Does everyone else feel this way about ESO?

Knowledge

I feel like ESO is one of the best MMORPGs out there to play currently. Even some of the games on the horizon pale in comparison to what ESO offers. I love the lore, the game play, and crafting systems. The unique auction house is also fantastic. Overall it's a fun game at its core.

The problem I have with the game, and maybe you can relate, is that the balancing is always a roller coaster. Every time a patch comes out we're faced with class crippling nerfs or extreme buffs that the community, for the most part, can't understand. I've only just returned and I don't even know what I want to play given the possible Murkmire adjustments.

More often than not I find myself replacing armor sets constantly every time a DLC drops. The adjustments to classes, sets, and abilities almost seem as though they have an RNG nerf generator. Nothing makes sense. I believe that some of the changes are so dramatic and senseless that that is why they put those explanations beneath the change in an effort to try and rationalize what was done.

I'd rather have a sorc shield stacking than have the entire shield meta gutted completely. This is just one of many examples but I am sure we can all think of dozens of ways to adjust the shield issues beyond making them nearly useless. These dramatic changes hurt the core game fun for a lot of people that enjoy playing their way and enjoy the classes they've built.

I'd like to see more gradual and sensible adjustments to things in the future. I'd also like to know why something will be brought up 4% and then dropped 4% in the followup patch. That doesn't make sense mathematically. If you're working off of a baseline equation or using any form of logic you would only need to adjust the value a single time unless, once again, they use some RNG adjustment system or just change things based on how they "feel". Basing changes off how something feels will never work out right because there are varying skill levels. The adjustment should surround a baseline formula and be adjusted according to that unless power creep changes its potency (which 30 CP does not).

Ilithyania

Agree, maybe a small adjust is better, then review numbers, then adjust some. A small change can go along way.
Then again balance between classes Pvp vs PvE, is something all MMO stuggle with.

Most people will adjust and move on.


wait wait, what uniqe auction house ??

Knowledge

Ilithyania wrote: »

Agree, maybe a small adjust is better, then review numbers, then adjust some. A small change can go along way.
Then again balance between classes Pvp vs PvE, is something all MMO stuggle with.

Most people will adjust and move on.


wait wait, what uniqe auction house ??

Most games dramatically change how abilities work in PVP vs PVE or turn gear off when in PVP and give the class a "stat template".

VaranisArano

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

Ilithyania

yeah i seem to remember swtor had something called PVP specific gear. dont know why they changed that.
But yeah, maybe some sets that do a specific kinda damage only for PvP would work.

Bam_Bam

I enjoy the game enormously. The content and various storylines are many and excellent.
However, with the emphasis on constant content creation, this has left a swathe of bug, glitches and performance issues.

I think the marketing people aren't gamers or fans of the series. If we had a number of updates that refined and polished the game and addressed the long-standing problems, that have driven players away (and their subscriptions), a number of things would happen.
1) players who have left would return.

2) The game would be a lot more fun.

3) the existing player base would have renewed faith that ZOS cares about the game and us players and, even though we know they are in it for the money, they realise that without us players this game would fall hard onto its backside. Please fix the game, treat us a humans who are here for the love of the game and not the cash cows we're currently viewed as.

Kadoin

I can understand that they want combat to be more fluid and no more "I can sit in place and have my damage uninterrupted" gameplay, but it still doesn't mean I support the changes. I have fast reflexes so dodge change and shield changes won't mean much to me, but from what I've seen many people don't and it will definitely cripple their ability to play the game to their satisfaction in both PvP and PvE.

ZOS has the opportunity to change the game in a good way. Shields and passive dodge both were stupid mechanics, and I'm glad to see passive dodge gone and shields get stabbed. At the same time, I can see how the implementation of this is incomplete.

It's still not possible to really roll or break free on a mag char, and that's where the problems start with nerfing shields. If ZOS doesn't want to give passives that address that, then there should at least be a set for mag users that addresses that so there is at least the option to emphasize the ability to roll and break free in your build without having to nuke your damage to oblivion. In fact, maybe it could be a set aimed at "hybrids" so less people complain about it and its use. The alternative would be for them to cut the cost of break free across the board; I honestly know of no one that would complain about that.

Medium armor changes are actually at least good. There is room for improvement, but at least DW isn't being forced on players anymore and hopefully it means people will have less generic builds.

Knowledge

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

Hoolielulu

I've begun ignoring the patch notes so that I can log in and see what my people can and can't do. Then I can yell "What the hell is going on?!" My husband loves that part.

Maybe someday I'll wake up and my stamplar's hands will have been removed. In my inbox I'll find a note: "You'll fight with stumps and like it!"

Ilithyania

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

tbf WoWs BfA has gotten alotta bashing. their game directors AMA on reddit etc etc.

FlyingSwan

I mostly enjoy the principle of the game; an Elder Scrolls multiplayer game. But the implementation is weak and I am not that engaged with the game anymore, as the developer seems unable to move it forward in any meaningful way.

