Overland Content Feedback Thread

disky

SilverBride wrote: »

I am speaking up to advocate for those of us that have been happy with overland. We need to be considered too, and I am asking that they don't make any more changes that are negatively affecting our experience.

I don't think a single person in the conversation we've been having for the past couple of days has said anything in any way that could negatively impact your experience, and in fact we supported you when you argued that the adjustments in overland challenge for Gold Road were a problem for you. I agree that the inconsistencies are a mistake, and that could be ameliorated by implementing the system we've been discussing here.

SilverBride

disky wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

The fact that some players want certain things doesn't mean ZoS should want them, too. There are a lot of other players, many of whom have differing opinions, to consider, too.

But understanding and responding to players is how you remain relevant and successful as an MMO.

ALL players, not just those asking for a change.

disky wrote: »

ZOS knows what an Elder Scrolls game has been for decades and what people expect from them.

Not everyone that plays ESO played the single player games in the series, and not everyone has those expectations. This game was a LOT more difficult at launch and was failing. If difficult overland is what most players were wanting and expecting they wouldn't have changed that and it wouldn't have been successful for 8 years now because of the change.

disky wrote: »

I didn't buy Gold Road and I've canceled ESO Plus because I can no longer stomach overland, and I know for a fact that I'm not the only one. If ZOS wants my money they know exactly what to do.

And a LOT of us did buy Gold Road and are still subscribed and they don't want to lose us either.

SilverBride

disky wrote: »

I don't think a single person in the conversation we've been having for the past couple of days has said anything in any way that could negatively impact your experience, and in fact we supported you when you argued that the adjustments in overland challenge for Gold Road were a problem for you. I agree that the inconsistencies are a mistake, and that could be ameliorated by implementing the system we've been discussing here.

I never said that anyone said anything that could negatively impact my experience. I said that some changes in the game negatively impacted my experience.

BasP

Muizer wrote: »

disky wrote: »

sh4d0wh4z3 wrote: »

The overland itself is irrelevant. I don't think anybody is itching to wipe to a pack of wolves, wasps, bandits, etc that are all spaced 5-10 feet apart from each other.

I'm not itching to die to a pack of wolves but I do want fights to feel like they make sense, and I feel like a pack of wolves should be dangerous. The fact that we disagree is exactly why we should have the ability to choose for ourselves.

I agree, but I do wish people were careful pointing to LOTRO as an example of how to do it. Making sense means when I fight wolves I want to see claws and teeth, not LOTRO's laser beams from the sky or 'corruption' on the ground or any other contrived mechanics. Yet knowing ZOS' conception of 'difficulty' that is exactly the kind of thing they'd lean towards.

A proper difficulty slider that won't depend on such antics is actually much harder to get right than people seem to think and I agree with @sh4d0wh4z3 that based on ZOS' track record they do not seem to have the expertise or inclination to pull it off. It's just not in their repertoire.

I partly agree with you - I read about "The Eye of Sauron" in LOTRO and I'm not sure if something like that would be great. I can already imagine continuously being struck by random glass shards in West Weald while fighting mobs and it could get annoying after a while.

That leads me to the biggest downside of having shared instances in which people can play on different difficulties while fighting the same mobs: enemies can't really be given different movesets. Without introducing other mechanics like those in LOTRO, I suppose developers are mostly left with debuffs that simply make players deal less damage and take more damage.

Alongside those generic debuffs, perhaps the enemies' attacks could have a small chance to proc an additional effect when you're hit too. Like a long lasting nasty DOT, or a debuff that further weakens you, which would make slotting a skill that purges negative effects worthwhile. Stuff like that.

But would that be enough to satisfy those that seek more engaging combat considering the AI of the enemies would still be the same? Or would it only turn the combat into a slog after a while? I don't know. Considering separate instances are apparently out of the question, I'd still be interested in seeing what the developers would come up with if they'd ever set their minds to implementing different difficulty settings though. I'm sure that they could think of some cool things.

disky

Muizer wrote: »

Whether ZOS achieves this by creating separate instances, difficulty sliders, a new type of system or a dedicated zone is of secondary importance to me. In any case, we're not going to be the ones deciding it. As I said, this might depend on things as prosaic as what expertise they have on the team and how many resources can be allocated.

