800k people don't seem to mind difficult overworld

Hallothiel

@AlexanderDeLarge

[snip]

Was just bland stuff about competition being good - which it can be - but in no way supported your opinion or detracted from what has been quoted by others.

[edited for rude comment]

CP5

Girl_Number8 wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

We will soon have the armory system. Make an overland questing build without cp and poor gear. There you go, an optional harder overland.

Mobs will hit harder and appear to have more hp.

Doesn’t fix the problem- many of us have tried this solution and as we’ve pointed out; they still use basic bare minimum mechanics which they overly telegraph.

Even if you have green gear , with a mix match of random stuff, and no CP - if you know the basic gameplay it is a cakewalk.

Self Nerfing is not, nor will it ever be an effective solution.

“Self Nerfing is not, nor will it ever be an effective solution”

[snip]

Start an alt account no help from you main or guilds.

Be a penniless vamp stage 4 with no passives or skills. Wear a costume and equip no gear. Be sure to not use any food or pots while playing. Don’t slot any healing skills or weapons skills.

Just use your fists and single target class abilities.... delete your character before level 27, rinse repeat. No Necros or Wardens.

I mean you’re not doing any challenging content that is ESO’ hardmode. If that was the case, there wouldn’t be the same few people harping on the dead horsey in identical threads.

Or just go play a game that is much harder with PvP in overland and use ESO to relax.

Changing overland has never been the number 1 request. The real number 1 request has been fixing the games performance....

Should I chug damage health potions on cooldown and jump into every single red aoe I see as well? That isn't challenging, that isn't an engaging fight to work around. That's intentionally finding the quickest way to reduce my own health to 0 as fast as possible, not a way to make the game more enjoyable. If <using skills> or <wearing armor> are already a bar that if overcome trivializes overlands difficulty and makes it so disengaging that the only solution is to off yourself, there's an issue.

And again to everyone harping on how this would divide the player base too much.

1. Zones are already broken into shards, so you don't even see everyone whose in a zone unless it is a particularly dead one in which case this changes nothing.
2. If this choice would be so popular that this is an issue, then clearly it is something worth making.

[edited to remove quote]

Hallothiel

And again to everyone harping on how this would divide the player base too much.

1. Zones are already broken into shards, so you don't even see everyone whose in a zone unless it is a particularly dead one in which case this changes nothing.
2. If this choice would be so popular that this is an issue, then clearly it is something worth making.

There may be different instances, but the player base is still mixed. New players can call upon more experienced for help with stuff that they might find difficult (& please do understand that not all players are good at this game, but nonetheless enjoy playing). This is a good thing. A separate vet instance would change that, and the feel of the game.

And its not about it being so popular, it’s about time & money being spent on this which is then used by a very few players, who would not doubt still be complaining after they got used to it.

As I have said before, if this was a profitable thing to do, it would have been done by now.

CP5

Hallothiel wrote: »

And again to everyone harping on how this would divide the player base too much.

1. Zones are already broken into shards, so you don't even see everyone whose in a zone unless it is a particularly dead one in which case this changes nothing.
2. If this choice would be so popular that this is an issue, then clearly it is something worth making.

There may be different instances, but the player base is still mixed. New players can call upon more experienced for help with stuff that they might find difficult (& please do understand that not all players are good at this game, but nonetheless enjoy playing). This is a good thing. A separate vet instance would change that, and the feel of the game.

And its not about it being so popular, it’s about time & money being spent on this which is then used by a very few players, who would not doubt still be complaining after they got used to it.

As I have said before, if this was a profitable thing to do, it would have been done by now.

So, first this says that it is the job of experienced players to sit in town waiting to be called on to help, rather than doing content they enjoy. In my raids many players only log in once a week to raid and nothing else. They aren't sitting in town waiting to help those in need, they're gone. This could offer them a reason to even log in.

And you can't have it both ways. Either the idea is so popular it compromises the 'feel of the game' by shifting so many players, then that large player pool deserves to have content they would enjoy, and if it would only be of use to a small player pool then it wouldn't impact the game feel and you wouldn't notice anything different. See the issue here?

