Overland Content Feedback Thread

SilverBride

What I have observed is that some of those asking for more difficult overland have also stated that they don't currently play the game and haven't for awhile, but they may come back if difficulty was added. While most of us that are happy with overland as it is are currently playing and also subscribing.

disky

DenverRalphy wrote: »

disky wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

disky wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

I would personally welcome an increase in difficulty for Overland content. It's long overdue. And I don't want to see it optional. No difficulty sliders. Just straight up boost the difficulty.

When anybody, even brand new players, can just truck across any overland zone training all the mobs into one giant pile then turn around at their leisure to kill them all without breaking a sweat, there's something inherently wrong. What ever happened to there being an actual reason you may need to stick to the roadways because otherwise you run the risk of running into something more challenging that you're ready to handle?

But why does it matter what someone else is doing or what their experience is? Shouldn't you only care about your experience? So what if they're racing through a zone, they aren't affecting you in any way other than that you can see them, and if that's such a big issue then you have a problem with MMOs, not just ESO overland.

Because I'd rather not have my accomplishments diminished by the fact that at any time it can be done without a challenge.

But then too, I don't believe in "Participation Trophies" either.

I can't say with 100% certainty that you will never be satisfied, but I'm pretty sure you're just not going to get anything like what you're asking for. ZOS understands that the bulk of its players do not want an increased challenge and those people pay the bills. I would encourage you not to worry so much about what other people do with their time and prioritize your own enjoyment of the game instead.

Bolded for emphasis...

I don't buy that for one second. Exactly where are you pulling this information from?

Directly from ZOS, and the fact that people quit when they're bored which leaves those who are happy with the status quo, and the fact that in general, MMO players are not no-lifeing hardcores. As much as I want tougher overland, I think I'd be closer to casual than hardcore myself.

DenverRalphy

disky wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

disky wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

disky wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

I would personally welcome an increase in difficulty for Overland content. It's long overdue. And I don't want to see it optional. No difficulty sliders. Just straight up boost the difficulty.

When anybody, even brand new players, can just truck across any overland zone training all the mobs into one giant pile then turn around at their leisure to kill them all without breaking a sweat, there's something inherently wrong. What ever happened to there being an actual reason you may need to stick to the roadways because otherwise you run the risk of running into something more challenging that you're ready to handle?

But why does it matter what someone else is doing or what their experience is? Shouldn't you only care about your experience? So what if they're racing through a zone, they aren't affecting you in any way other than that you can see them, and if that's such a big issue then you have a problem with MMOs, not just ESO overland.

Because I'd rather not have my accomplishments diminished by the fact that at any time it can be done without a challenge.

But then too, I don't believe in "Participation Trophies" either.

I can't say with 100% certainty that you will never be satisfied, but I'm pretty sure you're just not going to get anything like what you're asking for. ZOS understands that the bulk of its players do not want an increased challenge and those people pay the bills. I would encourage you not to worry so much about what other people do with their time and prioritize your own enjoyment of the game instead.

Bolded for emphasis...

I don't buy that for one second. Exactly where are you pulling this information from?

Directly from ZOS, and the fact that people quit when they're bored which leaves those who are happy with the status quo, and the fact that in general, MMO players are not no-lifeing hardcores. As much as I want tougher overland, I think I'd be closer to casual than hardcore myself.

And ZOS has posted this somewhere for public reading? Because the last thing I read from ZOS is that they're looking to increase the difficulty of Overland zones. So..

spartaxoxo

Franchise408 wrote: »

While I am not asking for mandatory vet trial level content in overland, and I do believe that overland should be a degree easier than the rest of the content designed for higher challenge, I feel that ESO would be a far better game if it committed to an actual vision other than "we don't want to isolate players".

It DOES have a vision. It wants players to be able to play the way that they want to play. It wants to be solo friendly. It's established itself as a popular casual game. They talked a before about how they have, in their opinion, been in the "meta verse" type space before those companies tried share world ideas. They don't even really fully consider themselves an MMO.

This vision may not align with your own, but "play the way you want," has been their mantra from the very beginning. And they have done a very good job of allowing people to pick and choose how they want to engage in the space

It because of this "play how you want" vision that overland not having a way to do that stands out so much, and not in a good way. They like that they are the accessible game. It's good for games like that to be on the market.

Walking sims may not be your cuppa but they are an entire, successful genre of game. That's what overland provides fo some people and they prefer it that way. They are engaging with the game and they are enjoying it. ESO has committed to such people for nearly a decade.

