Overland Content Feedback Thread

Kyip · January 13

disky wrote: »

I am not here for dungeons and trials, I am not here for PvP, I'm here to explore and experience the story, as I have with every other TES game. ESO provides tons of content for someone like me, it's just that I can't enjoy it because it's not fun for me.

Respectfully... I do not think your approach fits developer design intent for endgame. You can also do harder solo content like Maelstrom Arena, Vateshran Hollows, and Infinite Archive. It's unreasonable to not progress upward into more difficult content once you have mastered entry-level content, yet expect the game to continue to challenge to you. As we improve, we can seek out greater challenges. That is the solo endgame content, on normal or veteran, and it's also doing some group-based overland challenges like incursions or world bosses on our own. Heck, maybe just experiment with new builds, try out things that might be fun. Play a new class, master it, experience the game a new way. I wouldn't expect any content to remain challenging if I just keep doing it over and over after I have mastered it.

disky · January 13

Kyip wrote: »

@disky
I am definitely newer to this thread. So, tell me what alternatives you have in mind, that do not sacrifice the game I enjoy for the game you want. No sarcasm, what is the solution you propose? Because what you want and what I want seem incompatible to me. I favor a normal/veteran toggle because I have seen it work in other games.

The idea many of us have come to uses a personal debuff system, which would keep everyone in the same zone, would use available code without a big tech investment, and could even be configurable depending on how the player wants to play and how ZOS chooses to implement it. Players don't like the *idea* of debuffs because...they're debuffs, but it has essentially the same effect as any other kind of challenge mode would. with the only difference being that you're still around other players who aren't using the system. Obviously, some people don't like that because it means it's harder to compare themselves to one another but there are ways to remedy that as well.

If we separate players into instances it's bad for everyone. It's bad for ZOS because of the additional required tech, maintenance and balance required. It's bad for players because the world will be more empty on both sides. I think players who want this just don't see it. And some of them may not care right now, but they will when they realize they can't find anyone to do what they want to do.

disky · January 13

Kyip wrote: »

disky wrote: »

I am not here for dungeons and trials, I am not here for PvP, I'm here to explore and experience the story, as I have with every other TES game. ESO provides tons of content for someone like me, it's just that I can't enjoy it because it's not fun for me.

Respectfully... I do not think your approach fits developer design intent for endgame. You can also do harder solo content like Maelstrom Arena, Vateshran Hollows, and Infinite Archive. It's unreasonable to not progress upward into more difficult content once you have mastered entry-level content, yet expect the game to continue to challenge to you. As we improve, we can seek out greater challenges. That is the solo endgame content, on normal or veteran, and it's also doing some group-based overland challenges like incursions or world bosses on our own. Heck, maybe just experiment with new builds, try out things that might be fun. Play a new class, master it, experience the game a new way. I wouldn't expect any content to remain challenging if I just keep doing it over and over after I have mastered it.

I think we need to keep in mind that if the "endgame", meaning dungeons/trials/PvP, were the primary focus of the game for everyone, this thread would not exist, and it would not be the largest thread on the forum. Many, many people want overland to be fun and provide the feeling that the other TES games provide, and I think it goes without saying that in terms of content, ZOS has provided a disproportionate amount of overland content compared to endgame. So it's worthwhile to provide a way for players with a variety of motivations to enjoy it.

Kyip · January 13

I think the debuff solution works too. It feels like that would actually be a more radical change, but I suppose they already have some relevant experience with the level scaling buffs.

I agree that it would be emptier on both sides with normal/veteran instances. It's not my preference, it's just the least bad I could see to satisfy both sides. I don't think that it's that we don't care, moreso that we care more about the game not being changed in a way that makes it fundamentally worse for our own enjoyment. It's a compromise.

I also agree that we want overland to be fun... but I find it fun like it is right now. If they can accommodate both sides, that would be ideal.

Muizer · January 13

disky wrote: »

I just think that more people are coming to the thread with this idea because of the recent letter, and they haven't entirely thought things through.

Probably why they want alternative threads to stay open. So they can be present from the start when it's going to repeat the whole discussion we've had in this one.

Anyway, I'm going to push back a little against the 'solution that keeps everyone happy' approach.

IMHO there are certain things that players have gotten used to in overland. Some of these things I think the devs should respect, but not all.