I agree, but discussing it is how we hammer out what feels like the best solution from the community's perspective, and I strongly believe that a debuff-based system is the simplest and most equitable solution. I would be fine with anything that doesn't interfere with builds and gives me a decent challenge across all overland zones, but obviously my ideas make the most sense to me and they've been tempered through debating this ad nauseum.

disky

SilverBride wrote: »

disky wrote: »

I don't think a single person in the conversation we've been having for the past couple of days has said anything in any way that could negatively impact your experience, and in fact we supported you when you argued that the adjustments in overland challenge for Gold Road were a problem for you. I agree that the inconsistencies are a mistake, and that could be ameliorated by implementing the system we've been discussing here.

I never said that anyone said anything that could negatively impact my experience. I said that some changes in the game negatively impacted my experience.

But you're arguing with us as if we're your opponents when we basically agree with you, and this isn't the first time it's happened.

CP5

BasP wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

disky wrote: »

sh4d0wh4z3 wrote: »

The overland itself is irrelevant. I don't think anybody is itching to wipe to a pack of wolves, wasps, bandits, etc that are all spaced 5-10 feet apart from each other.

I'm not itching to die to a pack of wolves but I do want fights to feel like they make sense, and I feel like a pack of wolves should be dangerous. The fact that we disagree is exactly why we should have the ability to choose for ourselves.

I agree, but I do wish people were careful pointing to LOTRO as an example of how to do it. Making sense means when I fight wolves I want to see claws and teeth, not LOTRO's laser beams from the sky or 'corruption' on the ground or any other contrived mechanics. Yet knowing ZOS' conception of 'difficulty' that is exactly the kind of thing they'd lean towards.

A proper difficulty slider that won't depend on such antics is actually much harder to get right than people seem to think and I agree with @sh4d0wh4z3 that based on ZOS' track record they do not seem to have the expertise or inclination to pull it off. It's just not in their repertoire.

I partly agree with you - I read about "The Eye of Sauron" in LOTRO and I'm not sure if something like that would be great. I can already imagine continuously being struck by random glass shards in West Weald while fighting mobs and it could get annoying after a while.

That leads me to the biggest downside of having shared instances in which people can play on different difficulties while fighting the same mobs: enemies can't really be given different movesets. Without introducing other mechanics like those in LOTRO, I suppose developers are mostly left with debuffs that simply make players deal less damage and take more damage.

Alongside those generic debuffs, perhaps the enemies' attacks could have a small chance to proc an additional effect when you're hit too. Like a long lasting nasty DOT, or a debuff that further weakens you, which would make slotting a skill that purges negative effects worthwhile. Stuff like that.

But would that be enough to satisfy those that seek more engaging combat considering the AI of the enemies would still be the same? Or would it only turn the combat into a slog after a while? I don't know. Considering separate instances are apparently out of the question, I'd still be interested in seeing what the developers would come up with if they'd ever set their minds to implementing different difficulty settings though. I'm sure that they could think of some cool things.

That was my main reason for having it be an instance, since they already use instances everywhere, and in all other content where combat is involved it is used to do exactly this. You can't make, say, an npc healer stronger by letting them heal for more, because that would impact other players gameplay. You can't make an enemies aoe's larger, same thing. You can't make them attack more frequently, because then there would be edge cases where they may shift targets with that increased attack rate. Something like, "Archer tries to use taking aim" "Archer sees player is set to hard mode" "Archer uses arrow barrage instead" could work somewhat, but it would be such a clunky approach and would also likely have issues.

But to answer your question from my perspective, no, making boring enemies take longer to fight by reducing my damage doesn't make them more engaging, especially when most of their attacks are designed to simply show off vfx rather than accomplish anything. All it takes is 2 steps to the side to avoid the aoe of those mages who summon those illusionary deadroth, doesn't matter how much damage the attack does.

And the comment on the last page about the wolves reminds me of the wolves in Dragons Dogma 2, where if you were out of stamina they could drag you away from your party to eat your face. That creates memorable moments and interesting decisions, without needing to make them overly powerful or dramatic. If a fight against wolves is going well, they're easy, but a stray wolf can sneak up mid-fight against a dragon and really ruin your plans. Not even the Deadlands in ESO hold a threat like that.

SilverBride

disky wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I never said that anyone said anything that could negatively impact my experience. I said that some changes in the game negatively impacted my experience.

But you're arguing with us as if we're your opponents when we basically agree with you, and this isn't the first time it's happened.

