to One Tamriel)

Sure, I'll define "good".
I want things in the world to fit their role in the world.
Do you think a bunch of goblins in their faction military outfit look good patroling a whole section of a zone and losing to a naked man smacking them with his bare hands? The game provides you with the tools to not look like a naked man smacking goblins around, but given that you could ignore all these tools, that just means either what you got is absolute garbage because you could just be a naked man, or established goblin forces shouldn't be patroling a whole section if they lose to a naked man or to equipment equivalent of a naked man.

Hallothiel

But you do not appreciate that for a lot of players, they would struggle to play naked. [snip] And the demand for vet/harder overland is from a very very small minority of players.

[edited for baiting]

SilverBride

I still don't understand why a player who has developed their character for veteran end game content wants to spend their game time in overland. That's like earning a PhD in astrophysics then taking a job at a fast food restaurant.

Vhozek

SilverBride wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It doesn't matter if I go out with no gear and only punch mobs to death, the fact that the enemy doesn't change from me doing this, and they remain so basic and underwhelming to fight, that still makes the fight dull and forgettable no matter how long I drag the fight out for.

That's because they are basic mobs that are part of the base game, not veteran trial bosses.

Imagine taking all the action out of an action based MMO RPG

Dungeons, trials and arenas are nothing but action so there is plenty of that to be had. Although I've always considered Elder Scrolls more story based.

And what about crafting and writs and housing and roleplaying? These activities aren't "action" but are part of a lot of MMORPG's, which by the way doesn't contain an A for action.

The first thing I do in MMOs is roam the world and fight mobs in my way of finding super rare items. Finding a rare item means nothing if it took no effort and the game is basically narrowed down to a slot machine cause I only have to deal with the rarity RNG. When does my playstyle become valid? My secondary playstyle is having epic battles with mobs. I can't do anything in this game other than skip mobs and loot a chest if the incentive to have fun fighting something isn't there. I do not want to make too many comparisons but it's almost necessary. In New World, I get all of these things. I'm getting my ass kicked left and right by mobs and makes exploring incredible EVEN after I already got the hang of everything to do with combat and even after I, for the first time in my life, spent HOURS gathering and crafting good gear. Now, sure, you could tell me to just stick to that game, but this is temporary for me at least until ESO gets better. The questing sucks in there, little to no voice acting, lack of character options and class customization. It's basically almost as if they said "ESO PvE sucks, lets make a game that adds ESO PvE but if it was good" and that's enough for me to switch indefinitely. Well, until ESO is fixed. If ESO grabs this PvE combat, not necessarily 1:1, I'm staying for life. There's nothing else I would need except maybe better resource gathering cause NW kinda too good on that department, but I wouldn't want it to copy NW cause I know that's impossible at this point.
There's just no incentive for me to play this game other than lore which I can just read or watch a letsplay. Why would I not just do that and stick to another game at the same time?

The fact that SO many people don't seem to mind the difficulty there, tells me you guys are wrong. I have asked many times if anyone has trouble with the difficulty and nobody says yes. You can say "it's not the same game though" as much as you want, but both are action based MMOs and ESO lets you spam the hell out of your skills and you rarely ever get staggered. There's legit no excuse, especially now with companions. I have no clue what the counter arguments are about against higher overland difficulty. To me, those arguments don't exist and I'm convinced some people are just trying to keep this a "login and take free stuff" game when it could be much more than that.

Vhozek

Hallothiel wrote: »

But you do not appreciate that for a lot of players, they would struggle to play naked. [snip] And the demand for vet/harder overland is from a very very small minority of players.

Bro... it's not even hard to play naked. [snip] I'm not trying to be rude here, but I've approached it in so many different ways and I'm convinced the PvE combat is just NOT good. [snip]

[edited for baiting & to remove quote]

Vhozek

SilverBride wrote: »

I still don't understand why a player who has developed their character for veteran end game content wants to spend their game time in overland. That's like earning a PhD in astrophysics then taking a job at a fast food restaurant.

I don't develop my character. If there was a way to record stats about my life, I would show you just how many characters I have deleted as soon as I reach max level with them. I delete SO many characters and restart them over. Same build, different approach to combat. I have deleted and restarted an unimaginable amount of times. I have said it before in OLD af threads. People have given me flack for even mentioning it.
I have over 2000 hours of just deleting characters and restarting. It is my second most played game ever. First is LoL cause I started a really long time ago.
I basically play this game like a merchant. I just hunt for rare items and explore. Trash PvE just makes the whole game a slot machine.

SilverBride

Vhozek wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I still don't understand why a player who has developed their character for veteran end game content wants to spend their game time in overland. That's like earning a PhD in astrophysics then taking a job at a fast food restaurant.

I don't develop my character. If there was a way to record stats about my life, I would show you just how many characters I have deleted as soon as I reach max level with them. I delete SO many characters and restart them over. Same build, different approach to combat. I have deleted and restarted an unimaginable amount of times.

If you are only playing new characters up to max level (level 50 or CP3600?) and never experiencing any other content then of course it will become less exciting over time. Especially if you are using the same build, which by now you would be very adept at. But this isn't the way most people play.

Vhozek

SilverBride wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I still don't understand why a player who has developed their character for veteran end game content wants to spend their game time in overland. That's like earning a PhD in astrophysics then taking a job at a fast food restaurant.

I don't develop my character. If there was a way to record stats about my life, I would show you just how many characters I have deleted as soon as I reach max level with them. I delete SO many characters and restart them over. Same build, different approach to combat. I have deleted and restarted an unimaginable amount of times.

If you are only playing new characters up to max level (level 50 or CP3600?) and never experiencing any other content then of course it will become less exciting over time. Especially if you are using the same build, which by now you would be very adapt at.

You don't get it. I have no problem with replaying the same exact build for the 10th million time. I played Trundle in LoL for 10 years and I still do. It's the only character I play. It's about the PvE.

SilverBride

Vhozek wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I still don't understand why a player who has developed their character for veteran end game content wants to spend their game time in overland. That's like earning a PhD in astrophysics then taking a job at a fast food restaurant.

I don't develop my character. If there was a way to record stats about my life, I would show you just how many characters I have deleted as soon as I reach max level with them. I delete SO many characters and restart them over. Same build, different approach to combat. I have deleted and restarted an unimaginable amount of times.

If you are only playing new characters up to max level (level 50 or CP3600?) and never experiencing any other content then of course it will become less exciting over time. Especially if you are using the same build, which by now you would be very adapt at.

You don't get it. I have no problem with replaying the same exact build for the 10th million time. I played Trundle in LoL for 10 years and I still do. It's the only character I play. It's about the PvE.

I do get it. You enjoy replaying overland only on new characters. Nothing wrong with that. But that is not how most play, and is not a reason to make such a drastic change to the game that most players do not want.