Overland Content Feedback Thread

Elsonso · January 1

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

I cannot wrap my head around the fact that this very minor increase would cause a problem for anyone (how casual they might be) and i still haven't seen any solid arguments supporting this.

My thought is that a very minor increase would not satisfy enough people.

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

The problem is: the more complex the solution we demand, the smaller the chance that it will get actually implemented (ahem, 190 pages in). So if we all unanimously ask for a simpler solution (again: a little extra HP for story/quest bosses) there is a much bigger chance of something actually being done!

Devs have said that they don't want solutions to problems. Solutions are what they do. We provide problems, and if they agree that it is a problem, they will design a solution.

So, I think we are good with talking about both simple and complex solutions, so long as the problem is clearly stated.

KapiteinBoterham · January 1

@Alinhbo_Tyaka Oh i thought you were agreeing with me by quoting me, too bad. Like i have mentioned multiple times a toggle/option/banner is not going to happen, I hope after 190 pages that this has become clear. Asking for this is the same as not posting anything at this point.. I also think it is not fair to drag the solution i came up with through the mud by calling it a "quick and dirty change or a hack" without any arguments or reasoning:

Why/how will a small change in quest/story bosses' HP "alienate the majority of players"?

You do not support my suggestion because i am adamant about a change that is much needed. Why is this change not needed according to you?

@valenwood_vegan I am not going to bother with the math (while interesting), this is something ZOS can figure out fine without our help. It is up to us as players to point the developers in the right direction and let them know there is something wrong with the game. All i am asking for is a little extra HP for the bosses to be able to say their voicelines, i am not expecting some epic million HP bosses.

@Elsonso I did not know that solutions were not welcome. If i were this game's developer i would be happy to read any possible way to increase the gameplay experience, but whatever.

My thought is that a very minor increase would not satisfy enough people.

Why would this minor change not satisfy enough players? I think it's best to try to satisfy as many players as possible and seeing this thread not a lot of people are currently satisfied..

Something we can all agree on; It is not the mudcrabs on the beaches that are cause for complaint!

*With this post i hope to steer this thread into a healthy discussion using arguments and reasoning, that can be easily taken into account by the developers.

spartaxoxo · January 1

Multiple reasons were given for flatline HP increase.

Pros

Simple and cheap to implement

Some old bosses would get to say their lines to more players

People who's only goal is to hear the lines to aide immersion would enjoy it.

Cons

It does not offer more difficulty for those who seek difficulty, as neither the mechanics nor the damage received by the player changes with a flat HP increase

Those who are already struggling and don't want it to be harder would find the fight more of a slog

Those who wanted nothing to change would dislike and resent the change

Those who wanted things to change to be specifically to make fights harder would dislike it because it did not address most their concerns.

No matter the HP change implemented, the fight would take longer the lower the power you have. This means that it is a solution that impacts the players that are lower power (such as new players) more than high power players. But the majority that want the change are higher power players. This was shown by the math earlier.

Alinhbo_Tyaka · January 1

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

@Alinhbo_Tyaka Oh i thought you were agreeing with me by quoting me, too bad. Like i have mentioned multiple times a toggle/option/banner is not going to happen, I hope after 190 pages that this has become clear. Asking for this is the same as not posting anything at this point.. I also think it is not fair to drag the solution i came up with through the mud by calling it a "quick and dirty change or a hack" without any arguments or reasoning:

Why/how will a small change in quest/story bosses' HP "alienate the majority of players"?

You do not support my suggestion because i am adamant about a change that is much needed. Why is this change not needed according to you?

@valenwood_vegan I am not going to bother with the math (while interesting), this is something ZOS can figure out fine without our help. It is up to us as players to point the developers in the right direction and let them know there is something wrong with the game. All i am asking for is a little extra HP for the bosses to be able to say their voicelines, i am not expecting some epic million HP bosses.

Something we can all agree on; It is not the mudcrabs on the beaches that are cause for complaint!

*With this post i hope to steer this thread into a healthy discussion using arguments and reasoning, that can be easily taken into account by the developers.

The change is not much needed. In fact I posit that the majority of players are perfectly satisfied with open world hardness and have no desire to see it made harder. I'm positive many like me have no problem if ZOS tries to accommodate higher level players as long as it does not affect our play.

