Overland Content Feedback Thread

SilverBride

Tannus15 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Delve bosses are not supposed to be big major challenges. If they were new characters and players new to ESO wouldn't be able to defeat them.

Then buff new characters more.

People wonder why there is a retention problem with ESO. If you balance 90% of the game around what is essentially the first 2 hours of game play then the entire game is going to suffer.

I'm also not saying that a delve boss should be a "major challenge".
I'm saying 9 seconds without using an ult with all green gear and non optimised setup is too little.
It's not enough.

Here is a metric to consider. One iteration of a rotation is 10 seconds, based on back bar ground dots. Most buffs last 30 seconds.
I would put forward that the combat above should last between 20 and 30 seconds depending on the skill of the player. This would give someone the opportunity to pre-buff and do a full rotation. Keep in mind that with better gear this time will drop dramatically.

So as a bare minimum my suggestion is to double the health of all delve bosses.
You could probably double the health of everything in a delve, making them at least feel slightly more dangerous than wandering around the countryside.

The delve bosses are more difficult than normal overland mobs and are fine just as they are.

Players who have progressed and become more powerful should find overland easy. It's not supposed to be a challenge, although it does provide some group activities with World Bosses and Harrowstorms and Vents. But it's main purpose is to quest and level and play through the story for all players of all skills and experience. It doesn't make sense for it to be anything different than what it already is.

There is a lot of content to challenge those who enjoy that. Overland isn't the place for it.

CP5

I'm now remembering the Wrothgar delve bosses that are actually weaker than standard elite mobs (50k health as opposed to 100k). That aside, there are still likely many players who quit ESO because of how simplistic their first impressions of the game were, and given that they could repeat that experience several dozen times over across the zones means that is likely a stopping point for many regardless of which zone they try to begin their journey in. There is no reason why the largest piece of content, that contains the part of the game that likely drew many to ESO in the first place, shouldn't offer choice to accommodate more players.

Tannus15

SilverBride wrote: »

Tannus15 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Delve bosses are not supposed to be big major challenges. If they were new characters and players new to ESO wouldn't be able to defeat them.

Then buff new characters more.

People wonder why there is a retention problem with ESO. If you balance 90% of the game around what is essentially the first 2 hours of game play then the entire game is going to suffer.

I'm also not saying that a delve boss should be a "major challenge".
I'm saying 9 seconds without using an ult with all green gear and non optimised setup is too little.
It's not enough.

Here is a metric to consider. One iteration of a rotation is 10 seconds, based on back bar ground dots. Most buffs last 30 seconds.
I would put forward that the combat above should last between 20 and 30 seconds depending on the skill of the player. This would give someone the opportunity to pre-buff and do a full rotation. Keep in mind that with better gear this time will drop dramatically.

So as a bare minimum my suggestion is to double the health of all delve bosses.
You could probably double the health of everything in a delve, making them at least feel slightly more dangerous than wandering around the countryside.

The delve bosses are more difficult than normal overland mobs and are fine just as they are.

Players who have progressed and become more powerful should find overland easy. It's not supposed to be a challenge, although it does provide some group activities with World Bosses and Harrowstorms and Vents. But it's main purpose is to quest and level and play through the story for all players of all skills and experience. It doesn't make sense for it to be anything different than what it already is.

There is a lot of content to challenge those who enjoy that. Overland isn't the place for it.

I'm not asking for a challenge.
I'm really not.

I'm asking for engagement. Like it or not ESO is not a walking simulator. Yes, the story is there to be played through, but there is also gameplay in the combat and over coming of enemies.
I'm not saying it should be challenging. I'm saying it shouldn't be trivial.

BretonMage

Tannus15 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Delve bosses are not supposed to be big major challenges. If they were new characters and players new to ESO wouldn't be able to defeat them.

Then buff new characters more.

That's a pretty good idea. I like that more than debuffs for higher level players, given that new players are scaled up anyway.

IMO only delve bosses need to be reworked. Trash mobs are fine as is, delves can be long enough without having to spend more time fighting mobs.

