Overland Content Feedback Thread

martinhpb16_ESO

SilverBride wrote: »

In all my years of playing I have never even once heard anyone complain in game that overland is too easy or boring or that they wish that it was harder. But I heard plenty of complaints in game that it was too hard before One Tamriel.

I wonder if we went through the 4k posts in this thread how many people are asking for it?

I always find it strange when people talk about their own lived experience and others say, no you are wrong cos a person of authority said this, you are a minority anyway by my reckoning so you don't count. That my experience is more valid than yours because I say so.

Thank goodness the suffragettes saw through this kind of reasoning.

Even though ion this instance people are asking for a choice so it takes nothing away. Baffling

SilverBride

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

In all my years of playing I have never even once heard anyone complain in game that overland is too easy or boring or that they wish that it was harder. But I heard plenty of complaints in game that it was too hard before One Tamriel.

I wonder if we went through the 4k posts in this thread how many people are asking for it?

There are some but there are also those who posted against an optional separate veteran overland. Many posters have agreed to debuffs, but very few agreed that a separate instance is the best option. It's also important to note that a huge portion of posts in this thread are by the same group of posters, both for and against.

Powerful players should be able to demolish overland mobs easily. It doesn't make sense that the story zones would be a challenge to a player decked out in Trial gear. Maybe they need to lower the ceiling a bit more if this is still an issue for some.

AlexanderDeLarge

SilverBride wrote: »

Let's set Cadwell's Silver and Gold aside for a moment and just look at the part of Rich's reply concerning the state of the game today.

"We have millions of players that play The Elder Scrolls Online, and a large portion of them find the game hard and the Overland content challenging, especially as a new player when you don't have gold, all the gear, and Champion Points."

They have noted player feedback and we have been given an answer.

Well good news for those players, the veteran overland everyone wants is opt-in just like it is for dungeons, trials and arenas and even if they decide to delve into veteran overland content, they have companion NPCs which seem like it's tailor made for those types of players.

We have not been given an answer because the developers are still citing Cadwell Silver and Gold, an extremely out of date and frankly irrelevant retort to what is being discussed here. No one besides Rich Lambert seems to consider Cadwell Silver/Gold the equivalent of veteran overland and even if they did, that was before the exponential power creep which necessitated a veteran overland in the first place. 2023 will officially mark the year where I've spent more time wishing we had a veteran overland in TESO than actually playing TESO throughout TESO's entire lifespan. Right now it's about even, sadly.

You can say that the rhetoric in this thread isn't commonplace and is 'only a vocal minority' but every time I see The Elder Scrolls Online mentioned outside these forums, the lack of difficulty is discussed just as much if not more than it is here. Especially on YouTube among people who quit the game or are considering quitting the game or have friends that quit the game. I've seen it mentioned in articles talking about the game. I've even seen it pop up in interviews with the developers and most importantly, my friends cite it as the primary reason why they're not playing anymore.

AlexanderDeLarge

Also saying that ZOS has data proving that 'most' players find the overland difficult as justification to not do it is such weasely language. That number could be a 51%/49% split and we wouldn't know yet that's given as a vague statement to justify not working on something people clearly want. Mind you these kinds of statements are on top of the false equivalence of a veteran overland with Cadwell Silver/Gold last seen in the game over half a decade ago before the game was entirely reworked.

I'm actually a big fan of transparency so put it to a public vote with public results. You know what vote I'd be really interested in? "Would you rather have a card game or have us work on some sort of implementation of a veteran overland?"

AlexanderDeLarge

ZOS continuously boasts their player counts so let's use those numbers.

OVER 20 MILLION PLAYERS

Alright those of us asking for a veteran overland are a minority. I don't think anyone would really dispute that. Most people probably only played the game until level 15 and quit. Whatever. A minority could be anything from 1-49%. Let's conservatively estimate that 5% of players thinks the game is too easy. I think it's actually substantially more but I'm simply playing devil's advocate. 5% sounds like a small number right? Quite misleading because 5% of 20 million is 1 million players.

Spare me the "yeah, but what about current players actually playing the game" because that's downplaying all the people who quit the game and have their own reasons for quitting the game. I think it's quite foolish to write off people just because they're not actively playing a game they no longer enjoy.