Giving feedback that doesn't agree with the feedback others have given is not arguing. It is putting another viewpoint out there to be considered. This thread isn't just for those that want a more difficult overland. It's for all of us, many of whom were happy with it as it had been for the past 8 years, and very successfully so.

disky

BasP wrote: »

Without introducing other mechanics like those in LOTRO, I suppose developers are mostly left with debuffs that simply make players deal less damage and take more damage.

There are other levers that could be pulled aside from damage, like stealth detection, resources, loot, experience...I wrote a list in a previous post a while back. Anyway, even increasing damage to players in overland could fundamentally adjust the way you play overland. As soon as things are more dangerous, you have to change tactics and the things monsters do make more of a difference. I think one of the things this position ignores is that monsters have movesets in this game but we don't pay attention to them, because they don't matter, because the game is mindlessly easy. If the game became more lethal, we might need to start thinking about the abilities they have now.

Consider The Witcher III. On easier difficulty levels you can blast through monsters without much worry by hammering light attack. On Death March, preparation and tools are far more important. You actually read the bestiary to find out how best to tackle a situation. It's a totally different game, and as far as I'm aware it doesn't change the behavior of the monsters at all.

disky

SilverBride wrote: »

disky wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I never said that anyone said anything that could negatively impact my experience. I said that some changes in the game negatively impacted my experience.

But you're arguing with us as if we're your opponents when we basically agree with you, and this isn't the first time it's happened.

Giving feedback that doesn't agree with the feedback others have given is not arguing. It is putting another viewpoint out there to be considered. This thread isn't just for those that want a more difficult overland. It's for all of us, many of whom were happy with it as it had been for the past 8 years, and very successfully so.

I understand and agree that it's not just for those who want an increased overland challenge, but it's just that you position yourself as an opponent to people who want optional changes to difficulty and if that's not how you feel then I have trouble seeing why you've been doing it all this time.

SilverBride

disky wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Giving feedback that doesn't agree with the feedback others have given is not arguing. It is putting another viewpoint out there to be considered. This thread isn't just for those that want a more difficult overland. It's for all of us, many of whom were happy with it as it had been for the past 8 years, and very successfully so.

I understand and agree that it's not just for those who want an increased overland challenge, but it's just that you position yourself as an opponent to people who want optional changes to difficulty and if that's not how you feel then I have trouble seeing why you've been doing it all this time.

I don't see a need to make overland any more difficult. And I don't think that most players would use a debuff or slider or other such option if there was one. And I don't think that mass players are leaving the game because overland isn't more difficult.

But in spite of my own personal views, I have agreed all along with suggestions for optional sliders or debuffs, not because I agree that it is needed but because they won't affect anyone else's experience and may give others a more enjoyable experience, and I did so with a sense of good faith for these players.

But that doesn't change my view and I don't want the view of those of us that are happy with overland as it has been lost in the discussion.

Muizer

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't see a need to make overland any more difficult.

Is that because at its present level of difficulty you find overland combat enjoyable and rewarding or because it does not get in the way of enjoying the story, and would if it were harder?

TaSheen

Muizer wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't see a need to make overland any more difficult.

Is that because at its present level of difficulty you find overland combat enjoyable and rewarding or because it does not get in the way of enjoying the story, and would if it were harder?

Dunno about her, but for me it's because I don't find combat "enjoyable and rewarding" at all, so I want to do as little of it as possible (as in swatting things out of the way as much as I can) so I CAN just enjoy the story - and making it harder overall is already (in the last couple of releases) making that problematic for me. I had serious issues killing the story boss in High Isle. I didn't even bother with Galen's story and boss. Or Necrom/Gold Road. Because friends of mine were complaining about how much harder for them (and they are far better than I am, being much younger and with INFINITELY better internet connections due to not living where satellite is the only possible option).

SilverBride

Muizer wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't see a need to make overland any more difficult.

Is that because at its present level of difficulty you find overland combat enjoyable and rewarding or because it does not get in the way of enjoying the story, and would if it were harder?

Both.

I played before One Tamriel and completed the veteran level zones on one character and never did it again because I got tired of dying to a pack of wolves, or bears, and let's not forget River Trolls. It was not fun.

Now I can be the strong hero they tell me I am. I should be able to easily tear through overland mobs.

MorganaLaVey

SilverBride wrote: »

Now I can be the strong hero they tell me I am. I should be able to easily tear through overland mobs.