In the first category are the many mobs in overland that are really just animated resource nodes. Think skeevers, mudcrabs, coyotes and the like. IMHO we should recognize them for what they are and not make them harder at all, for anyone.

In the second category mobs according to ES tradition really should be dangerous: Trolls, Ogres, Mammoths, Minotaurs, Atronarchs etc.. I actually do not expect of the devs to cater to players who want these creatures to be pushover cardboard props. It is not too much to ask players to look where they tread, whether that is because they are fragile because they're new to the game or whether they are in a hurry to farm nodes, surveys, treasure maps etc.. I am definitely ok with the game becoming harder in that regard. There's nothing wrong with that.

The issue of optional difficulty in overland IMHO pertains only to encounters that are a part of zone completion (delves, quests, WB etc.).

Kyip · January 13

This all kinda got away from my question though... what is the developer's design intent for the purpose of overland?

Kyip wrote: »

That said, I have a question for those who have been following the forums and developer intent messages longer than I have.
My understanding has been that overland content is primarily meant to be the on-ramp for new players, until they are ready for endgame pve activities like the veteran versions of dungeons, trials, arenas, etc... thus new players have always been nudged to the newest zone after they finish their tutorial.

My understanding has been that the secondary purpose was to deliver to story content for the new year/chapter for everyone, including new players and casual players, so that all players get to experience it... they advertise each new year/chapter as the reason for players who strayed away to come back and play again, presumably with their old and thus sub-optimal builds and gear.

For both of these purposes, it makes no sense to increase difficulty. So, my question is, am I wrong about the developer intent here? Because if I am, then I'm kinda looking at all this wrong, from the ground up.

Kyip · January 13

Muizer wrote: »

In the second category mobs according to ES tradition really should be dangerous: Trolls, Ogres, Mammoths, Minotaurs, Atronarchs etc.. I actually do not expect of the devs to cater to players who want these creatures to be pushover cardboard props.

Pushover for you. Not for everyone.

Kyip · January 13

Muizer wrote: »

Probably why they want alternative threads to stay open. So they can be present from the start when it's going to repeat the whole discussion we've had in this one.

Respectfully, this is glib, rude, and dismissive. They have been shutting down conversation threads about other topics, like quest markers, for example, that are not being discussed here.

SilverBride · January 13

I don't think a separate overland would make the world seem emptier... at least not the normal overland.

I doubt that many players doing the activities that many do in overland, such as harvesting resources and digging up surveys and maps and leads, and even meeting quest objectives would choose to do so in an instance that would take them way longer to move through the trash to complete.

Quest boss fights don't generally take place in the open world, and their difficulty being too low has been one of the biggest complaints. Now that these bosses have progressively become way more difficult than they used to be (way too far for many to even be able to complete now), what more is there to do?

disky · January 13

Kyip wrote: »

I think the debuff solution works too. It feels like that would actually be a more radical change, but I suppose they already have some relevant experience with the level scaling buffs.

I agree that it would be emptier on both sides with normal/veteran instances. It's not my preference, it's just the least bad I could see to satisfy both sides. I don't think that it's that we don't care, moreso that we care more about the game not being changed in a way that makes it fundamentally worse for our own enjoyment. It's a compromise.

I also agree that we want overland to be fun... but I find it fun like it is right now. If they can accommodate both sides, that would be ideal.

It is in the best interest of everyone that your interests be kept in mind as much as mine. Some players don't see that and I think that if it were included in their calculus, they would also come to a more nuanced and equitable solution.

disky · January 13

Muizer wrote: »

disky wrote: »

I just think that more people are coming to the thread with this idea because of the recent letter, and they haven't entirely thought things through.

Probably why they want alternative threads to stay open. So they can be present from the start when it's going to repeat the whole discussion we've had in this one.

Anyway, I'm going to push back a little against the 'solution that keeps everyone happy' approach.

IMHO there are certain things that players have gotten used to in overland. Some of these things I think the devs should respect, but not all.

In the first category are the many mobs in overland that are really just animated resource nodes. Think skeevers, mudcrabs, coyotes and the like. IMHO we should recognize them for what they are and not make them harder at all, for anyone.