The_Titan_Tim

Challenge is great, look at the successes of recent games, like game of the year Elden Ring. The way FromSoftware do their reward to difficulty ratio is massively popular for a reason.

spartaxoxo

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

Challenge is great, look at the successes of recent games, like game of the year Elden Ring. The way FromSoftware do their reward to difficulty ratio is massively popular for a reason.

Sure. But that game series has cultivated an audience that likes difficult games from jump. ESO on the other hand has aggressively cultivated a more casual audience, because when they tried to cultivate an audience who liked difficulty, the game flopped. You can't really just take a game that's been around for years and change its audience.

This is why I think that if they do implement this idea, they need to be careful in how they do it. Their casual audience is their biggest one. It's evident in their interviews, PlayStation trophy data, and design decisions.

All that said, there is room to improve the difficulty issue for vet players. I think a slider ala LOTRO would work best, but they need to come up with something. There's really no reason players who like the harder stuff need to be so starved for content.

The_Titan_Tim

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

Challenge is great, look at the successes of recent games, like game of the year Elden Ring. The way FromSoftware do their reward to difficulty ratio is massively popular for a reason.

Sure. But that game series has cultivated an audience that likes difficult games from jump. ESO on the other hand has aggressively cultivated a more casual audience, because when they tried to cultivate an audience who liked difficulty, the game flopped. You can't really just take a game that's been around for years and change its audience.

This is why I think that if they do implement this idea, they need to be careful in how they do it. Their casual audience is their biggest one. It's evident in their interviews, PlayStation trophy data, and design decisions.

All that said, there is room to improve the difficulty issue for vet players. I think a slider ala LOTRO would work best, but they need to come up with something. There's really no reason players who like the harder stuff need to be so starved for content.

ESO has no audience at the moment compared to launch, look at the Steam numbers for a reference if you want, and it had nothing to do with the difficulty of content on launch, it was the lack of reward and interest. If the story was engaging, players would deal with whatever difficulty is thrown at them.

The game feels worse than Skyrim for questing, a game that the vast majority of players came from.

About the Elden Ring having “cultivated an audience” that is used to difficulty, that game is its own IP, yes it feels like a Souls, but it pulled a MASSIVE number of players, way more than any Souls game to date, vastly made of players that never played any other From games. Players enjoy the difficulty because it feels amazing to progress when you have to work for it, and the actual rewards for completing content are enticing. A skill point is not.

Edit: Adding a slider runs the risk of depreciating rewards, presuming that an update to overland would add tons of actual rewards. For a reference, look to Arena weapons and the “Perfected” versions, that decision was a huge slap to the face of veteran players that worked insanely hard to get their whole collection, which wasn’t updated to Perfected in the stickerbook on launch, effectively forcing players to farm content AGAIN that they had ran for years to get those weapons. If you don’t get rewarded more for difficulty, people will tire of it after a week.

spartaxoxo

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

Challenge is great, look at the successes of recent games, like game of the year Elden Ring. The way FromSoftware do their reward to difficulty ratio is massively popular for a reason.

Sure. But that game series has cultivated an audience that likes difficult games from jump. ESO on the other hand has aggressively cultivated a more casual audience, because when they tried to cultivate an audience who liked difficulty, the game flopped. You can't really just take a game that's been around for years and change its audience.

This is why I think that if they do implement this idea, they need to be careful in how they do it. Their casual audience is their biggest one. It's evident in their interviews, PlayStation trophy data, and design decisions.

All that said, there is room to improve the difficulty issue for vet players. I think a slider ala LOTRO would work best, but they need to come up with something. There's really no reason players who like the harder stuff need to be so starved for content.

ESO has no audience at the moment compared to launch, look at the Steam numbers for a reference if you want, and it had nothing to do with the difficulty of content on launch, it was the lack of reward and interest. If the story was engaging, players would deal with whatever difficulty is thrown at them.

There is way more people playing now than launch. And it did have to do with the difficulty. This was explicitly stated by the devs as a common piece of feedback they received and you can still find examples of it to this day.

The story was engaging, lowering the difficulty (among numerous other fixes) exploded the numbers. The story is by far the most popular piece of content in the game, as confirmed by the devs.

A slider doesn't exclude rewards nor does it exclude new attacks. You can easily attach achievements to using the slider and give rewards accordingly. Same with challenge banners. Now that they have added AWA, they can really do more with achievements.