Your proposal as has been pointed out many times affects all players. Your assumption that it will only add seconds to peoples play time has no basis as you don't not know how it will affect those players of lesser skills. Your 10 - 15 seconds will turn into minutes for some players. On the other end the proposed change that it will not meet the expectation of many players who have posted here for harder content. They are expecting something significant along the lines of the difference between normal and vet content. Neither of these groups will be happy if ZOS presents a "small" adjustment to the damage tables that makes them slightly harder. It is also unlikely to resolve your desired goal of being able to hear all of a boss's dialog and see all of a boss's moves.

I have close to 40 years in software architecture and design of large scale operating system, communications subsystems and database managers. Your proposal to just do something and get it out there rather than a well designed thought out change is considered quick and dirty or a hack. It is a way of describing a less than desirable change that generally doesn't go over well with the customer base.

The fact is many players in this thread have disagreed with your proposal and explained why. That you continue to argue and say that their explanations don't meet your criteria could be considered insulting as well. I and others have told you multiple times that they are satisfied with the hardness for themselves or taking the whole player base into account. There need be no other explanation than that. You keep coming back with what I consider an argument of "Since I want this you have to too". It is time to come to terms that you have presented your case and that there are players that disagree and always will. I am sure there are also some players that agree.

As a side note in those 190 pages apply to your argument as well. The various arguments have been covered here and the best we can hope for should ZOS ever decide to visit the subject that they distill down the thread contents into usable requirements.

Braffin · January 1

@KapiteinBoterham A mandatory increase of difficulty is out of the question, even for those, which are in favor of difficulty options for overland like myself.

Besides that the necessary scaling technology was already implemented with release of IA. Applying that for overland is the next logical (and imo rather probably) step.

KapiteinBoterham · January 1

@spartaxoxo Now these are arguments that will form a healthy discussion! Although i do find the focus of the voicelines a little specific, this was just one of my latest arguments. The true main reason of the change would of course be to give the sense/illusion that the quest/story bosses are as powerful as the quest dialogue describes them as.

Now for the cons:

It does not offer more difficulty for those who seek difficulty, as neither the mechanics nor the damage received by the player changes with a flat HP increase

Not true, some enemies have special attacks that they never get to use because they die before that. A slight increase in HP would make them able to cast these attack and in turn deal more damage or apply certain effects.

Those who are already struggling and don't want it to be harder would find the fight more of a slog

The fight would take longer yes, especially for players that dont know what they're doing. If you are really that focussed on spending as little time at a boss as possible; I hope this will drive these types of players to improve their chararcter. There are plenty of ways of becoming better (think gear/food/skills) that are not reliant on quick reflexes or "gettin' good". Story/quest bosses make up only a very small (but important) part of the game and this change would not cause any long term fatigue.

Those who wanted nothing to change would dislike and resent the change

Let's be serious we're talking about ESO here. This game was built on change. I am still waiting for them to restore the infamous "Grim focus permaglow" or the costume animation that they changed/removed for no reason.

Those who wanted things to change to be specifically to make fights harder would dislike it because it did not address most their concerns.

But it would at least adress their concerns. Which is much better than what were getting now.

No matter the HP change implemented, the fight would take longer the lower the power you have. This means that it is a solution that impacts the players that are lower power (such as new players) more than high power players. But the majority that want the change are higher power players. This was shown by the math earlier.

This goes without saying, but i understand your concerns. Eventually it is up to the developers to decide how much change in HP would be reasonable. This would take multiple days of testing and is not something i am planning to do myself.

spartaxoxo · January 1

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

Not true, some enemies have special attacks that they never get to use because they die before that. A slight increase in HP would make them able to cast these attack and in turn deal more damage or apply certain effects.

I literally wait to attack until I see all of them. And have nuked the bosses on alts. It would have to be a lot more than slight HP to stop someone of my power level from nuking them before they can do them (or immunity phases as new ones have specifically to prevent this) and I am not a Godslayer caliber player. There are players significantly better than me.

The fight would take longer yes, especially for players that dont know what they're doing. If you are really that focussed on spending as little time at a boss as possible; I hope this will drive these types of players to improve their chararcter. There are plenty of ways of becoming better (think gear/food/skills) that are not reliant on quick reflexes or "gettin' good". Story/quest bosses make up only a very small (but important) part of the game and this change would not cause any long term fatigue.

Yes, it would cause long term fatigue. If they cannot do the story bosses with a bit more HP. Then they also won't be doing any other PvE content in this game because all of it would be too difficult for them as all of it is harder than what this would leave those bosses.

Those players would need to improve by grinding trash and picking mats to craft gear before they're allowed to engage in any serious aspect of the game. That's not appealing. That's long term fatigue.