In the second category mobs according to ES tradition really should be dangerous: Trolls, Ogres, Mammoths, Minotaurs, Atronarchs etc.. I actually do not expect of the devs to cater to players who want these creatures to be pushover cardboard props. It is not too much to ask players to look where they tread, whether that is because they are fragile because they're new to the game or whether they are in a hurry to farm nodes, surveys, treasure maps etc.. I am definitely ok with the game becoming harder in that regard. There's nothing wrong with that.

The issue of optional difficulty in overland IMHO pertains only to encounters that are a part of zone completion (delves, quests, WB etc.).

I think low-level beasts like skeevers and wolves should definitely be lower on the difficulty level, although I think wolves could be bumped up a little bit in an optional challenge implementation. There should be a scale that increases challenge noticeably based on enemy type, with low-level beasts at the bottom, then creatures like wisps and wasps, goblins, low-level humanoids, high-level beasts, high-level humanoids, etc., all the way up to Daedric Lords. But I don't see a reason to shake things up at the base level, aside from ensuring that this difficulty is consistent across all zones in the game if that isn't already the case. That way players know what to expect and it makes things easier to scale up in an optional challenge system.

I don't agree that optional changes should only affect delves, quests and world bosses. Most of the time I spend in the game is in the overland itself, the open space of the zones, and I want that space to feel like it's a challenge as well. It's where a lot of questing is done and those quests would essentially be unaffected if the zones are ignored. That would not only be unsatisfying, it would feel inconsistent. I'm not expecting it but this is why I think a granular challenge system, in which the player can decide how things work, would be ideal.

disky · January 13

Kyip wrote: »

This all kinda got away from my question though... what is the developer's design intent for the purpose of overland?

It does seem as though the devs have intended to push players toward harder/endgame content and they have said as much in interviews. They have also tried to provide harder "overland" content, in the form of alternatives like Bastion Nymic, but things like this don't address the core issue - the expectation many have with TES is that there is a world to explore, and that experience is the one many players who enjoy a challenge, including myself, are interested in. I'm here because I'm looking for exploration and story, and to be immersed in in the world of Tamriel, not for the ability to race through the same dungeons and trials over and over again. Though I like to be challenged that doesn't mean I should be expected to move away from what I enjoy - the essential TES experience which does exist in this game, just not for me.

That's why I've been here for as long as I have. Whether it has been ZOS' intent for me to do different content or not, the game can accommodate people like me, with some development effort, just as well as anyone who currently enjoys it. And I know I'm not the only one who feels this way because there's plenty of evidence to demonstrate that a lot of players agree.

spartaxoxo · January 13

Kyip wrote: »

For both of these purposes, it makes no sense to increase difficulty. So, my question is, am I wrong about the developer intent here? Because if I am, then I'm kinda looking at all this wrong, from the ground up.

You're correct about the purpose of overland. They have stated in the past that they want players to be able to explore anywhere. It's to provide the core Elder Scrolls experience. This game is canon to the other games as well. Here's a few articles that should shed some light on overland, it's purpose, and the canon status of the game. I highlighted some quotes. All of these show that they wanted to give us the true Elder Scrolls experience of story and exploration. Unfortunately for many vet players, they aren't able to enjoy that aspect of the game due to the lack of difficulty. I personally believe that's why we're finally getting something that helps with this issue. The single player games have difficulty adjusting too.

Under the new levelless system, players can jump into any part of Elder Scrolls Online and play which content strikes your fancy. If you want to start on Morrowind, you can. If you want to jump back to the beginning, that works too. This means new players have a lot of choices, and never have to worry about not being able to play with friends. But it also means that it's a little more confusing to experience the older content that ESO has to offer. The community has resources to let players know where older storylines begin, but some have asked for a way to experience ESO in release order. Lambert says that Zenimax Online is "always interested in making sure that we put our best foot forward," which is usually the newest content available. That said, the team has talked about a way for players to enjoy ESO in chronological order

https://web.archive.org/web/20220705214449/https://www.usgamer.net/articles/elder-scrolls-online-developers-elsweyr-player-milestones-and-the-season-of-the-dragon

A lot of the feedback at launch centered on the fact that ESO didn’t feel Elder Scrolls enough. It was a hybrid of MMO and Elder Scrolls “light” as we were trying to appeal to both MMO & Elder Scrolls players at the same time. A lot of players reacted negatively to that and so the team took a hard look at the game and what we wanted it to be – ultimately deciding to focus more on the Elder Scrolls aspects. Two major initiatives came out from that decision – improving world interactivity and freedom of exploration.