Tannus15

I guess the question is how high could we push the overland "difficulty" without negatively impacting the super casual players, and can this be done in an asynchronous manner such as buffing just the delve boss as an example so the day to day impact is felt less.

I put difficulty in quotes because i'm not saying it should be difficult. i just want to move the needle from trivial to easy, and maybe for some players that moves it from easy to some attention required but not hard.

BretonMage

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

About the Elden Ring having “cultivated an audience” that is used to difficulty, that game is its own IP, yes it feels like a Souls, but it pulled a MASSIVE number of players, way more than any Souls game to date, vastly made of players that never played any other From games. Players enjoy the difficulty because it feels amazing to progress when you have to work for it, and the actual rewards for completing content are enticing. A skill point is not.

My SO plays/played Elden Ring and I spent quite a bit of time watching it. I'm sure it's a good game for those specifically looking for challenge, but I suspect the audience for the two games are vastly different, as their strengths are significantly disparate. Even my SO, who is a big fan of ER (more than ESO), admits that the lore is superior in Elder Scrolls. On my part, you could not get me to touch ER. I like a little bit of challenge, but to me, that's not the point of a game.

I know you're not advocating for ESO to be more like ER (I hope), but I do think that those who play ESO generally look for something else besides challenging content. Immersion, stories, relaxation even (I know a lot of people play Skyrim to relax). Not every gamer likes the same thing.

(Having said that, I do think tweaking the difficulty up would be great for seasoned players, as long as it's optional).

The_Titan_Tim

BretonMage wrote: »

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

About the Elden Ring having “cultivated an audience” that is used to difficulty, that game is its own IP, yes it feels like a Souls, but it pulled a MASSIVE number of players, way more than any Souls game to date, vastly made of players that never played any other From games. Players enjoy the difficulty because it feels amazing to progress when you have to work for it, and the actual rewards for completing content are enticing. A skill point is not.

My SO plays/played Elden Ring and I spent quite a bit of time watching it. I'm sure it's a good game for those specifically looking for challenge, but I suspect the audience for the two games are vastly different, as their strengths are significantly disparate. Even my SO, who is a big fan of ER (more than ESO), admits that the lore is superior in Elder Scrolls. On my part, you could not get me to touch ER. I like a little bit of challenge, but to me, that's not the point of a game.

I know you're not advocating for ESO to be more like ER (I hope), but I do think that those who play ESO generally look for something else besides challenging content. Immersion, stories, relaxation even (I know a lot of people play Skyrim to relax). Not every gamer likes the same thing.

(Having said that, I do think tweaking the difficulty up would be great for seasoned players, as long as it's optional).

No, ESO doesn’t need to be like Elden Ring, you’re right, but it definitely could take some of the highlights the game brought to the table and incorporate them in it’s own iteration. You’re absolutely right about the Elder Scrolls lore being top notch; it’s by far my favorite universe. It‘s just an injustice that the storyline is as easy and as unrewarding as it is currently.

Games that make you leave a boss with an L and have to revise your strategy, rent space in your head and keep you coming back, striving to be better.

Edit: Pre-One Tamriel had that vibe, and it was amazing, the problem was the lack of incentive, and the lack of options. People didn’t want to be pigeoned into a linear direction, which was what irritated them back in the day. My incentive was the lore, having played every TES game prior, simply learning more about each race was all I needed.

One Tamriel solved the free-roam problem but created a new one entirely… instead of having easy and difficult areas to every region, they settled in the middle, allowing the power to creep, inevitably making the game too easy.

This new update needed a chisel but ended up getting hammered, a pattern much too common when it comes to patches.

BretonMage

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

Games that make you leave a boss with an L and have to revise your strwe hvategy, rent space in your head and keep you coming back, striving to be better.

Couldn't you get that by soloing vet group content? We have a lot of that. In fact, if you were to include all the group content in ESO, wouldn't we actually have more difficult content than Elden Ring?

Edit: Pre-One Tamriel had that vibe, and it was amazing, the problem was the lack of incentive, and the lack of options. People didn’t want to be pigeoned into a linear direction, which was what irritated them back in the day. My incentive was the lore, having played every TES game prior, simply learning more about each race was all I needed.