SilverBride

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

Either we're a vocal minority and no one actually wants veteran overland or it's implementation is so dangerous it would split the community and leave the normal overland empty because everyone would migrate over.

It can't be both.

When asked how it would hurt other players if there was an optional veteran overland we have explained that IF there was an optional overland and IF it were actually used by very many players THEN it would cause a split in the playerbase. That is not saying we believe that it will ever happen because it's a very small minority who want this, but just explains why it would be bad for the game IF it did.

But this will never be an issue because there is too small a number who want this to make it feasible in the first place.

Hallothiel

So, first this says that it is the job of experienced players to sit in town waiting to be called on to help, rather than doing content they enjoy. In my raids many players only log in once a week to raid and nothing else. They aren't sitting in town waiting to help those in need, they're gone. This could offer them a reason to even log in.

Where did I say this?

And I can give anecdotal ‘data’ too. I know of raid-only players who have barely done any overland or quests as it doesn’t interest them. Same with pvp. And then I know lots of players that do all things, and are out in overland & happy to help.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

Either we're a vocal minority and no one actually wants veteran overland or it's implementation is so dangerous it would split the community and leave the normal overland empty because everyone would migrate over.

It can't be both.

When asked how it would hurt other players if there was an optional veteran overland we have explained that IF there was an optional overland and IF it were actually used by very many players THEN it would cause a split in the playerbase. That is not saying we believe that it will ever happen because it's a very small minority who want this, but just explains why it would be bad for the game IF it did.

But this will never be an issue because there is too small a number who want this to make it feasible in the first place.

If that's the case, then why bring it up as an issue unless it is something you were worried? That others may enjoy content that you have no interest in.

New players can call upon more experienced for help with stuff that they might find difficult. This is a good thing. A separate vet instance would change that, and the feel of the game.

Those experienced players are either not staying in game, or are afk in town waiting to group up for content. How is it a bad thing if they were able to go somewhere and do something they enjoy, unless as you said, it is more important for them to sit on standby to aid others rather than play the game for themselves?

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

If that's the case, then why bring it up as an issue unless it is something you were worried? That others may enjoy content that you have no interest in.

We don't keep bringing it up, others do, and we have been repeatedly asked to explain how it would hurt others. This is one of the biggest ways it would. But I reiterate, this isn't going to happen anyway.

SilverBride

Amottica wrote: »

Someone linked the video in this thread and gave the time stamp for the discussion. I suggest scrolling back and watching his comments.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s
1:48:00 through 1:51:11

This stream is from a little over a month ago. Below is a written transcript of Rich Lambert's entire comments:

Can we get a vet mode for delves and quests? Uh, so we had that ... at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out. We put the challenge into World Bosses, and into solo Arenas, and into Dungeons and Trials.

[Speaks about skyshards then returns to the topic.]

People didn't do it because they had to go through their own alliance first? That's not actually true. A ton of people completed their own alliance storylines to get to silver and gold. A ton of people did. People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff.

I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things. And so that was why we did what we did and said story is soloable and quick path will always be soloable and if you want the extra challenge you can go seek out other things to challenge you.

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

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

Would it be an option just to give people the choice? It is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a TON of work and then as Lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you’re not going to get anything out of it why do it? The satisfaction's there sure but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time.

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

CP5

Silver, for your quote to me about how this could "hurt" some players by allowing others to do content they enjoy seems selfish at best, and it would probably be useful to just admit that if this is a concern then it is basically saying "these players can't have x because they should be helping other players instead." These players who could enjoy this content either log out when not doing group content or just stand afk in town.

As for your quote from the twitch stream. Again notice, silver and gold zones plus old craglorn. Zones whose difficulty came from just giving mobs more health and damage. That doesn't solve the issue of mobs being uninteresting to fight, and is identical to the difficulty players can self impose by using poor gear. Those zones didn't address issues like "why is that tank mob flying off to space and leaving their allies defenseless" or "why is that conjurer summoning a bubble to fight me?" Enemies like that aren't worth the time to fight, no matter how much health you give them or how much damage they do, mobs that waste their own time are handing victories to players in the least satisfying way possible.

cptqrk

SilverBride wrote: »

But this will never be an issue because there is too small a number who want this to make it feasible in the first place.