And new players aren't going to want to have to get good before they can even do tutorial content.

But it would at least adress their concerns. Which is much better than what were getting now.

No. It wouldn't. The only thing it addresses is hearing the voice lines, which I can already accomplish by light attacking or waiting.

SilverBride · January 1

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

The true main reason of the change would of course be to give the sense/illusion that the quest/story bosses are as powerful as the quest dialogue describes them as.

Being able to defeat these bosses as the Hero I am being told I am gives me a sense of actually being that Hero. If I struggle on them I won't feel this way.

TaSheen · January 1

Braffin wrote: »

@KapiteinBoterham A mandatory increase of difficulty is out of the question, even for those, which are in favor of difficulty options for overland like myself.

Besides that the necessary scaling technology was already implemented with release of IA. Applying that for overland is the next logical (and imo rather probably) step.

That's an interesting take. How do you envision that working in overland, @Braffin?

spartaxoxo · January 1

Braffin wrote: »

Besides that the necessary scaling technology was already implemented with release of IA. Applying that for overland is the next logical (and imo rather probably) step.

One thing that IA has also shown me is how much better these quest bosses feel to fight when they hit harder. I have run into Lady Belain several times now in IA. Lady Belain outranks Lady Thorn, but you wouldn't know why when it comes to fighting Lady Belain it in overland questing vs Lady Thorn in a dungeon. They tell you but they can't show you because dungeons are group content and quests are single player beginner content. However, when I see Lady Belain in IA, I'm way more scared of losing a thread to her than Lady Thorn. Belain is a G.

Laatvulan and Belain are two of the cycle bosses I have the most trouble with and they are both characters I completely looked over in questing.

KapiteinBoterham · January 1

@Alinhbo_Tyaka

They are expecting something significant along the lines of the difference between normal and vet content. Neither of these groups will be happy if ZOS presents a "small" adjustment to the damage tables that makes them slightly harder.

I am simply one step ahead in the process by asking for a smaller/simpler change. We are never going to get toggles/banners or another fleshed out system. If we were it would have been implemented by now (or do you know more about this process from experience in the software field?)

Neither of these groups will be happy if ZOS presents a "small" adjustment to the damage tables that makes them slightly harder.

Why would both groups not be happy? I personally think both groups would be happy, that's why i am calling it a middleground. What we now have is one group unhappy..

It is a way of describing a less than desirable change that generally doesn't go over well with the customer base.

Why would this change not go over well? You state it like it is a fact but i dont see it that way.

I and others have told you multiple times that they are satisfied with the hardness for themselves or taking the whole player base into account. There need be no other explanation than that. You keep coming back with what I consider an argument of "Since I want this you have to too".

It's great that many people are satisfied at the moment, but many also aren't (thats why were holding this discussion). If you think i am somehow forcing this change down people's throaths you are mistaken. I am trying to find a middleground for a problem that has been plaguing ESO since One-Tamriel and has a thread with over 190 pages dating back to November 2021.
You can find my questions insulting but i am sincerely trying to understand other's point of view about something I really care about.

As a side note in those 190 pages apply to your argument as well. The various arguments have been covered here and the best we can hope for should ZOS ever decide to visit the subject that they distill down the thread contents into usable requirements.

This thread exists because of the overwhelming amount of threads complaining about the overwold being too easy not the other way around.

Braffin · January 1

TaSheen wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

@KapiteinBoterham A mandatory increase of difficulty is out of the question, even for those, which are in favor of difficulty options for overland like myself.

Besides that the necessary scaling technology was already implemented with release of IA. Applying that for overland is the next logical (and imo rather probably) step.

That's an interesting take. How do you envision that working in overland, @Braffin?

There are two options to implement this:

1) Separate instances of overland zones with increased difficulty would be the easier approach. As simple as open up the respective instance and apply the scaling algorithm.
2) More complex, but nonetheless possible, is a slight rework of said scaling mechanism to have it work as personal "debuff" which indeed does nothing more than a hidden upscale of enemies encountered. The advantage of this approach is in allowing players to have more options regarding difficulty, as no additional instances are needed. The disadvantage would be a much higher server load tho.

Either way, the major technical work is already done. If it's possible to scale enemies at will in IA, it's also possible everywhere else without much hassle.

This would only adjust stats of enemies, leaving their mechanics as before. That's not an issue imo tho, as a lot of said enemies already have interesting mechanics. We just don't get to see them.