One Tamriel solved the free-roam problem but created a new one entirely… instead of having easy and difficult areas to every region, they settled in the middle, allowing the power to creep, inevitably making the game too easy.

This new update needed a chisel but ended up getting hammered, a pattern much too common when it comes to patches.

I wasn't around till 2018 so I don't have any experience with the change. I'm very glad all regions are accessible with an open world feel - that open world element is also very much an Elder Scrolls staple. And even after the One Tamriel changes, I remember entering Craglorn as an utter lowbie, being chased by half a dozen atronachs and being quite terrified.

Lalothen

I would love to see time-of-day spawns that add more threat/challenge to overland content. We already have werewolves & blood fiends that spawn in certain zones in the dead of night; there's no reason why that can't be taken several steps further. There ought to be zones where it's dangerous to be out in the wild during the night, with tough mob packs and night-only roaming bosses added to reflect that. Likewise there's no reason certain other zones couldn't be more dangerous during the daytime.

This would actually get players to pay attention to the day/night cycle in ESO instead of just ignoring it/seeing it as a minor visual inconvenience (unless you're trying to get a free vamp/WW bite).

TaSheen

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

Games that make you leave a boss with an L and have to revise your strategy, rent space in your head and keep you coming back, striving to be better.

This is not why I play games. I'm not interested in striving to be better. I'm interested in exploring, doing the least amount of combat needed, talking to every NPC about whatever, questing and the lore (though I'm certainly not a lore junkie no matter that I've played TES since Arena released).

I play games for total escape from reality, and the only challenge I have any desire to deal with is what I already face IRL.

That said, as long as a more difficult overland is optional I'm fine with it. But knowing how ZOS does things (remember AWA? not that what they did with that is an issue for me, but it certainly is for a lot of people I know) I have a feeling that what's going to happen eventually is that those of you who want harder overland will get what you want, and I'll be spending the rest of my game life in towns and my houses - because the word "optional" seems to have no interest for those in charge.

Agenericname

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The_Titan_Tim wrote: »

Challenge is great, look at the successes of recent games, like game of the year Elden Ring. The way FromSoftware do their reward to difficulty ratio is massively popular for a reason.

Sure. But that game series has cultivated an audience that likes difficult games from jump. ESO on the other hand has aggressively cultivated a more casual audience, because when they tried to cultivate an audience who liked difficulty, the game flopped. You can't really just take a game that's been around for years and change its audience.

This is why I think that if they do implement this idea, they need to be careful in how they do it. Their casual audience is their biggest one. It's evident in their interviews, PlayStation trophy data, and design decisions.

All that said, there is room to improve the difficulty issue for vet players. I think a slider ala LOTRO would work best, but they need to come up with something. There's really no reason players who like the harder stuff need to be so starved for content.

They have cultivated an audience, but that alone wasnt resposible for the surge in popularity. In its first year Elden Ring sold nearly as copies as ESO has since its been out. I think that was in part because it introduced a true open world. And partly because, while some fights/bosses are even harder than previous games, the game as a whole is more accessible now.

By accessible I mean, we have summons and in an open world we have more options as to when we engage with certain content. If a player cant beat a given boss/dungeon, they can go back and level some more. The summons in Elden ring are stronger than anything in ESO so they change the difficulty significantly in many cases.

Fromsoft didnt just deliver a Soulsborne game to Soulsborne fans, they opened it up to a wider audience. The first of the Demonsouls game was 2009, which puts 13 years between it and ER. They did change their audience, but the did it by making it more inclusive.

Its a SP/Co-op and difficult to compare to an MMO, especially one as close to a themepark as ESO is, but there is a place in the market for it. I do agree, they would have to be careful with it.

spartaxoxo

Agenericname wrote: »

Its a SP/Co-op and difficult to compare to an MMO, especially one as close to a themepark as ESO is, but there is a place in the market for it. I do agree, they would have to be careful with it.

Well MMOs are also an aging genre....