NeuroticPixels

20 million? Doubt.
I want to know how many active players they have on each platform & server. Give them wiggle room and say an “active player” is any account that has logged on in the last 30 days.
Give me those numbers separated by platform and server, ZOS.

Araxyte

NeuroticPixels wrote: »

20 million? Doubt.
I want to know how many active players they have on each platform & server. Give them wiggle room and say an “active player” is any account that has logged on in the last 30 days.
Give me those numbers separated by platform and server, ZOS.

From the most accurate site I could find, MMO-population. In comparison, Old School Runescape, World of Warcraft, and Path of Exile all have around 1 million active players. Even Runescape 3 and Star Citizen have over 300k active players. Take these figures with a pinch of salt as we can never truly know the exact figure. But it does give you some idea.

It's clear that ZOS has abandoned their long-term player retention plan and gone for new player count, in the hopes that they gorge on the crown store before they quit. Whereas more successful MMO's have kept a good balance.

SimonThesis

Overland is way too easy. You shouldn't be doing some end of the world quest and then have the end of the zone bad guy do no damage to you and then get two shot.

The problem is is that mobs do no damage, they stand there and die quick, they dont have intelligent AIs. This makes questing unengaging and unrewarding, endgame players want to be able to quest too. I understand having low hp overland enemies for casuals and solo healers, but at least have them do more damage to make the encounter more dangerous. Pve enemies that can 2 shot you back would make it much more exciting. Make the mobs actually stun/apply status effects/move around something, as it stands now they are simply fragile damage sponges that do nothing but stand there and light attack you.

I don't want a separate instance or debuffs, just make overland enemies smarter, do more damage, and apply more interesting effects but leave their health as is. The game is losing endgame players because it only caters to the new ones but at some point they will run out of new players.

*The solution to this problem is not nerfing the ceiling and making endgame trifecta achievements no longer achievable. The company tends to be like a genie and make us regret what we wish for.

tonyblack

Well, by looking through pts forums for update 36 i saw the smallest amount of hype compared to any previous updates i witnessed before. The only few active discussions are about class balancing, which remained untouched barring wardens. Same for other forums, streamers and in game conversations: 0 anticipation of anything new or exciting.

Maybe i’m wrong in my assumption, but imho zone dlc alone in their current state aren’t that popular as some want to believe. There are some mystics to grind but other than that my expectations are pretty low: short and easy questline, aimed at brand new players and repeatable dailies for same 2 delves and bosses. No longevity or progression and very few reasons to ever revisit or replay it on different characters once everything completed on the main. Just something you do over the weekend and forever forget. The only positive is that this one at least free. I wish I could be more enthusiastic when new dlc drops.

Tariq9898

I recently started this game a few months ago and realized that quests in general are too easy. Whether it be Main quests, zone quests, side quests, guild quests, etc.

I understand that story is generally aimed for more casual players. But there are hardcore players who enjoy great storytelling/lore as well as challenging solo content. It breaks the immersion when I kill a "powerful" necromancer who supposedly destroyed armies within 2 seconds.

Hopefully there's a difficulty slider, or at least give players a Vet option at the start of every quest.

Akasha_Mei

I would like more skyshards, cause it's impossible to make one character a good crafter and good warrior at the same time. There are too much skill lines taking our skill points (specially the passive skills that should unlock automatically as long you go further in progression).
I think that's a simple adjustment that can save lots of swappings toons and reduce saved data continent of armor benches.
So, if it's not possible more skyshards, at least passive skills should not need them to be unlocked.

Sarannah

Akasha_Mei wrote: »

I would like more skyshards, cause it's impossible to make one character a good crafter and good warrior at the same time. There are too much skill lines taking our skill points (specially the passive skills that should unlock automatically as long you go further in progression).
I think that's a simple adjustment that can save lots of swappings toons and reduce saved data continent of armor benches.
So, if it's not possible more skyshards, at least passive skills should not need them to be unlocked.

While I don't think they should create more skyshards, I agree with your points. But instead, I feel there should be a catch-up mechanic for skillpoints. ZOS should let us be able to excavate random unclaimed overland skyshards from all across Tamriel(and unlocked DLC's) from the ground as bonus loot. This would allow players to catch-up with skillpoints somewhat, and would allow players to do this from wherever they are.