Well, for me being strong is about the challanges i overcome, not about not facing challenges. It's all about the contrast, in order to feel strong, i first need to feel weak to see the difference. If im strong from the start, i dont feel strong, everyone else just feels weak and incompetent. It makes it impossible for me to relate to the strugles of the NPC. And since i just got my powers granted by the gods / devs and didn't do anything to earn them , i feel less like a hero and more like a rich kid spending daddy's money.

I wish they would just abandon the combat heavy quest design and do storry / puzzle quests. They can be enjoyed by new and expirienced players alike and i'd much rather help to organise an argonian funeral to learn about there way of life and there perspective on death or crawl through a ruin solving its anciant traps and puzzels to save a kitten that walked in there and got stuck somewhere than to be a rich kid larp'ing as hero, fighting paid actors who will be defeated no matter what i do.

Maby they can put in some optional combat for those who enjoy it like: In order to enter the ancient chamber and safe the kitten you need to prove your worth to the gatekeeper by solving the puzzle or defeating it in combat.

But i guess to many players like to beat up paid actors to feel like a hero

Elsonso

.

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

I wish they would just abandon the combat heavy quest design and do storry / puzzle quests. They can be enjoyed by new and expirienced players alike and i'd much rather help to organise an argonian funeral to learn about there way of life and there perspective on death or crawl through a ruin solving its anciant traps and puzzels to save a kitten that walked in there and got stuck somewhere than to be a rich kid larp'ing as hero, fighting paid actors who will be defeated no matter what i do.

I do wish quest design was less about mobs milling around every 10 feet, because level design, or having to follow some dog past every collection of mobs in a 1 mile radius.

SilverBride

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Now I can be the strong hero they tell me I am. I should be able to easily tear through overland mobs.

Well, for me being strong is about the challanges i overcome, not about not facing challenges. It's all about the contrast, in order to feel strong, i first need to feel weak to see the difference. If im strong from the start, i dont feel strong, everyone else just feels weak and incompetent. It makes it impossible for me to relate to the strugles of the NPC. And since i just got my powers granted by the gods / devs and didn't do anything to earn them , i feel less like a hero and more like a rich kid spending daddy's money.

I wish they would just abandon the combat heavy quest design and do storry / puzzle quests. They can be enjoyed by new and expirienced players alike and i'd much rather help to organise an argonian funeral to learn about there way of life and there perspective on death or crawl through a ruin solving its anciant traps and puzzels to save a kitten that walked in there and got stuck somewhere than to be a rich kid larp'ing as hero, fighting paid actors who will be defeated no matter what i do.

Maby they can put in some optional combat for those who enjoy it like: In order to enter the ancient chamber and safe the kitten you need to prove your worth to the gatekeeper by solving the puzzle or defeating it in combat.

We don't need to struggle like the NPCs. They come to us for help to do what they have been unable to accomplish themselves. We are the strong heros they need.

I enjoy the combat of overland quests. I absolutely do not want them replaced with puzzles. I don't enjoy those at all and usually just look up the solution to get it over with.

As far as feeling strong by overcoming challenges... what about Dungeons and Trials and Arenas and Geysers and Harrowstorms and Vents and Incursions and Public Dungeons and World Bosses and the Infinite Archive and Oblivion Portals and Cyrodiil and Battlegrounds? Are these not challenging content? Leave overland for those who want just one relaxing non challenging thing to enjoy.

TaSheen

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Now I can be the strong hero they tell me I am. I should be able to easily tear through overland mobs.

Well, for me being strong is about the challanges i overcome, not about not facing challenges. It's all about the contrast, in order to feel strong, i first need to feel weak to see the difference. If im strong from the start, i dont feel strong, everyone else just feels weak and incompetent. It makes it impossible for me to relate to the strugles of the NPC. And since i just got my powers granted by the gods / devs and didn't do anything to earn them , i feel less like a hero and more like a rich kid spending daddy's money.

I wish they would just abandon the combat heavy quest design and do storry / puzzle quests. They can be enjoyed by new and expirienced players alike and i'd much rather help to organise an argonian funeral to learn about there way of life and there perspective on death or crawl through a ruin solving its anciant traps and puzzels to save a kitten that walked in there and got stuck somewhere than to be a rich kid larp'ing as hero, fighting paid actors who will be defeated no matter what i do.