Nilandia

Perhaps against my better judgment, I'll offer some of my own thoughts.

I started playing ESO during beta, and I've been subscribed ever since. ESO was my first MMO, and I was one of thousands of people who loved Skyrim and wanted something similar in ESO. For years, I was a casual quester and gave no thought to whether I was actually any "good" at the game.

Story and narrative has always been the most important element for me in a game. Regardless of the genre, a game with a good story will always capture my attention.

The kind of narrative I enjoy, however, is that of the hero who overcomes adversity and emerges triumphant. So by necessity, I enjoy a challenge. While I was a casual quester, that wasn't a problem.

A few years back, a friend got me to try dungeons and other more difficult content, and I found it was fun! While I thoroughly enjoyed the harder content, I also realized how atrocious I was at the game. It took quite some time and a lot of hard work, but I've gained the skill to have fun running some of the game's more difficult content.

At the same time, though, overland lost all challenge. With it, the game's story lost its punch. The story of the hero overcoming all odds to save the world, the story I loved for years, no longer existed. And as I said, that story is the most important thing.

Over the years, I've done every storyline in the game except for Gold Road. I had to push myself to complete Necrom because I wanted to see the story, but the thrill was gone. I just don't have it in me to do it again with Gold Road.

The irony that becoming good at the game would deprive me of what I loved most.

I'd been hoping for an increase in overland difficulty for quite some time, so you could imagine that I'm extremely interested that it might become a possibility. Maybe questing could be fun again! Maybe I could start questing and roleplaying with my alts who already have backstories! I'm currently in a low point of playing the game, but a difficulty increase would absolutely get me to play more.

That said, difficult overland would need to be optional, and hopefully able to be turned off. I enjoy a challenge when I quest, but sometimes I just want to enjoy the scenery or do surveys without having to worry. There are also plenty of other people who want an easier overland for any number of valid reasons.

ESO claims the tagline of "play how you want." While playing how I want means a challenging overland, that isn't how other people want to play. So, here's hoping that there's something for everyone.

DenverRalphy

Nilandia wrote: »

ESO claims the tagline of "play how you want." While playing how I want means a challenging overland, that isn't how other people want to play. So, here's hoping that there's something for everyone.

"Play how you want" refers to they type of play, not the difficulty or the challenge. You can be an RPer, you can be a PvPer, you can be a Quester, you can be a Crafter, a House Decorator, a Trader, a Tank, a Healer, etc. etc.

But i seriously doubt "Play how you want" also includes "I want everything to be as easy to do and come by as possible".

Nobody's asking for Overland to be made difficult in and of itself. Just boosting the current difficulty, and ZOS seems to agree. There's a significant difference between making Overland "Difficult" vs "More Difficult". Midly Difficult is more difficult than No Difficulty, but less difficult than Moderately or Insanely Difficult.

SilverBride

"Play how you want" means to play the game how you want. It doesn't mean change the game into whatever you want.

old_scopie1945

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Nilandia wrote: »

ESO claims the tagline of "play how you want." While playing how I want means a challenging overland, that isn't how other people want to play. So, here's hoping that there's something for everyone.

"Play how you want" refers to they type of play, not the difficulty or the challenge. You can be an RPer, you can be a PvPer, you can be a Quester, you can be a Crafter, a House Decorator, a Trader, a Tank, a Healer, etc. etc.

But i seriously doubt "Play how you want" also includes "I want everything to be as easy to do and come by as possible".

Nobody's asking for Overland to be made difficult in and of itself. Just boosting the current difficulty, and ZOS seems to agree. There's a significant difference between making Overland "Difficult" vs "More Difficult". Midly Difficult is more difficult than No Difficulty, but less difficult than Moderately or Insanely Difficult.

"Play how you want" means "Play how you want" plain and simple. It doesn't mean your interpretation or even my interpretation of the phrase. It is left to each persons own interpretation regardless to whatever others think.

DenverRalphy

SilverBride wrote: »

"Play how you want" means to play the game how you want. It doesn't mean change the game into whatever you want.

On that I agree completely. But then I'm in the camp that's happy with the direction ZOS says they want to go on this particular topic. So, who's trying to change it?

old_scopie1945

DenverRalphy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

"Play how you want" means to play the game how you want. It doesn't mean change the game into whatever you want.

On that I agree completely. But then I'm in the camp that's happy with the direction ZOS says they want to goon this particular topic. So, who's trying to change it?