On the topic of tougher overland: ZOS just nerfed DPS across the board with U35, and this was not well received at all. Even by those asking for more difficult content. Why would ZOS ever want to do this? Do players asking for this even know what they are asking for? Personally I found how ZOS handles boss stages(like the High Isle main quest final boss) to be how it should be: not too easy, not too hard. As any main quest has to be possible to complete on a fresh new player new to MMO's as level 1 in gear from urns. People often forget, years of experience in this and other MMO's, allows them to be better than most other players. Just slow your DPS somewhat if you feel bosses die too quickly, I do this as well.

PS: Most players run through mobs in delves, overland, public dungeons, group dungeons, quest areas, etc anyways, regardless of their difficulty. Making mobs more difficult would only affect those who actually kill them, or those who aggro them as someone else runs mobs through their AOE's(happens to me A LOT).

Destai

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/620072/veteran-difficulty-for-quests#latest

Some additional feedback.

SerafinaWaterstar

Akasha_Mei wrote: »

I would like more skyshards, cause it's impossible to make one character a good crafter and good warrior at the same time. There are too much skill lines taking our skill points (specially the passive skills that should unlock automatically as long you go further in progression).
I think that's a simple adjustment that can save lots of swappings toons and reduce saved data continent of armor benches.
So, if it's not possible more skyshards, at least passive skills should not need them to be unlocked.

Of course it is possible.

Main is a Grand Master Crafter & does vet trials. All crafting maxed out, and all skill lines except resto & destruction staves & 2H.
Has over 50 skill points spare.

If the game is so damn easy as many here claim, should therefore not be hard to get the requisite ones you need, surely 😁

(And can’t believe this thread is still going. Am still of the opinion that this is not a valid thing for the game to do; and yes, prefer a card game to vet overland.)

Araxyte

Sarannah wrote: »

Akasha_Mei wrote: »

I would like more skyshards, cause it's impossible to make one character a good crafter and good warrior at the same time. There are too much skill lines taking our skill points (specially the passive skills that should unlock automatically as long you go further in progression).
I think that's a simple adjustment that can save lots of swappings toons and reduce saved data continent of armor benches.
So, if it's not possible more skyshards, at least passive skills should not need them to be unlocked.

While I don't think they should create more skyshards, I agree with your points. But instead, I feel there should be a catch-up mechanic for skillpoints. ZOS should let us be able to excavate random unclaimed overland skyshards from all across Tamriel(and unlocked DLC's) from the ground as bonus loot. This would allow players to catch-up with skillpoints somewhat, and would allow players to do this from wherever they are.

On the topic of tougher overland: ZOS just nerfed DPS across the board with U35, and this was not well received at all. Even by those asking for more difficult content. Why would ZOS ever want to do this? Do players asking for this even know what they are asking for? Personally I found how ZOS handles boss stages(like the High Isle main quest final boss) to be how it should be: not too easy, not too hard. As any main quest has to be possible to complete on a fresh new player new to MMO's as level 1 in gear from urns. People often forget, years of experience in this and other MMO's, allows them to be better than most other players. Just slow your DPS somewhat if you feel bosses die too quickly, I do this as well.

PS: Most players run through mobs in delves, overland, public dungeons, group dungeons, quest areas, etc anyways, regardless of their difficulty. Making mobs more difficult would only affect those who actually kill them, or those who aggro them as someone else runs mobs through their AOE's(happens to me A LOT).

Nah, what we're asking for is an optional difficulty setting, potentially with an incentive. Key word is optional. You're free to bull-doze through mobs or rp all you like. We want everyone to be able to play the game how they want - similar to veteran and normal mode dungeons, there is always the choice. How they implement this, idk, none of us knows, it's not our job. It's just what we're asking for.

I like to think that most sane people agree with the idea of everyone having fun and enjoying something. Having the option for a difficulty setting on overland seems pretty good to me, in terms of the 'everyone having fun' idea. I don't see the issue with having 2 different public delve n dungeon instances - one for normal mode and one for vet. And then having a self debuff for the overland that makes things more difficult for the individual player without affecting other's experience. I'd also say have two different overland instances for normal and vet, but this would probably require a lot of resources and create division in community.