There is a place in the market for a new more difficult mmo (isn't that what New World is supposed to be??), but I don't think changing an existing old game to just be like that game would work out. It's a general rule it's better to please existing customers than chase new ones with a game this old. Whatever changes that are made can't alienate casual players. I think it would depend on whatever they did. People don't want empty lands. They don't forced difficulty. But there's a LOT of room for doing things that doesn't involve either of them. I am hoping that this next chapter will show they finally have an answer to this problem.

SilverBride

I don't agree that it's a problem. It's just a matter of personal preference.

Elden Ring keeps getting mentioned as being a popular game that's doing well, but that's because it's a difficult game that attracts an audience that enjoys difficult play. I don't think its playerbase would be receptive to them developing an easy version of the entire game and splitting the playerbase just like many casuals here aren't receptive to ESO creating a veteran overland.

Four_Fingers

Not to mention the overland in Elden Ring is also not as hard as the bosses to me anyway.
Used the overland in ER to level just like other games.

Franchise408

I don't consider myself a part of the FromSoftware fanbase, though I did play through and complete Elden Ring, and though I am more of an Elder Scrolls fan than Elden Ring (Elder Scrolls is my favorite game series) I do think that Elden Ring is the better game than ESO.

That said, Elden Ring is not the proper design direction for ESO. Although fittingly enough, ESO was one of the games that I thought about when thinking about Elden Ring's level of challenge. But mostly, ESO matches ER's level of challenge in areas of vet dungeons / vet trials. Certainly not in overland.

I don't want ESO's overland to be like ER. But a poster above talked about rotations, and I really think that's a perfect example. I spend my time building my character, leveling skills, finding gear, all to develop a character specific playstyle, a playstyle which I don't get a chance to play because everything is dead within the first 2-3 attacks. So I don't even have a chance to use all my skills and abilities that I've taken the time to level up my characters to do.

I'm sorry, but that's counter intuitive when it comes to RPG's. RPG's are all about building and developing your character to unlock new skills and abilities and tactics to be able to use, but there is nothing to use it on, unless I go to the very specific content of group content or PVP. I personally am not a PVP player, and while I do very much enjoy the group content in this game, vet dungeons and trials, and feel that is the level of challenge and difficulty I am looking for in my gaming time, sometimes I don't always want to do group content, and if it's not trial time for my guild, there isn't really much for me to do in game, if anything. I don't even care if overland is reworked or not, I'd be happy with future chapters and DLC giving vet zones that we can go to to get a more engaging solo overland experience. A place where I can really play with my characters, builds, rotations, skills, abilities, sets, and everything else that I've worked to build on my character, and do so at a time where grouping might not be an option (if it's not trial time in my guild) or if I don't want to do group content at that time.

I understand gaming for relaxation as well, and have plenty of games that I play to relax, but when I am playing a combat centric RPG, I want opportunities to actually USE the character that I've built up and see those strategies and character building choices put in action.

SilverBride

Franchise408 wrote: »

...while I do very much enjoy the group content in this game, vet dungeons and trials, and feel that is the level of challenge and difficulty I am looking for in my gaming time, sometimes I don't always want to do group content, and if it's not trial time for my guild, there isn't really much for me to do in game, if anything.

I enjoy questing and housing but I'm not always in the mood for those either, so I just sit and chat with friends or go check out their houses or even log off for a bit. This is the way it is for a lot of players.

Franchise408 wrote: »

I don't even care if overland is reworked or not, I'd be happy with future chapters and DLC giving vet zones that we can go to to get a more engaging solo overland experience. A place where I can really play with my characters, builds, rotations, skills, abilities, sets, and everything else that I've worked to build on my character, and do so at a time where grouping might not be an option (if it's not trial time in my guild) or if I don't want to do group content at that time.

We can play with builds, rotations, skills and abilities on World Bosses and Harrowstorms and Vents and in dungeons and trials. Not being in the mood for those things isn't a problem with overland that needs fixed.

Franchise408 wrote: »

I understand gaming for relaxation as well, and have plenty of games that I play to relax, but when I am playing a combat centric RPG, I want opportunities to actually USE the character that I've built up and see those strategies and character building choices put in action.

ESO isn't just a combat centric game. The story is a big part of what it's about.

Agenericname

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Agenericname wrote: »

Its a SP/Co-op and difficult to compare to an MMO, especially one as close to a themepark as ESO is, but there is a place in the market for it. I do agree, they would have to be careful with it.