KapiteinBoterham · January 1

@Braffin this would be the perfect middleground for everybody!! Now let's increase the quest/story bosses' HP for the meantime, at least untill this get's implemented!

@spartaxoxo

No. It wouldn't. The only thing it addresses is hearing the voice lines, which I can already accomplish by light attacking or waiting.

Purposefully not attacking the boss to let them finish their voicelines is exactly one of the things that proves this part of the game is just clearly broken . In a properly functioning game enemies present their voicelines/animations during a fight without dying so fast. I am not asking for enough HP for even a pro DPS player to experience everything, just a slight bump so it feels less dumb and honours the quests building up the bad guy.

Alinhbo_Tyaka · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

@Alinhbo_Tyaka

They are expecting something significant along the lines of the difference between normal and vet content. Neither of these groups will be happy if ZOS presents a "small" adjustment to the damage tables that makes them slightly harder.

I am simply one step ahead in the process by asking for a smaller/simpler change. We are never going to get toggles/banners or another fleshed out system. If we were it would have been implemented by now (or do you know more about this process from experience in the software field?)

Neither of these groups will be happy if ZOS presents a "small" adjustment to the damage tables that makes them slightly harder.

Why would both groups not be happy? I personally think both groups would be happy, that's why i am calling it a middleground. What we now have is one group unhappy..

It is a way of describing a less than desirable change that generally doesn't go over well with the customer base.

Why would this change not go over well? You state it like it is a fact but i dont see it that way.

I and others have told you multiple times that they are satisfied with the hardness for themselves or taking the whole player base into account. There need be no other explanation than that. You keep coming back with what I consider an argument of "Since I want this you have to too".

It's great that many people are satisfied at the moment, but many also aren't (thats why were holding this discussion). If you think i am somehow forcing this change down people's throaths you are mistaken. I am trying to find a middleground for a problem that has been plaguing ESO since One-Tamriel and has a thread with over 190 pages dating back to November 2021.
You can find my questions insulting but i am sincerely trying to understand other's point of view about something I really care about.

As a side note in those 190 pages apply to your argument as well. The various arguments have been covered here and the best we can hope for should ZOS ever decide to visit the subject that they distill down the thread contents into usable requirements.

This thread exists because of the overwhelming amount of threads complaining about the overwold being too easy not the other way around.

There is no middle ground that will satisfy the majority of players. Most don't want any change to overland difficulty for various reasons. Those higher skilled players that want harder overland content are looking for a significant increase in difficulty. As has already been stated on this thread by other posters just increasing health stats won't cut it. In particular your proposal would not mean anything to someone looking for vet level open world content.

Telling ZOS to just do something, anything is not going to cut it with either group. Both are in agreement that it would be nice if ZOS could accommodate the higher skilled players. However the general consensus is it needs to be opt-in and not applied across the board. There is also a large cross section of posters who feel if the change cannot be made to be optional then things are best left as they are.

I'm done responding as you won't listen and it always circles back to the idea that your idea is something everyone should want when the reality is they want a well thought out architected solution.

Braffin · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

@Braffin this would be the perfect middleground for everybody!! Now let's increase the quest/story bosses' HP for the meantime, at least untill this get's implemented!

As said before, I oppose any mandatory increase of difficulty and your arguments aren't convincing at all imo.

A slight increase is meaningless to most well-equipped players, while a major increase would leave newer players and those with less fleshed-out builds with unbeatable story bosses.

Besides that, increasing HP of an enemy doesn't make them more interesting and immersive. For that you'd also have to increase the dmg they capable to do. Otherwise you create nothing more than a bullet-spongy slog, which doesn't endanger the players besides boring them to death.

KapiteinBoterham · January 2

@Alinhbo_Tyaka

There is no middle ground that will satisfy the majority of players.

There are plenty of things that are satisfying about ESO. Why can't the story/quest bossfights be one of them?

In particular your proposal would not mean anything to someone looking for vet level open world content.

Yeah, that's what a middleground is. You lower your demands to keep as many people happy as possible.

However the general consensus is it needs to be opt-in and not applied across the board. There is also a large cross section of posters who feel if the change cannot be made to be optional then things are best left as they are.

We have to stay realistic to ZOS' capabilities. I do not want to see the game hurting any longer or another year having passed without anything being actually done about it. There is also a group of player who, if the change cannot be made to be optional, still would like a more immersive/realistic bossfight.