So you are admitting that there are not enough people that actually want a toggle to warrant it to be a concern.

Too small a number to effect over world means too small a number to waste resources to make it happen.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

Silver, for your quote to me about how this could "hurt" some players by allowing others to do content they enjoy seems selfish at best, and it would probably be useful to just admit that if this is a concern then it is basically saying "these players can't have x because they should be helping other players instead." These players who could enjoy this content either log out when not doing group content or just stand afk in town.

I never said players should stand in town waiting to help others. All I said was that when someone asks in zone for help with World Bosses others come, and that splitting the playerbase would be bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

As for your quote from the twitch stream. Again notice, silver and gold zones plus old craglorn.

Rich Lambert felt these were relevant enough to mention when asked about veteran overland today. If anyone knows what is relevant to this discussion, it's Rich.

CP5 wrote: »

That doesn't solve the issue of mobs being uninteresting to fight

That is a subjective opinion, not a fact. Many of us find overland mobs fine just as they are. It is not reasonable to expect every single fight in game to be an epic battle.

CP5

Silver, zones are already split depending on how many players are trying to enter them. Populated zones have several instances running, and dead zones are dead anyway. Reallocating which instance players are in isn't going to decimate the zone populations.

Rich's comment was made implying that he isn't addressing the real concern players have, since that comment implies he thinks players are asking for the old vet zones back, which isn't the case.

And if you find overland mobs fine, which is fine in and of itself, care to explain what the bubble some conjurers summon actually does? I shouldn't be asking what an attack does years into the game after letting it deliberately hit me. If enemies are going to have that little impact on a fight, they may as well not exist.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

Silver, zones are already split depending on how many players are trying to enter them. Populated zones have several instances running, and dead zones are dead anyway. Reallocating which instance players are in isn't going to decimate the zone populations.

Rich's comment was made implying that he isn't addressing the real concern players have, since that comment implies he thinks players are asking for the old vet zones back, which isn't the case.

And if you find overland mobs fine, which is fine in and of itself, care to explain what the bubble some conjurers summon actually does? I shouldn't be asking what an attack does years into the game after letting it deliberately hit me. If enemies are going to have that little impact on a fight, they may as well not exist.

The separate instances are because it's a megaserver and is not the same thing at all to a completely separate veteran overland.

Rich never once said or implied that players are asking for the old vet zones back, but used them to show that a HUGE portion of the playerbase don't want difficult story.

I don't know what a conjurer's bubble has to do with any of this, but why any mob uses any mechanic has nothing to do with this topic.

Jeffrey530

CP5 wrote: »

Rich's comment was made implying that he isn't addressing the real concern players have, since that comment implies he thinks players are asking for the old vet zones back, which isn't the case.

Lol in no way he implied that, [snip]

[edited for baiting]

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

Silver, zones are already split depending on how many players are trying to enter them. Populated zones have several instances running, and dead zones are dead anyway. Reallocating which instance players are in isn't going to decimate the zone populations.

Rich's comment was made implying that he isn't addressing the real concern players have, since that comment implies he thinks players are asking for the old vet zones back, which isn't the case.

And if you find overland mobs fine, which is fine in and of itself, care to explain what the bubble some conjurers summon actually does? I shouldn't be asking what an attack does years into the game after letting it deliberately hit me. If enemies are going to have that little impact on a fight, they may as well not exist.

The separate instances are because it's a megaserver and is not the same thing at all to a completely separate veteran overland.

Rich never once said or implied that players are asking for the old vet zones back, but used them to show that a HUGE portion of the playerbase don't want difficult story.

I don't know what a conjurer's bubble has to do with any of this, but why any mob uses any mechanic has nothing to do with this topic.