Maby they can put in some optional combat for those who enjoy it like: In order to enter the ancient chamber and safe the kitten you need to prove your worth to the gatekeeper by solving the puzzle or defeating it in combat.

But i guess to many players like to beat up paid actors to feel like a hero

I actually agree with you a thousand percent! I (in game persona here) am NOT A HERO. My characters are all mercenaries, they get hired (or conned) into doing things they would probably rather NOT do.... all things considered. The LAST thing I think of is that my characters are "heroes". Ballocks to that. My characters are ordinary mercs, making a living.... and the last thing THEY want to do is have to kill their way through a bunch of those "paid actors".

Tarma and Kethry.... THOSE two are my "background" for games like this one....

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Now I can be the strong hero they tell me I am. I should be able to easily tear through overland mobs.

Well, for me being strong is about the challanges i overcome, not about not facing challenges. It's all about the contrast, in order to feel strong, i first need to feel weak to see the difference. If im strong from the start, i dont feel strong, everyone else just feels weak and incompetent. It makes it impossible for me to relate to the strugles of the NPC. And since i just got my powers granted by the gods / devs and didn't do anything to earn them , i feel less like a hero and more like a rich kid spending daddy's money.

I wish they would just abandon the combat heavy quest design and do storry / puzzle quests. They can be enjoyed by new and expirienced players alike and i'd much rather help to organise an argonian funeral to learn about there way of life and there perspective on death or crawl through a ruin solving its anciant traps and puzzels to save a kitten that walked in there and got stuck somewhere than to be a rich kid larp'ing as hero, fighting paid actors who will be defeated no matter what i do.

Maby they can put in some optional combat for those who enjoy it like: In order to enter the ancient chamber and safe the kitten you need to prove your worth to the gatekeeper by solving the puzzle or defeating it in combat.

We don't need to struggle like the NPCs. They come to us for help to do what they have been unable to accomplish themselves. We are the strong heros they need.

I enjoy the combat of overland quests. I absolutely do not want them replaced with puzzles. I don't enjoy those at all and usually just look up the solution to get it over with.

As far as feeling strong by overcoming challenges... what about Dungeons and Trials and Arenas and Geysers and Harrowstorms and Vents and Incursions and Public Dungeons and World Bosses and the Infinite Archive and Cyrodiil and Battlegrounds? Are these not challenging content? Leave overland for those who want just one relaxing non challenging thing to enjoy.

When there is an "End of the world" level threat, and the big bad is a deadric prince, or a powerful mage, or a bloody moon empowered dragon, I'd like that fight to be more memorable than "oh, great, another boss that talks forever before another invulnerability phase." I've said it before and this is a great point to demonstrate it, I want to enjoy the world and the story, not to be told off to "go to my corner and be quiet."

You have stories where the stakes are on such a grand scale, yet a random nobody with a rusty stick can save the day just by showing up. There is no weight behind a victory that is handed to you for many players, such as myself. Satisfaction comes not from going through the motions, pointing my character in the right direction, pushing the forward key, then hitting a synergy button to make the big bad keel over and cry uncle. It's about using the tools we learned over our time playing to overcome greater and greater odds. That type of progression and challenge isn't restricted to 'just do dungeons and trials then,' basically any RPG that is based around having level ranges on their zones works this way, as opposed to ESO and Skyrim's systems of letting the world and player remain equal.

That sense of growth, of having to work for victory, that is what makes moments rewarding and satisfying for some people. Let's say, you don't care for the combat. Why not just line up all the NPC's in a line, and you talk to them, one at a time, getting all the dialogue you could want. And when one NPC is done talking to you, you then walk over to the next and they tell you "wow, you're so amazing, here are the things you did and..." before doing the next string of dialogue. Would that feel satisfying for you? For me, that's what quest feel like. There is no resistance to any overland content, so every quest is "go from point A to B to C, with the only hold up being to talk to melodramatic NPC's." That isn't satisfying, that isn't memorable, that isn't worth my time so I simply don't participate.

But you have stated in the past the high priority you have for keeping players together, because people being subdivided into different instances is a cost you wouldn't tolerate, so now we have this situation where ZOS is haphazardly cutting into the content you enjoy to aimlessly attempt to sate players like me, but at the very least its still all together.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

But you have stated in the past the high priority you have for keeping players together, because people being subdivided into different instances is a cost you wouldn't tolerate, so now we have this situation where ZOS is haphazardly cutting into the content you enjoy to aimlessly attempt to sate players like me, but at the very least its still all together.

