800k people don't seem to mind difficult overworld

trackdemon5512

Nanfoodle wrote: »

New World has everyone at the same place. New to the world and no progression on their character. I can say ESO when starting out has some real challenges. It's fun to play just Ike New World. In a year or so, that game will be the same as ESO. Top end players will find the world easy. How do you scale the open world for people with 1500cp and someone with 160cp and mak the progression seem meaningful? I'm sure Zeni would love to know that answer.

Easy. You scale the world to either lvl 50 or CP160. You negate CP or you adhere to the gear cap. That’s what is done now. Anything beyond that is the player optionally making things easier for themselves. It’s their choice.

Pre CP System 2.0 you still received stat attribute bonuses up to CP300. Those were rolled in to the base levels with the new system and so you reach maximum natural attribute power at lvl 50. Anything beyond is like I said, you making things easier for yourself.

WhyMustItBe

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

You're asking for a challenge that the vast majority of the game nor the game developers care for. And despite that being pointed out you continue to insist that it should be done.

I still don't see how what you are saying relates to the story "Flowers for Algernon" but we can just table that.

[snip] (I also haven't seen any source to substantiate your continued claim of "most" people not wanting something, or the devs saying anything about it, but I'll just ignore that too for now.)

[snip]
[edited for baiting]

tonyblack

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

tonyblack wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

People ask for harder overland, but no comes up with a viable way to make it harder for some and leave it the same for others in the same game world. And, outside of Mechanics, which can't be instanced in overland, the only viable way is to turn NPCs into Damage Sponges. Yawn.

Of course, people could carry around a set of gimp gear to use in the overland. Its just like carrying different sets for Trials and Vet Dungeons. You know, gearing for content....

Of course that last statement always sets peoples heads on fire. I will now sit back and toast some marshmallows.

Or you know, wear your maxed gear for cheese. And then with the upcoming armory system instantly switch out your entire CP, skills, and gear for a dumbed down gimped load out for free.

What a solution being freely implemented lol. And completely negates the need for a damage slider.

How is gimping yourself thus nullifying all progress you made in this game a solution? And how it would make it suddenly fun experience? It’s exactly opposite why I and many other players play RPGs in the first place where researching your character and creating optimized build is defining part of experience. [snip] Not to mention no one in their right mind would use 1 of 2 free slots of new armory to make yourself useless in combat.

[Edited for Baiting]

Adding a difficulty slider is handicapping yourself. They can’t make the entire world more difficult for everyone as that’s unfair to those rising up the ladder. The developers can’t make enemies that scale in damage output of every single member of a PVE instance. Do you understand how many server checks that would require?

So handicapping aka gimping players is the only way to go via either gear, attributes, food, etc. And gear sets with their bonuses and procs make things easier for players. Playing without set bonuses is the most natural state.

Anyone arguing that progression is having gold gear and full five piece sets is wrong. Skill progression is learning how to play and react to mechanics. Improving gear/acquiring it doesn’t require skill progression as everything can be farmed, crafted, improved, and augmented through grinding or gold. The advantages of perfected vs imperfect trial sets offer little if any advantage and those can be easily acquired without actual skill.

You HAVE to handicap yourself for a harder experience. There is no way around that as the game can’t be made harder without ruining the experience for everyone else. Doing so is counterintuitive to being inclusive.

And if the game already has options for doing so and players refuse to handicap themselves for a challenge then why should the developers make a system that even the hardcore aren’t likely to use let along the general populace?

They can make entire world difficult or certain parts of it. Vet instances do exist in this game.
So saying others to gimp themselves is lazy solution that do not solve anything other than shutting discussion because you personally not interested in discussing or suggesting anything constructive that would make it fun for everyone.
And you second point completely nullify your first suggestion entirely since if I can’t lose skill when I change my golden sets then how am I supposed to challenge myself and have fun in content that designed around players with no idea how to play this game? All quest mobs and bosses can be beaten in seconds with jab spam on level 1 character with no cp without any need for block, dodge or interrupts. So it’s not require any skill no matter how hard I’ll decide to nerf myself.