Well MMOs are also an aging genre....

There is a place in the market for a new more difficult mmo (isn't that what New World is supposed to be??), but I don't think changing an existing old game to just be like that game would work out. It's a general rule it's better to please existing customers than chase new ones with a game this old. Whatever changes that are made can't alienate casual players. I think it would depend on whatever they did. People don't want empty lands. They don't forced difficulty. But there's a LOT of room for doing things that doesn't involve either of them. I am hoping that this next chapter will show they finally have an answer to this problem.

New World was originally open world PvP. It was in one of the open betas that they changed their direction. Their vision seemed pretty fluid there for a while. Im not sure what theyre going for now, but it originally wasnt meant to be that game.

Personally I feel like an engaging overland goes beyond simple difficulty. Even if NW had have been as difficult as ER, which ER's overland isnt horribly difficult, it would have still been moving a character from point A to point B follwing quest markers. The difference would be, it would take 3 hits to kill a wolf instead of 2.

Elsonso

Agenericname wrote: »

Personally I feel like an engaging overland goes beyond simple difficulty. Even if NW had have been as difficult as ER, which ER's overland isnt horribly difficult, it would have still been moving a character from point A to point B follwing quest markers. The difference would be, it would take 3 hits to kill a wolf instead of 2.

That is actually a predicted problem if you read through this thread.

Just having harder general overland is pointless if there is no reason to be in the overland. Something needs exist to bring people in to do something. I doubt players are going to line up to just kill harder monsters in numbers big enough to justify doing it. If people are coming to the zone for something else, and all that is happening is that it is taking longer to accomplish whatever they are there to do, chances are most people will pick the easy path. The destination isn't going to be "harder overland" for most players. I think most players will see "annoying overland" and "easy overland" and pick the latter.

This is why I don't think ZOS is going to do overland zones. There needs to be a reason to do harder overland zones that goes well beyond "I want harder overland". Well beyond. Maybe they can come up with something with rewards, but my guess is that if they do many special rewards in harder content only, a sizable portion of their player base will complain, and loudly. Why? Because they are never going to do that harder content and will feel sidelined.

They might do a slider, but my bet is that, if they do, they won't do it for _everything_ in overland. They will do it just for bosses and boss content and my guess is that most players (aka "clear majority") won't move it from default. The slider will be a "nerf" to the character, not a buff, because everyone will be in the same zone with the same overland difficulty. The "veteran" players would just do less DPS compared to non veteran players. And THAT is why I don't think they will do sliders, either.

If I am wrong, it will be interesting to see what they do, though.

Agenericname

Elsonso wrote: »

Agenericname wrote: »

Personally I feel like an engaging overland goes beyond simple difficulty. Even if NW had have been as difficult as ER, which ER's overland isnt horribly difficult, it would have still been moving a character from point A to point B follwing quest markers. The difference would be, it would take 3 hits to kill a wolf instead of 2.

That is actually a predicted problem if you read through this thread.

Just having harder general overland is pointless if there is no reason to be in the overland. Something needs exist to bring people in to do something. I doubt players are going to line up to just kill harder monsters in numbers big enough to justify doing it. If people are coming to the zone for something else, and all that is happening is that it is taking longer to accomplish whatever they are there to do, chances are most people will pick the easy path. The destination isn't going to be "harder overland" for most players. I think most players will see "annoying overland" and "easy overland" and pick the latter.

This is why I don't think ZOS is going to do overland zones. There needs to be a reason to do harder overland zones that goes well beyond "I want harder overland". Well beyond. Maybe they can come up with something with rewards, but my guess is that if they do many special rewards in harder content only, a sizable portion of their player base will complain, and loudly. Why? Because they are never going to do that harder content and will feel sidelined.

They might do a slider, but my bet is that, if they do, they won't do it for _everything_ in overland. They will do it just for bosses and boss content and my guess is that most players (aka "clear majority") won't move it from default. The slider will be a "nerf" to the character, not a buff, because everyone will be in the same zone with the same overland difficulty. The "veteran" players would just do less DPS compared to non veteran players. And THAT is why I don't think they will do sliders, either.

If I am wrong, it will be interesting to see what they do, though.