These ideas have been said multiple times already on this thread though. Zos dev team haven't responded to this thread directly yet, and it seems like they haven't even acknowledged the existence of it. They've mentioned the failure of craglorn and progressive zone difficulty many many years ago, but haven't addressed any of the ideas on this thread. So anyone new here, I wouldn't waste your time with suggestions like we lot have.

[snip]

[Edit for Bashing.]

Kappachi

I think we should have an option to scale overland content to "veteran" level, on a per-player basis. Players on regular mode would still clear content the same as everyone else but players on "veteran" mode would have increased challenge and difficulty in mobs. I never even get to see quest mini-bosses use their skills because of how fast I take stuff down, would be nice to at least increase the difficulty on my end while still playing with other players in the overworld.

Jammy420

To put it plainly, my wife, who never played the game, started playing last march, and has consistantly said the game was too easy from the get go when it comes to the overland content. Things that need to happen :

• AI update - The mobs are simply too stupid. They respond slowly, and do not respond to the skills you use 99.9 percent of the time. If they actually can do this is hard to know considering everything dies in seconds.
• Seperate Veteran and Normal Instances- We already have seperate instances for overland, and nearly everything else. There is no reason that you could not simply click a checkbox to activate or de activate veteran mode. Its an elegant and extremely simple solution. Also, better rewards for these instances to incentivise others to give it a go instead of sticking to sneeze and kill mode.

Something else that is unrelated to the difficulty, we could maybe have wandering world bosses, or something interesting like that in overland.

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

ZOS continuously boasts their player counts so let's use those numbers.

OVER 20 MILLION PLAYERS

Alright those of us asking for a veteran overland are a minority. I don't think anyone would really dispute that. Most people probably only played the game until level 15 and quit. Whatever. A minority could be anything from 1-49%. Let's conservatively estimate that 5% of players thinks the game is too easy. I think it's actually substantially more but I'm simply playing devil's advocate. 5% sounds like a small number right? Quite misleading because 5% of 20 million is 1 million players.

Spare me the "yeah, but what about current players actually playing the game" because that's downplaying all the people who quit the game and have their own reasons for quitting the game. I think it's quite foolish to write off people just because they're not actively playing a game they no longer enjoy.

I have been ghosting these forums for quite some time now, and I can say with confidence that the majority want it more difficult. However I have noticed that a lot of people who found the game too easy, simply stopped posting, or stopped playing because it seemed, and this opinion is justified by the silence of the developers, that no one cared about their, our , opinions, and everyone who wanted more difficult content got consistantly flamed by those who wanted easy mode, and the ones who were attacked either left, or got banned, and the offenders were left alone. It seems pretty clear to me there is a bias within the mods and devs.

ADarklore

Jammy420 wrote: »

I have been ghosting these forums for quite some time now, and I can say with confidence that the majority want it more difficult. However I have noticed that a lot of people who found the game too easy, simply stopped posting, or stopped playing because it seemed, and this opinion is justified by the silence of the developers, that no one cared about their, our , opinions, and everyone who wanted more difficult content got consistantly flamed by those who wanted easy mode, and the ones who were attacked either left, or got banned, and the offenders were left alone. It seems pretty clear to me there is a bias within the mods and devs.

I can say with absolute confidence that the majority are quite happy with overland content as it is... as the majority of people playing overland content are simply players who enjoy questing. ZOS has said multiple times that they will NOT add a separate instance for 'vet difficulty' because they do not want to separate players. The entire point of 'One Tamriel' was to bring everyone together under the same difficulty, and as the game continues to lose players, separating players would make the game even worse. I believe the last count I saw was that ESO was down to roughly 400K 'active' players, which is a HUGE drop from the millions it likes to brag about; a million 'characters' or even 'accounts' means nothing if they are not actively playing the game.
People complain about lack of game development... yet a small minority would have them spend resources to develop a separate instance that only a small fraction of players would even play. My prediction... NOT going to happen.

martinhpb16_ESO

ADarklore wrote: »

I can say with absolute confidence that the majority are quite happy with overland content as it is... as the majority of people playing overland content are simply players who enjoy questing. ZOS has said multiple times that they will NOT add a separate instance for 'vet difficulty' because they do not want to separate players. The entire point of 'One Tamriel' was to bring everyone together under the same difficulty, and as the game continues to lose players, separating players would make the game even worse. I believe the last count I saw was that ESO was down to roughly 400K 'active' players, which is a HUGE drop from the millions it likes to brag about; a million 'characters' or even 'accounts' means nothing if they are not actively playing the game.
People complain about lack of game development... yet a small minority would have them spend resources to develop a separate instance that only a small fraction of players would even play. My prediction... NOT going to happen.