Sylvermynx

I will state, once again, that I would certainly not cavil at an option for players to choose harder difficulty. My caveat remains though: I'm not willing to trust that it would be added as completely optional. Without (I hope) getting whacked for "bashing" - I've dealt with enough game developers since the mid-80s that I have a very jaundiced view of any of them getting "optionally harder difficulty" anywhere close to right.

Iccotak

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

tonyblack wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

People ask for harder overland, but no comes up with a viable way to make it harder for some and leave it the same for others in the same game world. And, outside of Mechanics, which can't be instanced in overland, the only viable way is to turn NPCs into Damage Sponges. Yawn.

Of course, people could carry around a set of gimp gear to use in the overland. Its just like carrying different sets for Trials and Vet Dungeons. You know, gearing for content....

Of course that last statement always sets peoples heads on fire. I will now sit back and toast some marshmallows.

Or you know, wear your maxed gear for cheese. And then with the upcoming armory system instantly switch out your entire CP, skills, and gear for a dumbed down gimped load out for free.

What a solution being freely implemented lol. And completely negates the need for a damage slider.

How is gimping yourself thus nullifying all progress you made in this game a solution? And how it would make it suddenly fun experience? It’s exactly opposite why I and many other players play RPGs in the first place where researching your character and creating optimized build is defining part of experience. [snip] Not to mention no one in their right mind would use 1 of 2 free slots of new armory to make yourself useless in combat.

[Edited for Baiting]

Adding a difficulty slider is handicapping yourself. They can’t make the entire world more difficult for everyone as that’s unfair to those rising up the ladder. The developers can’t make enemies that scale in damage output of every single member of a PVE instance. Do you understand how many server checks that would require?

So handicapping aka gimping players is the only way to go via either gear, attributes, food, etc. And gear sets with their bonuses and procs make things easier for players. Playing without set bonuses is the most natural state.

Anyone arguing that progression is having gold gear and full five piece sets is wrong. Skill progression is learning how to play and react to mechanics. Improving gear/acquiring it doesn’t require skill progression as everything can be farmed, crafted, improved, and augmented through grinding or gold. The advantages of perfected vs imperfect trial sets offer little if any advantage and those can be easily acquired without actual skill.

You HAVE to handicap yourself for a harder experience. There is no way around that as the game can’t be made harder without ruining the experience for everyone else. Doing so is counterintuitive to being inclusive.

And if the game already has options for doing so and players refuse to handicap themselves for a challenge then why should the developers make a system that even the hardcore aren’t likely to use let along the general populace?

Except the main complaint that people have had is the lack of mechanics

To quote my point earlier.

Look at Skyrim, enemy speed is close to player speed - so increasing/decreasing their damage for difficulty makes sense.

But in ESO enemies are very slow. Which is why increasing their hp/damage doesn’t solve the problem. Because outmaneuvering them is incredibly easy. Regardless of gear & CP.

In order to make the gameplay engaging enemies at the very least would need to be much faster and they would have to stop spending so long overly telegraphing their moves.
Then we can talk about increasing their hp/damage.

Along with that the “Tougher NPC’s” need to have more abilities.

——————————————

It’s honestly amazing how many times it can be said that nerfing yourself doesn’t work - but everyone keeps suggesting it.

Just handicapping yourself does not solve the issue that people are complaining about.

SilverBride wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

What I don't understand is why players who have taken the time to prepare themselves for veteran dungeons and trials and arenas expect that the overland base story and quests should keep up with them and continue to be a challenge. That's like someone with a PHD in mathematics going back to elementary school and being disappointed that the multiplication tables are too easy for them now.

And yet the developers put Dungeons as part of the year long story.
The endgame group content, that has a difficulty setting, is part of the story now...

...You say the story is supposedly only for casual players, but the inclusion of dungeons in that year long story disproves that assertion.