Rewards are the wrong way to look at it. It needs to be rewarding.

If I encounter a random mob in ESO's overland, it will likely take me 2 shots to kill it counting the light attack. If I encounter a random mob in ER it will also likely take me 2 shots to kill it, assuming that they have a weapon. The difference is, I have to make a successful parry to pull that off. I could do it other ways, but, its fun. Theres risk in doing it. If I am not successful, Ill take damage, probably a good bit, or die if Im not careful. Theres something to be said for risk vs reward. But if I am successful, it feels rewarding.

My build reflects the playstyle. Choices that I make matter. Its a reason to invest time into that character. New players have that. Vet players, not so much. A veteran player could easily go through overland in crafted sets using the first skill they put on their bar, assuming it was a damage oriented skill. Concealed weapon, strife, wall of elements, it really doesn't matter.

It takes away from the sense of progression. Its not my build or my skill being so overpowered. If that were the case, it would feel like part of the progression, albeit, still the most boring part of it. Nearly anything would work and achieve similar results.

So now we are at a place, or I am, although Im not alone, where all of my characters are the same in terms of achievements. For the purposes of overland they may as well all be the same character because they could all equip a staff and FP/CS they way through the content.

Rewards, as in simply saying "heres more stuff to do this content" isnt really the answer to that. It should feel like the choices that I make matter, at least to that character and feel rewarding to play that way.

I don't think that ZOS is going to address it to be honest. Whatever system that they have coming I think will be something more repetitive in nature. I could be wrong, who knows?

colossalvoids

Franchise408 wrote: »

when I am playing a combat centric RPG, I want opportunities to actually USE the character that I've built up and see those strategies and character building choices put in action.

Can't agree more on that.

Malthorne

Four_Fingers wrote: »

Not to mention the overland in Elden Ring is also not as hard as the bosses to me anyway.
Used the overland in ER to level just like other games.

The elden ring overland isn’t as hard as the most difficult bosses, that’s true…however, it’s still very engaging and quite punishing when you make mistakes. There are challenges to be found relative to your level of progression everywhere you go if you choose to take them on. Some would even say that the Rune Bears and Deathbirds are absolutely some of the toughest foes you can face in the land between and they are mostly found in the overland. There are environmental hazards to overcome as well.

I’m not asking for ER difficulty in ESO. I and many other others have mentioned numerous times that we would like a more engaging, less trivial, “optional” veteran difficultly mode.

amonengelb16_ESO

I don't want to tell anybody how to play this game. But ignoring the fact, that combat is a basic part of MMORPGs, literally is escaping the game's virtual reality. I have a fulltime job, sparing a lot of time with family and friends, having limited time to play. I would call myself a casual if I look at my playtime nowadays. I play this game for escapism, too, since I have enough reallife stress. This does NOT mean, that I want to play Sims 4 while playing an Elder Scrolls game (especially ESO). I understood Elder Scrolls games as an experience where I can play my custom character, where I can immerse myself and create my own advanture which was always presented as a believable experience. It also can be challanging, if the story dictates it. Just as dragons and dragonpriests are.

I'm also not necessarily arguing for a "soulslike"-hardcore-experience. But I will not pretend playing this game solely for the voice acted storys. To be frankly, this is an uthopic approach, because creating a series would be cheaper than creating a MMORPG of this sort. Overland zones actually act as a first impression for new players. As said, the quality of story content and voice acting is good! But this ain't the only argument that binds people to ESO for a long time.

I leveled new characters last year and did many DLC/basegame zone quests solo. I have to admit that I was left with a hungry and partly-unfinished feeling. Contemporary (game) design progresses every year. God of War: Ragnarok is a recent example for flawless story approaches nowadays. And I mean "post 2020"-nowadays. It ain't a soulslike-game but it takes itself serious when communicating it's fantasy and story in a mature way. Thus its entertaining, believable and immersive. You don't get the story as a package of fassades.

Players had to use their imagination/fantasy to fill up personal gaming experiences in times of Baldur's Gate 1+2. But we're living in 2023! I don't have to use my fantasy to see that I could ignore all dialogues or to pretend/roleplay that my NPC enemy is much harder than it actually is. I can read it in the game's User Interface and displayed Damage Numbers. I also don't have to use my fantasy to realize, that my character can use A LOT of actions per second and weave a Light Attacks after every skill I use. ESO does not require superior perception from players to see this.