* sarcasm on* Yeh bcse the majority wanted a card game and shiny ponies.

*sarcasm off* I see more posts on here calling for an OPTION for more difficult overland than I do calling for anything else.

* sarcasm on* Thanks for supporting your fellow players mate.

SilverBride

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

I see more posts on here calling for an OPTION for more difficult overland than I do calling for anything else.

How does using the word "option" change that it is still a separate instance of overland and will cause a separation of players? And how does the word "option" make it take any less resources to develop and implement?

Rich Lambert made a statement that there are no plans for any major changes to overland difficulty.

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks for supporting your fellow players mate.

Not agreeing with something we don't see a need for or a benefit to does not mean we don't support our fellow players.

Malthorne

If the majority of players love overland as it is, then why is it that I rarely see other players questing? Outside of world bosses and dolmens in select zones or during events the overland is dead. Even in high isle.

Jammy420

ADarklore wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

I have been ghosting these forums for quite some time now, and I can say with confidence that the majority want it more difficult. However I have noticed that a lot of people who found the game too easy, simply stopped posting, or stopped playing because it seemed, and this opinion is justified by the silence of the developers, that no one cared about their, our , opinions, and everyone who wanted more difficult content got consistantly flamed by those who wanted easy mode, and the ones who were attacked either left, or got banned, and the offenders were left alone. It seems pretty clear to me there is a bias within the mods and devs.

I can say with absolute confidence that the majority are quite happy with overland content as it is... as the majority of people playing overland content are simply players who enjoy questing. ZOS has said multiple times that they will NOT add a separate instance for 'vet difficulty' because they do not want to separate players. The entire point of 'One Tamriel' was to bring everyone together under the same difficulty, and as the game continues to lose players, separating players would make the game even worse. I believe the last count I saw was that ESO was down to roughly 400K 'active' players, which is a HUGE drop from the millions it likes to brag about; a million 'characters' or even 'accounts' means nothing if they are not actively playing the game.
People complain about lack of game development... yet a small minority would have them spend resources to develop a separate instance that only a small fraction of players would even play. My prediction... NOT going to happen.

So I suppose bring "everyone" together , only means people who like it the way you like it. There would be 0 downsides to a seperate instance, it would, if anything, bring players back who were tired of sneezing their way to victory.

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

I can say with absolute confidence that the majority are quite happy with overland content as it is... as the majority of people playing overland content are simply players who enjoy questing. ZOS has said multiple times that they will NOT add a separate instance for 'vet difficulty' because they do not want to separate players. The entire point of 'One Tamriel' was to bring everyone together under the same difficulty, and as the game continues to lose players, separating players would make the game even worse. I believe the last count I saw was that ESO was down to roughly 400K 'active' players, which is a HUGE drop from the millions it likes to brag about; a million 'characters' or even 'accounts' means nothing if they are not actively playing the game.
People complain about lack of game development... yet a small minority would have them spend resources to develop a separate instance that only a small fraction of players would even play. My prediction... NOT going to happen.

* sarcasm on* Yeh bcse the majority wanted a card game and shiny ponies.

*sarcasm off* I see more posts on here calling for an OPTION for more difficult overland than I do calling for anything else.

* sarcasm on* Thanks for supporting your fellow players mate.

Very well put

SilverBride wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

I see more posts on here calling for an OPTION for more difficult overland than I do calling for anything else.

How does using the word "option" change that it is still a separate instance of overland and will cause a separation of players? And how does the word "option" make it take any less resources to develop and implement?

Rich Lambert made a statement that there are no plans for any major changes to overland difficulty.

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks for supporting your fellow players mate.

Not agreeing with something we don't see a need for or a benefit to does not mean we don't support our fellow players.