And that direction is still rather vague and open to discussion. I suspect that is why they are asking for feedback. Anyway I am off to play some World of Warships now.

SilverBride

DenverRalphy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

"Play how you want" means to play the game how you want. It doesn't mean change the game into whatever you want.

On that I agree completely. But then I'm in the camp that's happy with the direction ZOS says they want to go on this particular topic. So, who's trying to change it?

This 253 page thread has people wanting to change overland from what it's been very successfully for the past 8 years to something that it isn't, and that failed before.

colossalvoids

SilverBride wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

"Play how you want" means to play the game how you want. It doesn't mean change the game into whatever you want.

On that I agree completely. But then I'm in the camp that's happy with the direction ZOS says they want to go on this particular topic. So, who's trying to change it?

This 253 page thread has people wanting to change overland from what it's been very successfully for the past 8 years to something that it isn't, and that failed before.

* To try to make everyone equally satisfied and not just one part of the community.

Once you've already been a part of the group who's feedback changed the game drastically, but it's not the one and only road, luckily. There are way more people now with a lot of different tastes, and that should be accommodated.

SilverBride

I don't agree that a minority of players, many of whom do not actively play and haven't for quite awhile, should be accomodated over those that are happy with the game as it's been for 8 years and are actively playing and supporting it by subscribing all this time.

colossalvoids

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't agree that a minority of players, many of whom do not actively play and haven't for quite awhile, should be accomodated over those that are happy with the game as it's been for 8 years and are actively playing and supporting it by subscribing all this time.

No one is "accommodated over" anyone, except the bunch of people who currently have the status quo and actively trying to not let other players have the ability to enjoy overland content and questing when even development team finally decided to do something about it, seeing it as an issue or a development flaw.

Also consider a possibility that this "minority of so inactive players who don't play the game" are enough of a mass to make developers do something about their enjoyment. It's either a pretty significant mass of players overall or people who contribute enough to be considered worth investing in.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't agree that a minority of players, many of whom do not actively play and haven't for quite awhile, should be accomodated over those that are happy with the game as it's been for 8 years and are actively playing and supporting it by subscribing all this time.

I actively play and support this game. I get yearly subscription to plus. I buy crowns with real cash every once in a while, even when they aren't on sale. I give tons of feedback. I have introduced this game to other people, back in the day. I preorder most chapters.

And I am not happy with current overland. This change isn't just something that is meant to entice people who have quit. It's also a change that they have identified as something many in the vet community want. And we support the game just as much as anyone else. Arguably even more so, since it is mostly vet players that create content that casuals enjoy or and vet players that help casuals learn more when they want to. And no, I don't just mean famous YouTubers.

SilverBride

There has never even been a consensus on how much more difficult or what type of difficulty or if it's just for story bosses or if it's for trash mobs too. Or if it would be accomplished by a separate instance, or a debuff on the player, or a difficulty slider, or as some want an across the board increase that will ruin the game for many of us that do not want to struggle through the story, or physically can't.

How do you come up with something that will please all those asking when there is no consensus on what it would actually mean? And in the meantime many may be forced out.

We are not trying to stop those that want more difficulty from enjoying the game. We are trying to protect the game we love and play and have supported for years.

Even though I do not want more difficulty I supported optional suggestions in good faith so others would enjoy the game as much as I do. But I did not agree that it would happen at the expense of players no longer being able to enjoy the game because of it.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

There has never even been a consensus on how much more difficult or what type of difficulty or if it's just for story bosses or if it's for trash mobs too. Or if it would be accomplished by a separate instance, or a debuff on the player, or a difficulty slider, or as some want an across the board increase that will ruin the game for many of us that do not want to struggle through the story, or physically can't.

How do you come up with something that will please all those asking when there is no consensus on what it would actually mean? And in the meantime many may be forced out.

We are not trying to stop those that want more difficulty from enjoying the game. We are trying to protect the game we love and play and have supported for years.

Even though I do not want more difficulty I supported optional suggestions in good faith so others would enjoy the game as much as I do. But I did not agree that it would happen at the expense of players no longer being able to enjoy the game because of it.

Players will never reach a consensus because every person is different. An impossible goal need not be met for the devs to take the feedback and then handle how they feel is likely to please the most people.

We don't even know what the changes are yet. All current evidence points towards something completely optional, which is what the vast majority have requested.