Later in same article

The launch wasn’t so much rough – it was more that the game didn’t deliver on some of its promises, the largest being that it would be a true Elder Scrolls experience.

https://www.thegamer.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-interview/

Todd [Howard] has said many, many times that we've been carrying the torch for The Elder Scrolls and [that] we are canon," creative director Rich Lambert tells TheGamer. "All of the stuff we have done, they absolutely have to think about when they go and build their next thing. How they do that and what they're doing, I don't know. But, you know, we're absolutely part of the world of Tamriel in the end.

https://www.thegamer.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-carrying-the-torch-while-we-wait-for-the-elder-scrolls-6/#:~:text="Todd [Howard] has said,and build their next thing.

Surgee · January 13

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

SilverBride · January 13

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

There are players that find the current overland difficult for various reasons. Increasing the difficulty by 5% would make it more difficult for them, and 30% would render it completely unplayable for many of these players.

This isn't an overreaction... it's a fact.

spartaxoxo · January 13

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

I personally doubt it will even be mandatory. I think it's highly likely it will be entirely optional.

Kyip · January 13

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits.

Respectfully, you are making a baseless assumption on that number value. If we look at current examples in game for harder content, Craglorn and Veteran modes in various places, we can see it is a much, much more substantial difference.

Surgee wrote: »

Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

Baiting. Unnecessarily rude, too.

Surgee · January 13

SilverBride wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

There are players that find the current overland difficult for various reasons. Increasing the difficulty by 5% would make it more difficult for them, and 30% would render it completely unplayable for many of these players.

This isn't an overreaction... it's a fact.

Where did you get that fact from? Source? There are people who really struggle to kill a boar? I don't believe it. Unless you're talking about soloing world bosses in the newest maps, which is meant to be a group encounter. I always meet randoms there and it isn't an issue.

spartaxoxo · January 13

Surgee wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

There are players that find the current overland difficult for various reasons. Increasing the difficulty by 5% would make it more difficult for them, and 30% would render it completely unplayable for many of these players.

This isn't an overreaction... it's a fact.

Where did you get that fact from? There are people who really struggle to kill a boar? I don't believe it. Unless you're talking about soloing world bosses in the newest maps, which is meant to be a group encounter. I always meet randoms there and it isn't an issue.

There are people in this thread who already find overland difficult due to things like age, internet connectivity, disability, etc. The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

Surgee · January 13

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

There are players that find the current overland difficult for various reasons. Increasing the difficulty by 5% would make it more difficult for them, and 30% would render it completely unplayable for many of these players.

This isn't an overreaction... it's a fact.

Where did you get that fact from? There are people who really struggle to kill a boar? I don't believe it. Unless you're talking about soloing world bosses in the newest maps, which is meant to be a group encounter. I always meet randoms there and it isn't an issue.

There are people in this thread who already find overland difficult due to things like age, internet connectivity, disability, etc. The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

I'd like to see the data on fighting regular mobs, not trying to solo bosses that are meant for groups (you know, because it's an MMO) waiting still for a anyone here to admit they struggle to kill simple boars and thieves. Killing regular mobs requires absolutely zero effort. You can turn off the screen, press one button occasionally and you'll get out of it without a scratch. Or you can let your companion kill everyone for you. You don't even have to move. That's a fact.

I'd gladly see a recording for that struggle with regular mobs.

spartaxoxo · January 13

Surgee wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

There are players that find the current overland difficult for various reasons. Increasing the difficulty by 5% would make it more difficult for them, and 30% would render it completely unplayable for many of these players.

This isn't an overreaction... it's a fact.

Where did you get that fact from? There are people who really struggle to kill a boar? I don't believe it. Unless you're talking about soloing world bosses in the newest maps, which is meant to be a group encounter. I always meet randoms there and it isn't an issue.

There are people in this thread who already find overland difficult due to things like age, internet connectivity, disability, etc. The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

I'd like to see the data on fighting regular mobs, not trying to solo bosses who are meant for groups (you know, because it's an MMO) waiting still for a anyone here to admit they struggle to kill simple boars and thieves.