Stating your opinion as if they are facts does not really breed a healthy discussion. It convolutes the thread and makes it harder for the devs to decipher.

KapiteinBoterham · January 2

@Braffin Yeah you being opposed to my idea was clear! But I don't really know why..

Do keep in mind that the lower level players are boosted by the game. The exact math and logic behind it will take a lot of work for ZOS (not as much as a toggle/banner situation tho!). I think its unfair to debase the solution i've worked hard to defend purely because i haven't thought up the exact numbers/values..

It is not the "fix all", nobody says it is. But it is something realisticly feasible.

If we all unamously ask for slightly tougher story/quest bosses we have a much higher chance of succes. But if we keep demanding more and more.. Well, in that case I will see you on this thread next year.

TaSheen · January 2

I won't agree to this, sorry. I have a lot of trouble with the way things are right now, I certainly don't need any more problems with story bosses.

I linked a post where I addressed some of my issues when you stated I needed to prove it. You either didn't read it, or just ignored what I was talking about.

Of course, no one will miss me if I can't continue to play. I get it.

spartaxoxo · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

Purposefully not attacking the boss to let them finish their voicelines is exactly one of the things that proves this part of the game is just clearly broken . In a properly functioning game enemies present their voicelines/animations during a fight without dying so fast. I am not asking for enough HP for even a pro DPS player to experience everything, just a slight bump so it feels less dumb and honours the quests building up the bad guy.

I AM a good DPS player, so it not being enough for me to experience anything doesn't change anything for me. Players like me (or better) are the majority of the ones asking for more difficulty options.

And people with significantly less power than me already don't need to hold back to experience the content.

In lowering the bar so much, this solution doesn't satisfy almost anyone. People who want to hear voice lines but can't stand light attacking a couple seconds is about the only ones that benefit.

SilverBride · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

If we all unamously ask for slightly tougher story/quest bosses we have a much higher chance of succes.

The only way to get a unanimous response is if everyone involved is in agreement. That isn't the case here as there are many that are opposed to any increase in overland difficulty.

No one has an obligation to agree to anything they don't want.

Braffin · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

@Braffin Yeah you being opposed to my idea was clear! But I don't really know why..

Do keep in mind that the lower level players are boosted by the game. The exact math and logic behind it will take a lot of work for ZOS (not as much as a toggle/banner situation tho!). I think its unfair to debase the solution i've worked hard to defend purely because i haven't thought up the exact numbers/values..

It is not the "fix all", nobody says it is. But it is something realisticly feasible.

If we all unamously ask for slightly tougher story/quest bosses we have a much higher chance of succes. But if we keep demanding more and more.. Well, in that case I will see you on this thread next year.

It's not that hard to understand tho: While I fully support an optional increase in difficulty for all those interested in a more immersive and challenging experience (that's including myself btw), I don't want to enforce it upon players, which aren't interested in it. It's as easy as that. Because there is no "correct" way to play the game.

Therefore I vote for difficulty options, which are very much industry standard nowadays.

Regarding finding a middleground: If you would look into the numbers just a little, you'd already know, that the middleground you are looking for isn't possible in eso due to the very nature of possible build diversity. Dps alone is ranging from 5k all the way to around 100k (specialized group-related builds are excluded here). There is no middleground to accomodate this gap.

A slight increase in HP does nothing for me for example or any other player capable to burn through millions of HP within minutes, especially not if the enemy in question isn't a threat at all and I may safely ignore all related mechanics due to lack of incoming dmg. On the other hand, there are already players, which struggle to beat the current iteration of said bosses, so it would be fatal to make them more difficult across the board.

You want to convince me? Then counter my arguments with arguments.

On a sidenote: Voting for a mandatory increase in difficulty is as failed as voting against difficulty options. In both cases players are overstepping the boundaries with their opinions regarding playstyles of other people, development resources and whatnot.

disky · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

TL;DR - I think it's more complicated than just blanket-making-bosses-more-difficult, and requires a more complex solution that adds optional increased difficulty for those who want it, while keeping overland enjoyable for those who are not playing for a challenge.

The problem is: the more complex the solution we demand, the smaller the chance that it will get actually implemented (ahem, 190 pages in). So if we all unanimously ask for a simpler solution (again: a little extra HP for story/quest bosses) there is a much bigger chance of something actually being done!

Of course extra HP i suggested is not gonna scratch the itch we skilled players want scratched. But it will give all players the illusion and it would respect the writing of the quests a lot more. If you really want to be challenged i totally agree you should go for the veteran content and not expect that from overland.