I did not develop Elder Scrolls (Online), nor did I create the concept for it. But I'm more than 100% sure that an Elder Scrolls experience was/is not intended to be a "Journey"-like (the game) experience.

spartaxoxo

I think playing the game's story "as is" is already pretty immersive, if you're someone who can enjoy walking sims. Whenever I am in the mood for that kind of relaxing gameplay, the overland quest doesn't disappoint. The story is engaging, entertaining, and well-written. But, you have to be in the mood for a walking sim like experience.

ETA

As noted by others, the game doesn't feel as much as an action RPG when the combat ends so quickly.

Dreepa

Just consider this:
99% of the game's skills and rewards are combat related.

iirc we only have 2 non combat rewards in the skill lines: "Persuade" and "Intimidate". Oh, and maybe 30% faster riding.

Anyhow, the point being: Why is everything a combat related reward when combat is irrelevant?
This in turn means that the rewards are irrelevant.

Araneae6537

Reading about buffing or debuffing, it would be nice if new enemies had different AI / tactics too. Something like the jungle areas in GW2 Heart of Thorns where you would quickly die if you didn’t know how to engage the different enemy types (doesn’t have to THAT degree, actually, I’d prefer it wasn’t, lol). I really DON’T want overland to be a tedious slug, but it would be nice if there were enemies or groups that required more care, ones that you would probably avoid as a solo newer player, but not DLC WB level.

I was venturing into the Galen jungle for the first time on my crafter/adventurer (ie., not even adequate DPS by any standards) hunting down a lead and the area seemed really cool but dangerous, until I two-shot what I had cautiously approached as a forbidding foe… Ohhh… You know, I always found it more fun, engaging and ultimately rewarding to have some areas and enemies that are difficult, even too much at first. It gives a feeling of progression too.

When I started TES III Morrowind, I entered my a cave outside Seyda Neen and promptly died — I ventured more cautiously thereafter! Of course if everything killed me, I would have become frustrated and given up, but I had to play safer until I was more powerful (and learned the game of course too). I had an epic adventure exploring a dwemer ruin and then limping back to town (no health recovery in those days and I was out of potions) and I was cautious even of skeevers lest one take me out before I could rest and recovery!

Princess_Kassiopeia

Bodycounter wrote: »

...//.... The main problem is that every enemy instantly dies when im touching it and even enemies that are meant to be a real threat in the story will die within seconds. ...//...

What would be good is if the NME-Critter was aware of the level of the incoming threat and had its defences or strengths adjusted accordingly.
I recall I nearly quit eso in my beginings becase if anything even so much as looked at me I died. I didnt understand the levelling system at all. Now I dont mind a fight but as you say after gaining some degree of resistable defence and strength of attack it would be a challenge if, on occassion, the creatures knew of your level of ability and were adjusted accordingly.

Thats not to say that the fight to the death would be equall in effort to anyone of any level, just that a marginal percentage of success would favour the higher owered player but not before they were forced to put up a good fight to achieve it.

One other thought is that perhaps some critters (for example of intrigue of attack) may be aware by noise, so forcing you to NOT go for them by thrashing through the taller brush and bracken but rather wait until they were in the open on flat land. Then you could creep up on them.

Equally it would be good to have to creep behind something and get in at least the first smack by taking it by surprise because it couldnt see you.
This wouldnt be difficult. You'd just need a variable that disallowed sensitivity to incoming threat on the part of the critter anywhere but in the forward 280 degrees.

Also some creatures may be, like wolves, almost as good as blind at dusk and dawn and so therefore it would be advantgeous to go for THAT specific Boss/Critter/Demon/Spriggan at either dusk or dawn and at all other times it is as good as ipossible to kill it.

Another thing that gets me. A Leopard or Cheetah (and probably other monsters) would NOT fight to the death unless fighting for their young... they would flee. FAST! TOO fast to persue. And so escape. So unless SURROUNDED would live to tell the tale.

I'm with you. I think technology allows us to ask for a lot more.