Players don't have data. We have player feedback and dev statements

We do hear that feedback all the time,” Lambert says. “‘Give us a difficulty slider, let us do hard modes.’ There’s things we’re looking at but it’s not a simple problem because ten different people can play the game and they all play it ten different ways and it’s hard for some and easy for others. So we have to find the happy medium ground where the most amount of people can enjoy it.”

https://www.thegamer.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-creative-director-rich-lambert-10-year-anniversary-interview/

Surgee · January 13

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

I think many of you are overreacting. We don't even know how much harder it will get. Even if it they'll bump it up 30% it honestly won't make much difference since most players kill mobs within 1-2 hits. Let the update release and check if you really will fail miserably fighting a boar.

There are players that find the current overland difficult for various reasons. Increasing the difficulty by 5% would make it more difficult for them, and 30% would render it completely unplayable for many of these players.

This isn't an overreaction... it's a fact.

Where did you get that fact from? There are people who really struggle to kill a boar? I don't believe it. Unless you're talking about soloing world bosses in the newest maps, which is meant to be a group encounter. I always meet randoms there and it isn't an issue.

There are people in this thread who already find overland difficult due to things like age, internet connectivity, disability, etc. The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

I'd like to see the data on fighting regular mobs, not trying to solo bosses who are meant for groups (you know, because it's an MMO) waiting still for a anyone here to admit they struggle to kill simple boars and thieves.

Players don't have data. We have player feedback and dev statements

We do hear that feedback all the time,” Lambert says. “‘Give us a difficulty slider, let us do hard modes.’ There’s things we’re looking at but it’s not a simple problem because ten different people can play the game and they all play it ten different ways and it’s hard for some and easy for others. So we have to find the happy medium ground where the most amount of people can enjoy it.”

https://www.thegamer.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-creative-director-rich-lambert-10-year-anniversary-interview/

So it's all baselsss talk and panic. As I thought. Nothing about clearing regular mobs, just some vocal people on forums generally wanting the current difficulty, with some saying specifically they want to solo world bosses

This conversation is a bit pointless until we get the update. I hope everyone will be happy at the end. I'm out until then

cheers.

Muizer · January 13

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

We need to be clear what we're talking about though. In my book, the definition of 'too challenging' is 'blocking progress'. It most definitely is not "it would be annoying when I'm farming mats". I don't have much sympathy for that argument. The way I see it, the fact that overland can be traversed without looking where you're going is a flaw that may have been in the game for a long time, but nevertheless needs to be rectified.

spartaxoxo · January 13

Also, I have posted these videos before but can't find the quote in this thread anymore.

Here's what the game looks like for a vet character

https://youtu.be/WTDxmuSRNto

And here's how it looks at level 50+ with no gear or CP besides a white weapon

https://youtu.be/EN-Ixn0tFzs

The enemy being fought in both examples is just normal overland trolls.

spartaxoxo · January 13

Muizer wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

We need to be clear what we're talking about though. In my book, the definition of 'too challenging' is 'blocking progress'. It most definitely is not "it would be annoying when I'm farming mats". I don't have much sympathy for that argument. The way I see it, the fact that overland can be traversed without looking where you're going is a flaw that may have been in the game for a long time, but nevertheless needs to be rectified.

There are people who aren't doing the newest expansions because they can't progress through the story quests.

Muizer · January 13

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

We need to be clear what we're talking about though. In my book, the definition of 'too challenging' is 'blocking progress'. It most definitely is not "it would be annoying when I'm farming mats". I don't have much sympathy for that argument. The way I see it, the fact that overland can be traversed without looking where you're going is a flaw that may have been in the game for a long time, but nevertheless needs to be rectified.

There are people who aren't doing the newest expansions because they can't progress through the story quests.

Which is why I said that optional difficulty should concern those encounters which can block progress. But also that it does not have to concern encounters that are entirely avoidable. In all, it means it's just not a simple matter of applying some (optional) scaling factors across the board. It's really going to have to involve looking at the context of the encounters. Are they basically mobile resource nodes? Are they dangerous, but avoidable? Are they unavoidable because that would block progress?

spartaxoxo · January 13

Muizer wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The devs have also said some unnamed percentage of players find overland challenging.