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All current evidence points towards something completely optional, which is what the vast majority have requested.

I don't see it that way.

colossalvoids

There shouldn't be a consensus, we're not the developers on this exact game. To create an engaging game and worthwhile experience is their exact job. And seems like they've got some ideas for a starter.

Though we already know their thresholds for veteran solo and group content, their approach is standardised and no-one expects anything beyond those standards as a baseline minimum we can expect. Still they can iterate on it as they please, or make new ones if there's sense in it.

And yet again there's zero indication it's being made "at expense". Their previous words on a matter were pretty strict. Even separating us wasn't ever on a menu, though I disagree with that one.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All current evidence points towards something completely optional, which is what the vast majority have requested.

I don't see it that way.

Then what evidence are you referencing to come to the conclusion that it's forced?

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All current evidence points towards something completely optional, which is what the vast majority have requested.

I don't see it that way.

Then what evidence are you referencing to come to the conclusion that it's forced?

I have no evidence if it is or isn't. We can speculate but no one knows until they announce it.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All current evidence points towards something completely optional, which is what the vast majority have requested.

I don't see it that way.

Then what evidence are you referencing to come to the conclusion that it's forced?

I have no evidence if it is or isn't. We can speculate but no one knows until they announce it.

It's true none of us can know for certain.

But, we can make educated guesses based on currently available evidence. There is no definitive statements but there is evidence.

For example, earlier someone linked a video of a content creator that talked with ZOS about their ideas around this a while back. And he said that they were at the time discussing a completely optional way to self-impose difficulty but nobody would be forced.

We have an interview 3 months ago where they told us that players had requested sliders and hard modes, and somewhat separately that they were working on something internally. This did not explicitly state a slider or hard mode was being worked on. But it is notable that the very first time they said they were working on something was also the time they used a slider as example of requests rather than repeating the same tired story about Cadwell's gold about why they won't separate players.

And other such evidence that we have previously discussed like categorizing the announcement under systems/ideas.

We cannot know for certain but there is evidence we can use to make our best guess.

BananaBender

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't agree that a minority of players, many of whom do not actively play and haven't for quite awhile, should be accomodated over those that are happy with the game as it's been for 8 years and are actively playing and supporting it by subscribing all this time.

To me it's just disingenuous to state and assume that the people who want harder overland content are a minority, let alone mostly of players who don't play the game. In my bubble of players and guilds it's just accepted that overland is too easy and not worth playing. I acknowledge the fact that my viewpoint is heavily skewed, since the guilds I'm in mainly to trials and dungeons. This still doesn't take away from the fact that there are many active players, who want more challenging quests and storylines.

Even though we don't know the exact numbers, but I think it's fair to say that a large chunk of ESOs playerbase is more casual and mostly does overland and questing content, with maybe some normal dungeons mixed in. But making statements assuming that all of these players are happy with the state of the difficulty in quests and overland as a whole is just pointless, since we don't have the numbers to prove it right or wrong.

There are plenty of people asking for more solo content, like Vateshran and Maelstrom Arena to give more challenges for solo players, which to me tells that there are a bunch of casual solo players who would very much like a more difficult (but not insurmountable) solo experience.

SilverBride

There is a reason One Tamriel happened. But the thing I want to know now is are any difficulty increases going to be optional or not?

KingNutella

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't agree that a minority of players, many of whom do not actively play and haven't for quite awhile, should be accomodated over those that are happy with the game as it's been for 8 years and are actively playing and supporting it by subscribing all this time.

How can you say with such certainty that it's a minority who is unhappy with the current overland? And on top of that, you make the claim that many folks of said supposed minority don't support the game. Is it also not possible that there are many players who have played and supported the game consistently (hello!) for years but also want a more difficult overland?

With genuine respect, why do you, without any relevant, tangible data except for your points about One Tamriel from almost a decade ago, keep repeating this when ZOS ostensibly has received years of feedback and data to suggest that overland actually does need some adjustment? Their track record with the game doesn't even really suggest that they consistently (and intentionally) cater to or "accommodate" the minority over the majority. PvP is a clear example of this (when is the last time Cyrodiil got a meaningful update? Or BGs before U44?). I also think it is seriously unwise to dismiss a sizable community even if it happens to not be the majority (e.g U35).

Similar to the dozens of others who have commented, I have supported the game for almost five years now. Many players in my guilds have played and supported the game for years. The overwhelming majority of us would appreciate more engaging overland content. I don't think the "famous" (as someone earlier mentioned) content creators' opinions should dictate the game's direction by any means, but they have arguably supported the game more than any random player and all the ones I've watched seem to be in favor of harder overland too.