I have never referred to not splitting the playerbase as my own high priority, nor have I said I won't tolerate it. I do think it would be a bad idea and ZoS has said they are not willing to split the playerbase. I will NOT accept blame for the boss invulnerable phases because I agree with ZoS on not splitting the players.

The bottom line is every single thing in this game that is combat related is challenging content except the overland story. That should not be taken away from the many players that want to enjoy the story in a relaxing setting. Those of us that enjoy that deserve something, too.

disky

SilverBride wrote: »

The bottom line is every single thing in this game that is combat related is challenging content except the overland story. That should not be taken away from the many players that want to enjoy the story in a relaxing setting. Those of us that enjoy that deserve something, too.

Again, I don't think anyone you're speaking with wants to take that away from you. We want an alternative that doesn't impact your experience.

MorganaLaVey

SilverBride wrote: »

We don't need to struggle like the NPCs. They come to us for help to do what they have been unable to accomplish themselves. We are the strong heros they need.

No ofcourse i should be stronger than the NPC, but for reasons like i have invested gold in armor and weapons while the NPC are villagers with pitchforks, i have spend time to learn powerfull spells while the NPC where tilling there fields, i have invested gold/ time to buy/ craft potions/ poisons/ etc. while the NPC where at home taking care of there familys. Ands thats how it works just fine in any other adventure game. But in ESO you are a powerfull hero even as a naked perv with a broom.

SilverBride wrote: »

I enjoy the combat of overland quests. I absolutely do not want them replaced with puzzles. I don't enjoy those at all and usually just look up the solution to get it over with.

No puzzels at all or just the ESO puzzels ? ESO puzzels are super bad and ofcouse puzzle quests should have proper pussles like other games do.

SilverBride wrote: »

As far as feeling strong by overcoming challenges... what about Dungeons and Trials and Arenas and Geysers and Harrowstorms and Vents and Incursions and Public Dungeons and World Bosses and the Infinite Archive and Cyrodiil and Battlegrounds? Are these not challenging content?

As many people here have allready said, its not about challange for the sake of challenge, its about immersion. It's about the decisions we make and there consequences.

In normal adventure games:
-Some NPC tells me about a treasure in a cave crawling with monsters.
- I make preperations: Gear, weapons, potions, invest gold to learn the [repell undead] spell, it will come in handy.
- Should i take the short route through the mountens with wild animals and bandits ? Or take the longer but safer route?
- Should i rent a horse for the long rout? Will it be worth the investment?
- I carefully make my way through the cave, using the tools i prepared and the spells i learnd.
- I get the treasure and am happy because i made the right decisions and are rewarded with gold to buy new gear, more potions, new spells, ...

In ESO:
-Some NPC tells me about a treasure in a cave crawling with monsters.
-I make preperations: I have my bathingtowel and my broom, i'm good to go.
-I can just fast travel there because i know nothing interesting is gonna happen on my way there.
-I YOLO my way through the cave at lvl 3, using the broom or my bare fists or whatever else, dosnt matter.
-I get the treasure and ... what do i even do with it ? New gear,? Nah the broom is just fine. more potions? for what ? My HP regenaration > enemy damage, new spells ? Why ? Nothing can hurt me and every thing dies to my broom.
- Why did i even bother geting the treasure?

For me games are about problemsolving.
-I have a problem to solve.
-I have rules.
-I have tools.

The fun comes from testing the tools, figuring out the rules and combining the two to solve the problem.
If i can solve the problem by ignoring the rules and using any tool or even non than what is the game even about ?
NPC telling me what a cool hero i am for doing nothing?

SilverBride wrote: »

Leave overland for those who want just one relaxing non challenging thing to enjoy.

I do. Thats wy i dont quest in ESO but play other games and dont spend money on ESO. I'm still free do voice my opinion

SilverBride

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

As many people here have allready said, its not about challange for the sake of challenge, its about immersion. It's about the decisions we make and there consequences.

Spending 10 times as long to kill a bear between the player and their quest objective isn't going to make anything more immersive.

disky

SilverBride wrote: »

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

As many people here have allready said, its not about challange for the sake of challenge, its about immersion. It's about the decisions we make and there consequences.

Spending 10 times as long to kill a bear between the player and their quest objective isn't going to make anything more immersive.