Dungeon difficulty has nothing to do with overland and the base game, whether the story is continued in a dungeon or not. They are two different experiences with very different mechanics. One does not determine what is done in the other.

Except Dungeons are part of the year long story experience. So they in fact they do have something to do with the gameplay experience of the rest of the game. Especially that of the Main Story.

In creating two wildly different experiences in a year-long narrative, it creates one of inconsistency and disappointment - for both parties involved.

i.e. people asking for harder story experience and other people asking for a solo dungeon experience

To clarify, I never once said overland is just for casual players. I have said many times that overland is the base game and story, and needs to be a difficulty that all players can succeed at. It is not intended to be veteran end game content.

That’s not an argument against a choice. Because - again - what people have asked for is an option, that doesn’t take anything away from the people who want an easier gameplay experience.

Both sides get what they want.

(Additionally)

People of a low skill or casual play style have specifically complained about how they miss out on the story because of dlc dungeons.

often unable to get a group together and/or deal with others just rushing through the whole thing so they miss out on the story.

So that goes against your assertion that the story is overall of one difficulty that anyone of any skill level can do. Seeing as how DLC dungeons are often for those of more experience.

So why not create Solo/Group & Easy/Hard settings for both Main Story and Dungeons?

Solo Hard, Solo Easy, Group Easy, Group Hard.
Everyone gets what they want.

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

[snip]

Agreed.
I really don’t understand the problem when people are asking for an option that they as an individual/group can opt into that doesn’t apply to everyone.

[edited to remove quote]

SilverBride

Iccotak wrote: »

I really don’t understand the problem when people are asking for an option that they as an individual/group can opt into that doesn’t apply to everyone.

Some of my problems with it are:

• It would separate the playerbase
• It would give an unfair advantage to end game players IF there were increased rewards and drops
• It would turn overland into end game content, which has never been its intended purpose
• It would take time, manpower and cost that is better spent on issues that would benefit everyone
• But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Amottica

SilverBride wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

...then I think it is worth considering that on some level Rich Lambert is wrong and that they need to change their approach.

I believe that Rich Lambert has a good grasp of what is good for the game based on how people are playing and what features are being utilized.

I agree. Rich and company see the real metrics for ESO and have the best gauge of what is working and what is not. From what I have read from many sources ESO is doing very well and the population of the game seems very healthy.

WhyMustItBe

SilverBride wrote: »

Some of my problems with it are:

• It would separate the playerbase

Not really though. At least not any more than it already is with the ~100 player per shard cap. The players you see around you are not all the players in the game, as explained earlier. You could potentially still hear other difficulty levels in zone chat. You could still group up (with temporary shard hops to the leader's setting), and group invites could simply include the difficulty mode in their zone message so people could decide if they wanted to do the content in question on that difficulty level.

• It would give an unfair advantage to end game players IF there were increased rewards and drops

No more than veteran players already get from pulling large mob packs, grinding in Skyreach solo or Spell Scar, etc. All it would give is slightly higher XP which is not that important, a boost to new players leveling who were willing to take on some extra challenge, and maybe higher quality level drops or other mostly superfluous things that wouldn't upset the overall market balance.

• It would turn overland into end game content, which has never been its intended purpose

This one is pretty subjective. It is also not really true. The game actually launched with overland as end game content, or at least with veteran zones that were meant to be higher difficulty. This went away with One Tamriel scaling which, with the progressive power creep, is partly what many are asking for an option to experience again. But it was the original design of the game to have a veteran overland mode. All people are asking for is an OPTION to experience it that way now, as it was more or less, without forcing others to or taking anything away from the game the way it is now. Unless you toggled it, everything would remain exactly the same.

• It would take time, manpower and cost that is better spent on issues that would benefit everyone

It really wouldn't though. We are talking about a simple flag for shards which is basically a yes/no check, and some multipliers behind the scenes which are basically already done from back when the zones were originally designed as veteran content. The work on balance and sharding technology is already done. All it would require is adding this simple toggle and a check on zoning to add to which shard pool.