Again, I dont like that argument, but I'm putting it forth because I think it's dismissive and (unless you have relevant findings to say otherwise) baseless to effectively say "it's only a vocal minority who doesn't support the game anyway who wants this." This can be your opinion, but as far as I'm aware, certainly not a fact.

That said, it is my hope that we see a veteran overland or veteran mode questing though. All optional. If for whatever reason they don't do that, which seems counter to most other content in the game, I think a tiered system (e.g wolves/skeevers/animals in general are trash, daedra and quest bosses have a bit more oomph) could be a fair way forward.

spartaxoxo

KingNutella wrote: »

The overwhelming majority of us would appreciate more engaging overland content. I don't think the "famous" (as someone earlier mentioned) content creators' opinions should dictate the game's direction by any means, but they have arguably supported the game more than any random player and all the ones I've watched seem to be in favor of harder overland too.

So, just to clarify what I said about the famous creators. I didn't mean that we should listen to them because they content create.

I was pointing out that there are more ways to support a game than just subscribing. And I cited things people create to help others as example. When I said not only "famous" ones, I meant other vet players help each other out too. At least in some of the guilds I've been in, people would share build advice, videos of their parse, spreadsheets, etc. They did that to help people learn how to do stuff. It was just guildmates helping guildmates. That's what I meant. Sorry for any confusion.

Erickson9610

If we get more difficult overland content, then at least our Companions will be more useful! Maybe more people will post Companion builds.

Renato90085

colossalvoids wrote: »

Renato90085 wrote: »

i alway think it why we can in rnd see a dps do 5k(1%)
because basegame overland trash only 10~30k health, 5k dps still can cook them in 2-6sec

Partially, for me personally it was that my base regen and sturdiness was enough to tank anything pretty much without using block, dodge or healing myself when I started. Like why would I learn if it makes no difference? Why would I invest into crafting or collect a full gear set if those aren't needed? And then one day I queued into the veteran dlc dungeon. Pretty sure most people would just quit with that spike not even understanding what went wrong.

sad,you are right, today i try use my nb full dmg build and afk overland 2 trash attack , go out buy drink,5 min later i back and still live have 47% health,cmx tell me them only 300 dps for me and i have 900 heal res every 2sec,
it happen in a low armor(12k) low health(23k)no any survive buff character

KingNutella

spartaxoxo wrote: »

KingNutella wrote: »

The overwhelming majority of us would appreciate more engaging overland content. I don't think the "famous" (as someone earlier mentioned) content creators' opinions should dictate the game's direction by any means, but they have arguably supported the game more than any random player and all the ones I've watched seem to be in favor of harder overland too.

So, just to clarify what I said about the famous creators. I didn't mean that we should listen to them because they content create.

I was pointing out that there are more ways to support a game than just subscribing. And I cited things people create to help others as example. When I said not only "famous" ones, I meant other vet players help each other out too. At least in some of the guilds I've been in, people would share build advice, videos of their parse, spreadsheets, etc. They did that to help people learn how to do stuff. It was just guildmates helping guildmates. That's what I meant. Sorry for any confusion.

Gotcha! Thanks for the clarification! Though I actually agree with you especially in terms of supporting the game in a way that isn't just through subscribing. Apologies for misrepresenting that.

thatnewcatsmell

Arunei wrote: »

I've never understood the mindset of wanting others to struggle to accomplish something in a game just so one can feel 'strong'. How others play the game and whether they achieve any given thing or not, they don't affect your own ability. Demanding that others need to have their ability to play the game negatively impacted just so you feel good about what you've accomplished is...I'm sorry it's selfish, and it feels like a game like an MMO isn't the sort of game to play with that mindset.

Not everything needs to be a grueling struggle to accomplish even the most basic of things. Overland doesn't need to be some grand challenge just so someone feels like their "efforts" seem validated because they're able to do it but most others struggle. It's a game not a competition to see who can do what and who can't.

Edit to add this is in response to another post. I was gonna quote it but I hit the Last button on accident and couldn't remember what page the comment was on or the name of who posted it so...

So are you suggesting that overland content should be made easier? There are a couple of posts from people who aren't able to complete recent quest bosses. Should overland turn into 'click boss to win'? What's an acceptable amount of 'struggle'?