You often make definitive statements like this but we're a community of people who have different ideas and interests and feelings about things. We can't place assumptions on anyone. What we can do is ask for options that accommodate the greatest number of players in the most reasonable and efficient ways possible.

MorganaLaVey

SilverBride wrote: »

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

As many people here have allready said, its not about challange for the sake of challenge, its about immersion. It's about the decisions we make and there consequences.

Spending 10 times as long to kill a bear between the player and their quest objective isn't going to make anything more immersive.

Probably not. But, being able to
- kill the bear fast because you build your character to be a powerfull mage or warrior is more immersive than killing it fast because you'r simply a god.

- sneakin around the dangerous bear/ using a spell to make it friendly or fall asleep because you dont want to fight it is more immersive than sneaking around a harmless bear/ using a spell to make it friendly or fall asleep because your character isnt a fighter and should be afraid of a bear even if you could just kill the bear or ignore it.

As i said:

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

It's about the decisions we make and there consequences.

Did i make the decision to become a warrior and can challange the bear ? No? Well then, did i make the decision to level sneak and can sneak around it ? No? Welp crap. But did i make the decision to learn the sleep spell ? YES! Good thing i did that!

For me, without those decisions whats the point of the bear ? Its just another obstacle to slow me down for 2 sec and might as well just be removed all together.

SilverBride

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

As many people here have allready said, its not about challange for the sake of challenge, its about immersion. It's about the decisions we make and there consequences.

Spending 10 times as long to kill a bear between the player and their quest objective isn't going to make anything more immersive.

Probably not. But, being able to
- kill the bear fast because you build your character to be a powerfull mage or warrior is more immersive than killing it fast because you'r simply a god.

I have built my characters to be powerful Sorcerers and Arcanists and Nightblades and Dragonknights and Necromancers and Templars, so they should be able to kill a bear in the way of their objective.

Theist_VII

@SilverBride were you playing back then?

I keep seeing you bring up pre-One Tamriel as this standard of what overland difficulty was… but overland was always easy, even back pre-One Tamriel… all a player had to do was become the level of the content, or push past it to make the game a joke, an even bigger joke than it is now.

The problem was that people did not like, nor enjoy, the grind through vet ranks and for each of your 1-8 characters depending if you played both Stamina and Magicka versions of each.

They did not enjoy being told to wait and level up before progressing to the next zone because the amount of XP distribution put players nowhere near where they needed to be for ONLY doing the main questline. You had to do all of the side quests in a zone in order to be at or above level for the next one.

There weren’t many options at the time, if you grinded mobs pre-vet rank, you kept having to move regions for them to be your level, or you had to brave a Cyrodiil delve where enemies scaled with you similar to our system now.

Undoubtably the game was much easier when you could out-level content.

MorganaLaVey

SilverBride wrote: »

I have built my characters to be powerful Sorcerers and Arcanists and Nightblades and Dragonknights and Necromancers and Templars, so they should be able to kill a bear in the way of their objective.

Yes, and i like to build my characters to be a simple alchemist, thief or merchant, so they should not be able to kill a bear in the way of their objective. But they are. Thats my problem.

SilverBride

Theist_VII wrote: »

@SilverBride were you playing back then?

I keep seeing you bring up pre-One Tamriel as this standard of what overland difficulty was… but overland was always easy, even back pre-One Tamriel….

I started playing in Beta and that is not the experience I and many others had. The veteran overland zones were not easy and the story bosses were so difficult that I remember being stuck for days on one boss fight. If overland was really easy they wouldn't have lowered the difficulty with One Tamriel.

This is what Rich Lambert had to say when asked about it:

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

Theist_VII

SilverBride wrote: »

Theist_VII wrote: »

@SilverBride were you playing back then?

I keep seeing you bring up pre-One Tamriel as this standard of what overland difficulty was… but overland was always easy, even back pre-One Tamriel….

I started playing in Beta and that is not the experience I and many others had. The veteran overland zones were not easy and the story bosses were so difficult that I remember being stuck for days on one boss fight. If overland was really easy they wouldn't have lowered the difficulty with One Tamriel.

This is what Rich Lambert had to say when asked about it:

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

Yet you were stronger than the enemies you were fighting, being a higher level than them if you put in the time.

16 > 14
16 = 16

Players were hyper-focused on Cyrodiil when the game released, and everyone wanted to get to Veteran Rank 14 or 16 to PvP with their friends with the huge advantages of being that level.