• But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone. Game companies are always adapting to feedback from the player base. There is no reason to assume even if Rich actually said this that they could not be persuaded to change their minds if a reasonable argument for the pros and cons could be made that ensured no real downside and the ability to simply not use it, and change absolutely nothing.

Honestly I don't really care either way. I just feel it would add another layer of optional content that a lot of people would find rewarding and enjoyable with very little investment by the company (since everything is basically already done), and without taking anything away from players who want to keep things exactly as they are now. It seems like a win-win-win scenario to me.

/shrug

furiouslog

Prof_Bawbag wrote: »

Where were these 800k mythical people when Craglorn was difficult? Still in their bed?

This. I played in the beta and first year, and honestly, I didn't like the zone scaling compared to what we have now. Every other MMO, including a particularly new one, has this design and it's tiresome, grindy, and linear. It removes your ability to choose how you want to experience the world. ESO has so much content and richness to it with other channeling modes of gameplay that it does not need to make overland any more difficult.

Amottica

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

• But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone. Game companies are always adapting to feedback from the player base. There is no reason to assume even if Rich actually said this that they could not be persuaded to change their minds if a reasonable argument for the pros and cons could be made that ensured no real downside and the ability to simply not use it, and change absolutely nothing.

Honestly I don't really care either way. I just feel it would add another layer of optional content that a lot of people would find rewarding and enjoyable with very little investment by the company (since everything is basically already done), and without taking anything away from players who want to keep things exactly as they are now. It seems like a win-win-win scenario to me.

Prett sure you will be waiting for a while for that source as he said it over a year ago in one of the ESO streams. Not exactly something that a search brings up easily since it was nothing more than a quick response.

IIRC, he acknowledged they had seen the requests. He did not say no but did indicate we should not hold our breath as they are not trying to figure out how to approach this. Basically, it is not as simple as we tend to make it out to be.

Arahallris

AI in the entire game needs some desperate attention in general. Usually dull, bland and unresponsive behaviour or just often times locked in slow animations such as the bandit jump. I would like for them to be more responsive and faster with their attacks in general. Introduce some interesting mechanics like fleeing or flanking; ambushes would be welcomed too. Remove the ability for them to stack on each other and have them fan out utilizing CC and burn tactics.

trackdemon5512

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

You're asking for a challenge that the vast majority of the game nor the game developers care for. And despite that being pointed out you continue to insist that it should be done.

I still don't see how what you are saying relates to the story "Flowers for Algernon" but we can just table that.

[snip] (I also haven't seen any source to substantiate your continued claim of "most" people not wanting something, or the devs saying anything about it, but I'll just ignore that too for now.)

[snip]

I will argue is that we have been here before. Where each successive zone for a faction was scaled for difficulty and leveling. Where Craglorn was scaled for VR ranks and grouped instances. Where we had grinds to get specific traits. Where monster masks weren’t guaranteed drops. Where you had to subscribe to even play.

The point is that ESO has years of history of actual live data and player responses to draw upon. It’s not a theory that the majority of players hated VR ranks, leveling grinding, content that they paid for unnecessarily gated by difficulty, players they couldn’t join.

The entire game was literally rewritten (One Tamriel) for a more collaborative experience and that saved the game.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/qkj3x7/two-years-on-elder-scrolls-online-is-finally-kinda-like-skyrim

https://www.polygon.com/features/2016/10/14/13285014/elder-scrolls-online-one-tamriel-skyrim-mmo

https://www.theaureview.com/games/pax-aus-2018-zenimaxs-matt-firor-talks-the-future-of-the-elder-scrolls-online-and-how-fans-have-shaped-the-franchise/

The game as it is today isn’t perfect but they have teams dedicated to looking at what works and what doesn’t.

https://www.gameplanet.co.nz/pc/features/g57c12ac8b5c07/How-The-Elder-Scrolls-Online-won-over-its-detractors/

And for years we still get players wanting a return to the original format which the developers repeatedly state nearly killed this game. So despite your, or other player suggestions, there is a reason why the game is the way it is now, and why ideas like scaling difficulty are pointless to argue about. They’ve been there, they’re beyond it, they’re not going back.