Actually, it does. You are forcing us to play easy mode. An option would get rid of that force. And more options, is always better.

SilverBride

Jammy420 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Not agreeing with something we don't see a need for or a benefit to does not mean we don't support our fellow players.

Actually, it does. You are forcing us to play easy mode. An option would get rid of that force. And more options, is always better.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. If a player doesn't enjoy overland as it is they can choose not to participate in it the same way I choose not to participate in veteran dungeons, trials and arenas or PvP.

Players have varied tastes in what they enjoy so there needs to be varied activities to fit the different playstyles. ESO has this, but it can't be expected to completely customize every aspect of the game to fit a few player's desires.

martinhpb16_ESO

Latest vid from Minotaur nails it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3HiYqD5KqA

SilverBride

That is one player's opinion, not fact.

Blackbird_V

SilverBride wrote: »

That is one player's opinion, not fact.

It's actually an opinion shared by many other people......

Malthorne

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Latest vid from Minotaur nails it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3HiYqD5KqA

Spot on

SilverBride

Blackbird_V wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

That is one player's opinion, not fact.

It's actually an opinion shared by many other people......

It's an opinion shared by some, but not by all. Many are fine with overland just as it is. But in the end it's all just our opinions, and opinions aren't facts.

AlexanderDeLarge

tonyblack wrote: »

Well, by looking through pts forums for update 36 i saw the smallest amount of hype compared to any previous updates i witnessed before. The only few active discussions are about class balancing, which remained untouched barring wardens. Same for other forums, streamers and in game conversations: 0 anticipation of anything new or exciting.

Maybe i’m wrong in my assumption, but imho zone dlc alone in their current state aren’t that popular as some want to believe. There are some mystics to grind but other than that my expectations are pretty low: short and easy questline, aimed at brand new players and repeatable dailies for same 2 delves and bosses. No longevity or progression and very few reasons to ever revisit or replay it on different characters once everything completed on the main. Just something you do over the weekend and forever forget. The only positive is that this one at least free. I wish I could be more enthusiastic when new dlc drops.

I'm extremely frustrated because I love the druid archetype and Firesong is straight up my alley but it's not even worth playing through in the current implementation of overland. I'll login and see if there's any mounts finally worth spending my leftover crowns on but that's probably it.

The amount of live events, chapters and DLCs I've missed out on playing during their respective cycles is really starting to add up. The sooner ZOS leadership changes their tune and decides to give the people what they want, the sooner we can catch up and start buying and playing the new stuff.

CP5

AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »

tonyblack wrote: »

Well, by looking through pts forums for update 36 i saw the smallest amount of hype compared to any previous updates i witnessed before. The only few active discussions are about class balancing, which remained untouched barring wardens. Same for other forums, streamers and in game conversations: 0 anticipation of anything new or exciting.

Maybe i’m wrong in my assumption, but imho zone dlc alone in their current state aren’t that popular as some want to believe. There are some mystics to grind but other than that my expectations are pretty low: short and easy questline, aimed at brand new players and repeatable dailies for same 2 delves and bosses. No longevity or progression and very few reasons to ever revisit or replay it on different characters once everything completed on the main. Just something you do over the weekend and forever forget. The only positive is that this one at least free. I wish I could be more enthusiastic when new dlc drops.

I'm extremely frustrated because I love the druid archetype and Firesong is straight up my alley but it's not even worth playing through in the current implementation of overland. I'll login and see if there's any mounts finally worth spending my leftover crowns on but that's probably it.

The amount of live events, chapters and DLCs I've missed out on playing during their respective cycles is really starting to add up. The sooner ZOS leadership changes their tune and decides to give the people what they want, the sooner we can catch up and start buying and playing the new stuff.

When I had mentioned ages ago that adding an option would revitalize older content, this is what I meant. Many people, myself included, are way behind content wise and if I had the choice to engage with it in an enjoyable way I would love to get back in, maybe even redo some of the content I haven't touched in years, but instead I get a few quests into a story and lose all interest. I can understand that ZOS may not see the value in that, putting out new content attracts new or short term players which is financially beneficial for them, but they have already done this sort of thing before, with tech they already have, it wouldn't be the end of the world, even for those who think other players being given a choice would cause that to happen.