That has everything to do with the topic. I can self nerf all I want, doesn't change the fact that worthless enemies are a waste of time to fight, and make quest feel anticlimactic since fights are handed out for free most of the time. And you missed the point about zone instancing. Since players are already split between instances, how 'dreadful' would the impact be if people who wanted a harder overland were grouped together while everyone else was left untouched with things remaining as is?

Hallothiel

Because it would take time & resources to implement & maintain. Which would be better spent elsewhere in the game.

Do you have no concept of the cost of this? Or the coding involved? This is a business, run for profit, not to be ‘nice’.

CP5

Hallothiel wrote: »

Because it would take time & resources to implement & maintain. Which would be better spent elsewhere in the game.

Do you have no concept of the cost of this? Or the coding involved? This is a business, run for profit, not to be ‘nice’.

Took time and resources to make companions. Not everyone uses them. Was that a waste? I barely use mine, but I would say no. Trials take time and effort, and pvp'ers don't touch them. Are those a waste? No piece of content has to be for everyone, and clearly by these threads continuing there is an interest in this content to exist. And hey, if they did make it, all of their older content players never touched may actually get played.

Read that last line as "I've not bothered to play the skyrim story through since 2 quest in I already saw how it was going to end and was bored by the impending doom of the world."

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't know what a conjurer's bubble has to do with any of this, but why any mob uses any mechanic has nothing to do with this topic.

That has everything to do with the topic. I can self nerf all I want, doesn't change the fact that worthless enemies are a waste of time to fight, and make quest feel anticlimactic since fights are handed out for free most of the time. And you missed the point about zone instancing. Since players are already split between instances, how 'dreadful' would the impact be if people who wanted a harder overland were grouped together while everyone else was left untouched with things remaining as is?

It is an opinion, not a fact, that overland enemies are worthless and a waste of time. And I already explained why splitting the playerbase is bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

...and clearly by these threads continuing there is an interest in this content to exist.

This is a case of a vocal minority repeatedly asking for something they want. There is some interesting information out there on vocal minority and silent majority that shed some light on this, particularly when it applies to gaming.

CP5

"Splitting the player base." Again, zones are already doing this, and some of the players who would enjoy this content don't spend much time in the game as is, and this would encourage them to participate more. So which is it, an idea for too few players to matter, or for too many players, and it would split the player base?

Callosum

SilverBride wrote: »

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

Either we're a vocal minority and no one actually wants veteran overland or it's implementation is so dangerous it would split the community and leave the normal overland empty because everyone would migrate over.

It can't be both.

When asked how it would hurt other players if there was an optional veteran overland we have explained that IF there was an optional overland and IF it were actually used by very many players THEN it would cause a split in the playerbase. That is not saying we believe that it will ever happen because it's a very small minority who want this, but just explains why it would be bad for the game IF it did.

But this will never be an issue because there is too small a number who want this to make it feasible in the first place.

One thing you keep on telling everyone in these threads is that we are "very small minority". I don't really think that you actually have any idea whether this is true or not. Just looking a recent poll it seems to be quite even on this forum and even if this is a specific selection of the playersbase "a very small minority" is probably not true after all.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/583436/what-type-of-overland-would-you-prefer/p1

Elsonso

Callosum wrote: »

One thing you keep on telling everyone in these threads is that we are "very small minority". I don't really think that you actually have any idea whether this is true or not. Just looking a recent poll it seems to be quite even on this forum and even if this is a specific selection of the playersbase "a very small minority" is probably not true after all.

We, as players, do not know. However, the information I get from the developers in various streams leads me to believe that it is a minority. Even if it was not, ZOS has apparently made their decision about overland and my impression is that it would take a significant majority to reverse that.

They have also mentioned that the forum population is a definite minority, and also an echo chamber where people do tend to sit and agree with each other (just not always about the same things). Polls in here are for entertainment, not for decision making purposes.

trackdemon5512

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't know what a conjurer's bubble has to do with any of this, but why any mob uses any mechanic has nothing to do with this topic.