[edited to remove quote]

Sheezabeast

People thought ESO would be replaced by BDO. and that wasn't true. New World will be the new shiny toy for a while, gamers love new games, we're gamers, it's kinda what we do.

SilverBride

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone.

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert recently answered the request for veteran quests and delves, and his stand on this is very clear.

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

This was from a month ago.

Edit: I don't know how to clip part of a twitch stream but Rich continues his discussion on veteran overland and makes it very clear that this will not happen. You can watch his entire reply, including his answer to an optional vet mode, from 1:48:00 through 1:51:11 on the link below.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s

Arahallris

Sheezabeast wrote: »

People thought ESO would be replaced by BDO. and that wasn't true. New World will be the new shiny toy for a while, gamers love new games, we're gamers, it's kinda what we do.

New World isn't going to last long, zero endgame as well as things to do overland, can't speak much for dungeons but there isn't many of them. no raids. The world in terms of immersion outside of it's graphics is vastly underwhelming, no npc chatter or busy bodies or random events, the settlements are empty; weather is non-existent. Mob variety isn't much of a thing either. The weapon selection is meh, no dual wielding despite there being one handed weapons. Sorry I'm just ranting at this point.

New World has potential, it's a goldmine story wise if they implement the Secret World concept of mysteries and conspiracies.

Elvenheart

vingarmo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert's answer to request for veteran quests and delves:

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

…Game was completely different back than: there was little content, builds, character customization….

From my experience so far, this describes New World right now. I wonder if that means someday there will be a “One New World”? 🤣

Vhozek

Well I only see myself creating threads about the game's difficulty/excitement about THIS game. Maybe threads about lack of quests in others.
Addressing issues that DO exist in the products that I consume and want my money's worth in.
So far, exciting gameplay provides more for me than free loot ever has in years.

Iccotak

Amottica wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

...then I think it is worth considering that on some level Rich Lambert is wrong and that they need to change their approach.

I believe that Rich Lambert has a good grasp of what is good for the game based on how people are playing and what features are being utilized.

I agree. Rich and company see the real metrics for ESO and have the best gauge of what is working and what is not. From what I have read from many sources ESO is doing very well and the population of the game seems very healthy.

I think it is interesting how players in this community will often accuse the developers of not playing their own game when it comes to discussing feedback.

But as soon as some hear feedback that they don’t like, or disagree with, then they’ll say; “Well the developers know what’s best”
—————————————

And I will reiterate just because a games population is healthy doesn’t mean that it’s perfect and that there is no room for improvement.

As an example; Destiny is quite popular, has a large player base as big as ESO - it had the same complaint about the story being too easy and anti-climatic for as nearly long as ESO has been around.

The developers have now addressed the issue with the latest expansion. They implemented a difficultly setting for the Main Story - because they wanted to create an experience that was enjoyable for more than just one specific type of player.

They wanted to put the same level of passion that they put into group content and put it into the story. They want to put their best foot forward in the main story.
They wanted engaging Gameplay and engaging story.
And they let players choose.

That’s what I would love to see happen for ESO - because it is a shame that the Story does not have nearly the level of engaging gameplay that the dungeons and trials.

I see very little reason why the ZOS couldn’t do the same for their game.
Expand on how the base game main Story took players to a separate solo instance - in what was basically a series of mini dungeons.
Just do that but with difficulty options.

vingarmo

Elvenheart wrote: »

vingarmo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert's answer to request for veteran quests and delves:

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

…Game was completely different back than: there was little content, builds, character customization….