We need to be clear what we're talking about though. In my book, the definition of 'too challenging' is 'blocking progress'. It most definitely is not "it would be annoying when I'm farming mats". I don't have much sympathy for that argument. The way I see it, the fact that overland can be traversed without looking where you're going is a flaw that may have been in the game for a long time, but nevertheless needs to be rectified.

There are people who aren't doing the newest expansions because they can't progress through the story quests.

Which is why I said that optional difficulty should concern those encounters which can block progress. But also that it does not have to concern encounters that are entirely avoidable. In all, it means it's just not a simple matter of applying some (optional) scaling factors across the board. It's really going to have to involve looking at the context of the encounters. Are they basically mobile resource nodes? Are they dangerous, but avoidable? Are they unavoidable because that would block progress?

If they can't pick mats or explore anymore, they aren't getting the overland experience.

The point of overland is leveling, story, and exploration.

BananaBender · January 13

placeholder

Kyip wrote: »

Personally I still think we need an overland veteran mode to satisfy both sides of this debate.

That said, I have a question for those who have been following the forums and developer intent messages longer than I have.
My understanding has been that overland content is primarily meant to be the on-ramp for new players, until they are ready for endgame pve activities like the veteran versions of dungeons, trials, arenas, etc... thus new players have always been nudged to the newest zone after they finish their tutorial.

My understanding has been that the secondary purpose was to deliver to story content for the new year/chapter for everyone, including new players and casual players, so that all players get to experience it... they advertise each new year/chapter as the reason for players who strayed away to come back and play again, presumably with their old and thus sub-optimal builds and gear.

For both of these purposes, it makes no sense to increase difficulty. So, my question is, am I wrong about the developer intent here? Because if I am, then I'm kinda looking at all this wrong, from the ground up.

The problem is that the overland completely fails at being a ramp. Because the main thing people don't notice is, why there is there such a massive gap between players? Some people struggle with story bosses, others kill it in 30 seconds or so.
If you play this game completely alone without looking at guides or builds etc, it's very difficult to figure out how the combat actually works and what you should be doing. For example, the mechanics which happen during the fights are not forced to be played correctly. What I mean by this is if a boss does a mechanic that needs to be interrupted players are not actually forced to interrupt it. So when a player who doesn't know or remember about the whole interrupting thing runs into this mechanic they think the answer is to stack more defences to survive through the mechanic. Same applies for ground AoEs and heavy attacks. Once you get comfortable enough with the game to be able to pay attention to the mechanics, you quickly realize that you only need a single heal (if even that) to survive pretty much everything overland has to offer. Then when you start casting skills every second you start seeing the bosses fall much faster as well.

I know some people have disabilities and stuff like that which will limit their playing, and I'm in no position to say what everyone should and should not be able to do, but the game offers you tools to alter your build to fit your needs. For example if you want easier rotation you can use Oakensoul, if you don't want to bother with light attacks you can use Velothi, if you don't want to die ever again in overland you can use Pale Order. None of these items are a requirement, but they do help out.

So in short, current overland can be difficult if you are trying to brute force your way through.
It just doesn't sit right with me that the story content should be balanced to fit for players who actively (not necessarily intentionally) ignoring major gameplay mechanics.

BananaBender · January 13

When it comes to difficulty level, I fear that if they don't introduce a separate difficulty level the difficulty is still going to remain too low. I feel like ZOS is going go with the route that tries to satisfy everyone and not ending up making a meaningful difference anywhere. If they do end up making a veteran version of the fights, I hope they embrace it and add a challenge mode or something like that which could be actually challenging. Similar to normal, veteran and hard mode. Maybe this could only apply for story bosses since selfishly those are the only ones I care about.

SilverBride · January 13

BananaBender wrote: »

When it comes to difficulty level, I fear that if they don't introduce a separate difficulty level the difficulty is still going to remain too low. I feel like ZOS is going go with the route that tries to satisfy everyone and not ending up making a meaningful difference anywhere. If they do end up making a veteran version of the fights, I hope they embrace it and add a challenge mode or something like that which could be actually challenging. Similar to normal, veteran and hard mode. Maybe this could only apply for story bosses since selfishly those are the only ones I care about.

That is something I wish they would address. They have been progressively increasing the difficulty of the story bosses since High Isle, to the point that many can no longer defeat them.

They should follow your suggestion and make challenge modes for these bosses. And I'd like them to leave the rest of overland alone.