I cannot wrap my head around the fact that this very minor increase would cause a problem for anyone (how casual they might be) and i still haven't seen any solid arguments supporting this.

You can make it seem like i want extreme difficulty however much you want, that is simply not the case.. I really care about this game and i think the average player deserves a better experience when it comes to story/quest related bossfights.

~Keep overland super easy (a "kiddie pool" for new players to get their bearings) just add a little HP to the important story/quest bosses to give players the illusion of a challenge and respect the writing~

I don't want this though. What bothers me most about overland is that everything is incredibly, mind-numbingly easy, not just the bosses. I want the entirety of overland to be a greater challenge. I'm tired of plowing through trash mobs. I think a challenge toggle is a realistic ask, and adjusting boss HP will in no way solve the problem. It can work in a way which doesn't affect people who are happy with the current system.

Elsonso · January 2

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

There is no middle ground that will satisfy the majority of players.

There are plenty of things that are satisfying about ESO. Why can't the story/quest bossfights be one of them?

That's just it, story/quest boss fights are one of them.

Blackbird_V · January 2

SilverBride wrote: »

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

If we all unamously ask for slightly tougher story/quest bosses we have a much higher chance of succes.

The only way to get a unanimous response is if everyone involved is in agreement. That isn't the case here as there are many that are opposed to any increase in overland difficulty.

No one has an obligation to agree to anything they don't want.

Or if the majority of people want some form of change, instead of everyone... That's how the real world works.

[snip]
[edited for inappropriate content]

Elsonso · January 2

Blackbird_V wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

KapiteinBoterham wrote: »

If we all unamously ask for slightly tougher story/quest bosses we have a much higher chance of succes.

The only way to get a unanimous response is if everyone involved is in agreement. That isn't the case here as there are many that are opposed to any increase in overland difficulty.

No one has an obligation to agree to anything they don't want.

Or if the majority of people want some form of change, instead of everyone...

Another question is how many people want a change but end up not using it?

SilverBride · January 2

Blackbird_V wrote: »

Or if the majority of people want some form of change, instead of everyone... That's how the real world works.

Imagine that the workers in a business decide they want a raise. So they go to their boss and say "We want a raise." But the boss replies "No." They were the majority but that didn't guarantee they would get what they want.

As far as overland, we can only speculate because none of us have the numbers of what content players are utilizing. But I highly suspect that the majority do not want an overall increase in overland difficulty.

Elsonso · January 2

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

Or if the majority of people want some form of change, instead of everyone... That's how the real world works.

Imagine that the workers in a business decide they want a raise. So they go to their boss and say "We want a raise." But the boss replies "No." They were the majority but that didn't guarantee they would get what they want.

As far as overland, we can only speculate because none of us have the numbers of what content players are utilizing. But I highly suspect that the majority do not want an overall increase in overland difficulty.

Even if it is not a majority, we already have commentary from ZOS saying that a lot of people find overland hard.

valenwood_vegan · January 2

Very little of the real world functions in a democratic way where the majority gets exactly what it wants.

But I can only assume that if Zeni's data showed them that overland was way too easy for most players, they would act.

Maybe they still will - they are certainly aware of this thread and referenced it when discussing the introduction of Bastion Nymic, for example (not saying that was a good solution to the problem). They *are* continuing to increase difficulty in newer DLC's (obviously not as much as some want).

We can hope that they're maybe working on a new system to provide optional overland difficulty to those who want it. Given their statements on the matter, I'm not going to hold my breath though.

SilverBride · January 2

Elsonso wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

Or if the majority of people want some form of change, instead of everyone... That's how the real world works.

Imagine that the workers in a business decide they want a raise. So they go to their boss and say "We want a raise." But the boss replies "No." They were the majority but that didn't guarantee they would get what they want.

As far as overland, we can only speculate because none of us have the numbers of what content players are utilizing. But I highly suspect that the majority do not want an overall increase in overland difficulty.

Even if it is not a majority, we already have commentary from ZOS saying that a lot of people find overland hard.

This is true.

The statement also said that there are no major changes planned for overland difficulty. And we were given new content (Bastion Nymics) to address the concerns of those that do want more difficulty. That is a fair and reasonable response in my opinion.

mocap · January 2

Overland difficulty must be optional for everyone.

Who wants it easy, who wants it hard. Everybody should get theirs. I hope fans of easy overland will understand this someday, although it's unlikely.