From my experience so far, this describes New World right now. I wonder if that means someday there will be a “One New World”? 🤣

While I haven’t played new world personally, because there was too much AAA games recently that didn’t live up to the hype, everything I read and heard about this game reminded me about eso at launch. The only difference that ESO was classic MMO from the start with focus on both pve and pvp whereas NW changed from full loot pvp game to same model in last year of development to attract more players so its pve side is lacking. So maybe in 2-3 years these 2 games would be much more similar to each other or maybe not.
In either case overworld difficulty will not be a key to their success or failure and it definitely wasn’t the case with one tamriel update which brought much more changes to the table, it’s only about longevity of player base and its diversity. With no new systems in place and static gameplay of existing ones players eventually migrate to other games. And vet overland just an example of what such system can be. And since this subject brought so frequently I’m pretty sure it would have decent chance to succeed if done correctly.

Brenticus12

Audrena wrote: »

BroughBreaux wrote: »

All they need to do is add mechanics to NPCs, not increase their damage or health. The reason the overland is boring is because they just stand there and let you kill them, take 5 seconds visually telegraphing any kind of attack that would do any significant amount of damage

And with the sort of latency that players in countries like Australia have to deal with, that's pretty much necessary.

Who do you think you're speaking up for here? Because you're definitely not speaking up for Australians or other high ping players from regions like SEA or other Asian countries. High ping makes no difference to how the mechanics play out. There are plenty of Australians and Asians playing on 200-300+ ping on world record teams that push the hardest content to their limit and this is in content where a single mistake is the difference between life or death. Your comment makes even less sense for overland woes.

Personally I don't care about overland being harder or easier because it makes no difference to how I'd approach it either way (I use it to relax most of the time) but please don't bring up "high ping" as a reason for overland content to be watered down garbage mechanics wise. I play from Australia myself at about 280-300 ping and I'm fine doing the hardest PVE content (Scorepushing and Trifectas) in the game. Overland content being slightly tougher with shorter tells than 5 second long wind ups is definitely not going to be an issue for Australian players.

trackdemon5512

SilverBride wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone.

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert recently answered the request for veteran quests and delves, and his stand on this is very clear.

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

This was from a month ago.

Edit: I don't know how to clip part of a twitch stream but Rich continues his discussion on veteran overland and makes it very clear that this will not happen. You can watch his entire reply, including his answer to an optional vet mode, from 1:48:00 through 1:51:11 on the link below.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s

This full clip including why there isn’t a toggle and that they know what works is what has been said FOR YEARS. Players here refuse to listen or think it’s something simple.

It’s not happening. Ever. ZOS is doubling down on that by the use of optional bosses and mini boss hard modes in dungeons, arenas, and trials now. Instances are for challenge. Overworld is for story.

It not only works but more importantly it sells AND keeps players engaged. Those of you wanting difficulty sliders, you’re in a very small minority and the days of scaled content are never coming back.

Vhozek

PvP toggle in overworld that makes players with PvP on take more damage from mobs.
You also gain exp from killing other players.

tonyblack

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone.

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert recently answered the request for veteran quests and delves, and his stand on this is very clear.

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

This was from a month ago.

Edit: I don't know how to clip part of a twitch stream but Rich continues his discussion on veteran overland and makes it very clear that this will not happen. You can watch his entire reply, including his answer to an optional vet mode, from 1:48:00 through 1:51:11 on the link below.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s

This full clip including why there isn’t a toggle and that they know what works is what has been said FOR YEARS. Players here refuse to listen or think it’s something simple.

It’s not happening. Ever. ZOS is doubling down on that by the use of optional bosses and mini boss hard modes in dungeons, arenas, and trials now. Instances are for challenge. Overworld is for story.

It not only works but more importantly it sells AND keeps players engaged. Those of you wanting difficulty sliders, you’re in a very small minority and the days of scaled content are never coming back.

In that case you can shot down any discussion related to any new system, be it new pvp content, story dungeons, new classes or vet overland option. We only need new houses, 4 dungeons, 1 trial and 2 overland zones every year with some combat rebalancing to keep us happy. Because obviously everyone who plays now satisfied with everything this game has to offer.

trackdemon5512

tonyblack wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone.

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert recently answered the request for veteran quests and delves, and his stand on this is very clear.

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

This was from a month ago.