That has everything to do with the topic. I can self nerf all I want, doesn't change the fact that worthless enemies are a waste of time to fight, and make quest feel anticlimactic since fights are handed out for free most of the time. And you missed the point about zone instancing. Since players are already split between instances, how 'dreadful' would the impact be if people who wanted a harder overland were grouped together while everyone else was left untouched with things remaining as is?

It is an opinion, not a fact, that overland enemies are worthless and a waste of time. And I already explained why splitting the playerbase is bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

...and clearly by these threads continuing there is an interest in this content to exist.

This is a case of a vocal minority repeatedly asking for something they want. There is some interesting information out there on vocal minority and silent majority that shed some light on this, particularly when it applies to gaming.

Indeed the case of the vocal minority. Despite this forum topic going on for 20+ pages many of the posts within are by the same people. And going back a few years it also becomes quite clear that many of the same people are the ones to bring up this topic over and over and over again.

Callosum

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't know what a conjurer's bubble has to do with any of this, but why any mob uses any mechanic has nothing to do with this topic.

That has everything to do with the topic. I can self nerf all I want, doesn't change the fact that worthless enemies are a waste of time to fight, and make quest feel anticlimactic since fights are handed out for free most of the time. And you missed the point about zone instancing. Since players are already split between instances, how 'dreadful' would the impact be if people who wanted a harder overland were grouped together while everyone else was left untouched with things remaining as is?

It is an opinion, not a fact, that overland enemies are worthless and a waste of time. And I already explained why splitting the playerbase is bad for the game.

CP5 wrote: »

...and clearly by these threads continuing there is an interest in this content to exist.

This is a case of a vocal minority repeatedly asking for something they want. There is some interesting information out there on vocal minority and silent majority that shed some light on this, particularly when it applies to gaming.

Indeed the case of the vocal minority. Despite this forum topic going on for 20+ pages many of the posts within are by the same people. And going back a few years it also becomes quite clear that many of the same people are the ones to bring up this topic over and over and over again.

It's the same vocal minority who argue against it everytime. [snip]

[edited for naming-and-shaming]

SilverBride

Callosum wrote: »

One thing you keep on telling everyone in these threads is that we are "very small minority". I don't really think that you actually have any idea whether this is true or not.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

CP5

Doesn't change the fact that he clearly stated people didn't like "the old gold and silver zones" when that isn't the point.

Callosum

SilverBride wrote: »

Callosum wrote: »

One thing you keep on telling everyone in these threads is that we are "very small minority". I don't really think that you actually have any idea whether this is true or not.

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

"A LOT"

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

Doesn't change the fact that he clearly stated people didn't like "the old gold and silver zones" when that isn't the point.

Rich never once called them the "old" Silver and Gold zones, or indicated that this is what he thought posters were asking for.

Callosum wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

"I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things." - Rich Lambert

"A LOT"

Yes a LOT of players like harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion do not.

CP5

"Uh, so we had that ... at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out."

Right here, he references the silver and gold zones.

Parasaurolophus

It is an opinion, not a fact, that overland enemies are worthless and a waste of time. And I already explained why splitting the playerbase is bad for the game.

And I explained too.

Locations are already divided by mirrors. When there are too many people in one location, the game creates another instance for the players to get into. Now imagine that we have a new dlc release and at the moment there are 4 instances of the location, filled with 200 players each (in fact, it is not known for certain how many players can fit one instance of the location in eso). Now let's imagine we have a version of vet. overlend for the new dlc. Some of the players are there now. Now we have 3 normal instances and 1 veteran, or 2/2. Does not matter. One mirror can only accommodate a limited number of players. You argue that a highpopulation location attracts new players, like all players are playing overland. But this is not so ... High-end players, having completed all the quests of the new dlc, as well as having received all the achievements (all this takes me no more than a week), then leave the location, returning their character back to Vivec for crafting dailys. Ta Daaam! The End! There is absolutely no point in returning to the location, there are no activities that would be attractive to the high-end player.