Edit: I don't know how to clip part of a twitch stream but Rich continues his discussion on veteran overland and makes it very clear that this will not happen. You can watch his entire reply, including his answer to an optional vet mode, from 1:48:00 through 1:51:11 on the link below.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s

This full clip including why there isn’t a toggle and that they know what works is what has been said FOR YEARS. Players here refuse to listen or think it’s something simple.

It’s not happening. Ever. ZOS is doubling down on that by the use of optional bosses and mini boss hard modes in dungeons, arenas, and trials now. Instances are for challenge. Overworld is for story.

It not only works but more importantly it sells AND keeps players engaged. Those of you wanting difficulty sliders, you’re in a very small minority and the days of scaled content are never coming back.

In that case you can shot down any discussion related to any new system, be it new pvp content, story dungeons, new classes or vet overland option. We only need new houses, 4 dungeons, 1 trial and 2 overland zones every year with some combat rebalancing to keep us happy. Because obviously everyone who plays game now satisfied with everything.

Actually it was last year that Matt in another deep dive stated that there would be no new classes going forward, at least until combat AND performance is where they want. The same goes for PVP changes. And that spellcrafting is dead. He regrets that word of it got out because it’s always asked about yet Development was killed a long time ago.

Also, additional character slots will not be coming out either at any point in the near future. The developers find that managing 18 characters is extreme for players. Few in the player base actually do it. And that in terms of managing the actual database with account data the system can’t even handle it as of now.

So yes, expect several homes, a chapter, two dungeon DLCs, and a zone DLC along with combat/performance tweaks every year. That’s what works. That’s what keep people playing. That’s what pays to keep the lights on. Not Microsoft cash nor the wants of a few.

Iccotak

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But more importantly, Rich Lambert basically said "No"

Still waiting for a source on this one, but the "basically" part tells me it was by no means carved in stone.

SilverBride wrote: »

Rich Lambert recently answered the request for veteran quests and delves, and his stand on this is very clear.

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

This was from a month ago.

Edit: I don't know how to clip part of a twitch stream but Rich continues his discussion on veteran overland and makes it very clear that this will not happen. You can watch his entire reply, including his answer to an optional vet mode, from 1:48:00 through 1:51:11 on the link below.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s

This full clip including why there isn’t a toggle and that they know what works is what has been said FOR YEARS. Players here refuse to listen or think it’s something simple.

It’s not happening. Ever. ZOS is doubling down on that by the use of optional bosses and mini boss hard modes in dungeons, arenas, and trials now. Instances are for challenge. Overworld is for story.

It not only works but more importantly it sells AND keeps players engaged. Those of you wanting difficulty sliders, you’re in a very small minority and the days of scaled content are never coming back.

There’s a problem with his reasoning though.

As others have said in the past they swung the pendulum too far in the other direction.

For things like overland trash mobs and delves - sure, who cares.

But for your main narrative that you spend a year hyping up?

Rich says players have a lot of freedom to experience story. But does everyone enjoy the story?

Quality of Writing aside, they force everyone into the same story gameplay experience designed purely for beginners. That is a major reason why we see this topic come up every week of every month of every year.

People are getting tired of disappointing story experiences and want the choice for the Main Story Bosses at the very least to have a difficultly option.

It’s not about challenge; I can go do Endgame for challenge. It’s about how the gameplay experience affects the narrative.

Gameplay is part of narrative in video games, and when you’re gameplay doesn’t live up to the narrative than that hurts the story experience overall.

Further more Rich contradicts himself when he says story is solo-able when dlc dungeons are now officially part of year long stories.

Because now there are solo players criticizing that they miss out on story in those dungeons.

——————————————

I cannot emphasize enough how much bad boss fights completely ruins the main story of installments and the overall year long story.

Seriously - Elsweyr, Greymoor, Markarth, etc. imo those narratives were almost completely ruined and I lost all interest because the bosses were so mind numbingly boring to fight.

How am I supposed to care about this “Big Bad” when it’s fight is designed for complete novices, presents no challenges or dangers, no interesting mechanics, nada - not even an option.

The “minions” of the main antagonist, who are end bosses in dungeons are vastly more engaging and tougher than the main antagonist.

That kind of design hurts the overall story.

——————————————

Instances are for challenge. Overworld is for story.

According to that line of logic, a hard option for Main Story Bosses - which are instanced btw - is perfectly reasonable.

——————————————

Sheezabeast

Arahallris wrote: »

Sheezabeast wrote: »

People thought ESO would be replaced by BDO. and that wasn't true. New World will be the new shiny toy for a while, gamers love new games, we're gamers, it's kinda what we do.

New World isn't going to last long, zero endgame as well as things to do overland, can't speak much for dungeons but there isn't many of them. no raids. The world in terms of immersion outside of it's graphics is vastly underwhelming, no npc chatter or busy bodies or random events, the settlements are empty; weather is non-existent. Mob variety isn't much of a thing either. The weapon selection is meh, no dual wielding despite there being one handed weapons. Sorry I'm just ranting at this point.

New World has potential, it's a goldmine story wise if they implement the Secret World concept of mysteries and conspiracies.

I haven't played New World, so I cannot attest to how the gameplay is. I just know what it was like when BDO launched and how whole guilds threatened to migrate there and were saying it was the death of ESO and how badly things turned out for that game.

Toxic_Hemlock

I'm partially blind and my reflexes are crap. I do overland to relax and, yes I have died many times to a few badly judged encounters even there. I am not new to the game and even build my characters as well as I can without ability to get gear from the higher content (arenas and trials). I am an ESO+ sub and I am sure I am not alone in thinking the overland is just fine the way it is.

If Zos wants to add a optional switch that increases the difficulty fine, so long as it not made standard. I would hate to quit after all the time I have put into the game, but the "open world of craglorn" is not something I would want to play!

Please don't ruin all the fun I have simply because you want to have a more difficult time of it, some of us are just fine the way it is. If you want an example, cover one eye completely and use cellophane over the other all while having really bad nerves from too many years of working heavy machinery if you want more of as challenge. That is how I see/play the game currently and I am sure I am not the only disabled player either.

mague

I am a pre One Tamriel player.

What really is missing is aggro range, more health for the NPC and slightly more damage. And we need our private delves back.

As it is sneak is useless. Today it is possible to just walk though areas that once have been dangerous. NPC's have such a low aggro range that they usually just ignore you. Anyone is able to sneak or use a cheap invis potion to pass those areas to dig or harvest. Make them aggressive again please. They are deadra and Zombies who want to eat ypour soul or body and not disneyland staff.

More health and damage just to make it a fight that requires the players pools. With companions and proc sets the game plays itself anyway if you dont want do act. I have a few alts i could play through content but its boring to be honest. I have a full sneak Khajiit NB build with Brae's and it is useless and boring.

Dont have to go back pre One Tamriel, but please make it an adventure again.

Stokowski

Huh. It's like déjà vu all over again.

[snip]
[edited for baiting]

Jack-0

SilverBride wrote: »

The 800k people who don't seem to mind difficult overland are right where they need to be... in a game that provides that. They aren't spending time in a game that doesn't then requesting it be changed to their play style.

Rich Lambert recently answered the request for veteran quests and delves, and his stand on this is very clear.

"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." - Rich Lambert

https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u

That’s really disappointing and Rich Lambert is wrong, I highly enjoyed doing Cadwell’s gold and silver, so no, not everybody hated it.

Also, my main character is a tank, with tank CP and attributes, who I throw some assorted stam dps gear on when I’m doing overworld content. So he’s not specced for dealing damage, his gear isn’t particularly meta for the task..and yet overland is still ludicrously easy and those so-called bosses die in seconds. It renders the story lines a complete joke, how can you buy into the fantasy when there is literally zero challenge?

It’s a massive shame because I *enjoyed* having to work hard to progress through silver and gold, even if it did mean pretending to be a dirty AD or DC