By this I mean that I was a beta-tester and buyer from day one, I subbed, left about 18 months ago due to the changes around Morrowind time and the amount of broken mechanics in the game. I came back 3 weeks ago and the game is still broken in the same ways, the developer is still making sweeping changes without a lot of thought, the content is too faceroll, the performance is still bad, and this time I did not sub, for which I am glad as I don't think the game is worth paying a sub for, although for B2P it's not too bad.

It's a big mistake for the dev to try and balance PvP and PvE together, it will NEVER work to a satisfactory degree as the two communities have very different requirements. The fact ZOS try to do this shows how much of an amateur team they are, all other games have significant difference between the two worlds, as people above have pointed out. For this reason, very few people in either camp will ever consider ESO a benchmark MMO, because it's merely passable at both jobs, it does not excel at either.

I personally play ESO as a stopgap until a single player TES game arrives, then I won't have to put up with an immature developer who thinks game balance is acheived by pandering to who whines loudest on a forum.

Knowledge

Kadoin wrote: »

I can understand that they want combat to be more fluid and no more "I can sit in place and have my damage uninterrupted" gameplay, but it still doesn't mean I support the changes. I have fast reflexes so dodge change and shield changes won't mean much to me, but from what I've seen many people don't and it will definitely cripple their ability to play the game to their satisfaction in both PvP and PvE.

ZOS has the opportunity to change the game in a good way. Shields and passive dodge both were stupid mechanics, and I'm glad to see passive dodge gone and shields get stabbed. At the same time, I can see how the implementation of this is incomplete.

It's still not possible to really roll or break free on a mag char, and that's where the problems start with nerfing shields. If ZOS doesn't want to give passives that address that, then there should at least be a set for mag users that addresses that so there is at least the option to emphasize the ability to roll and break free in your build without having to nuke your damage to oblivion. In fact, maybe it could be a set aimed at "hybrids" so less people complain about it and its use. The alternative would be for them to cut the cost of break free across the board; I honestly know of no one that would complain about that.

Medium armor changes are actually at least good. There is room for improvement, but at least DW isn't being forced on players anymore and hopefully it means people will have less generic builds.

They could just implement a simple passive to allow your highest resource to be drawn from for dodging and sprinting. They could call it "endurance reversal", or "arcane endurance".

Knowledge

Ilithyania wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

tbf WoWs BfA has gotten alotta bashing. their game directors AMA on reddit etc etc.

Yes, but the players do like the fact that tier sets were pulled. I am targeting one change not the entire expansion.

VaranisArano

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

I think that ZOS has decided that making:
2 Dungeon DLCs
1 Chapter
1 Quest DLC
In a year is insufficient to keep the interest of enough players to meet their goals.

And honestly, it is, without reasons for players to grind and replay the content.

If you remain interested without the grindy changes and you play the game as much as ever, excellent. ZOS is delighted to have players like you.

Nevertheless, it seems pretty clear that ZOS isn't betting on players like you. ZOS' development strategy banks on players spending quantity of time playing the game, not quality, and so grinding and dramatic changes work better for that goal.

In short, ZOS is not incapable. Nevertheless. ZOS has decided that this is the most profitable way forward. They will continue unless failing profits prove them wrong.

Iccotak

I think my only complaint is that the landscapes often feel too small

Knowledge

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

I think that ZOS has decided that making:
2 Dungeon DLCs
1 Chapter
1 Quest DLC
In a year is insufficient to keep the interest of enough players to meet their goals.

And honestly, it is, without reasons for players to grind and replay the content.

If you remain interested without the grindy changes and you play the game as much as ever, excellent. ZOS is delighted to have players like you.

Nevertheless, it seems pretty clear that ZOS isn't betting on players like you. ZOS' development strategy banks on players spending quantity of time playing the game, not quality, and so grinding and dramatic changes work better for that goal.

In short, ZOS is not incapable. Nevertheless. ZOS has decided that this is the most profitable way forward. They will continue unless failing profits prove them wrong.

ESO has more content updates than most MMORPGs. From the end of WoW Legion to BFA launch I believe it was a nine month lull in content.

Final Fantasy XIV goes 90 days without anything being added and sometimes it's very small. They then have nearly twelve months from the last raid tier (now) until the next expansion.

I think you're speculating quite a bit about why they are making these dramatic changes. I seriously doubt it's to keep us interested.

Keep in mind, when a player feels powerful and enjoys their class they don't want that to go away. They find that to be upsetting and often times leave the game after grinding and building up their gear.

Gear aside there is CP to grind for months if someone really was kept interested in progressing constantly vs grinding new sets every few months.

Ilithyania

TES single player games are awesome. But after 3000 hrs in Skyrim, the world felt kinda stale and lonly

VaranisArano

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

I think that ZOS has decided that making:
2 Dungeon DLCs
1 Chapter
1 Quest DLC
In a year is insufficient to keep the interest of enough players to meet their goals.

And honestly, it is, without reasons for players to grind and replay the content.

If you remain interested without the grindy changes and you play the game as much as ever, excellent. ZOS is delighted to have players like you.

Nevertheless, it seems pretty clear that ZOS isn't betting on players like you. ZOS' development strategy banks on players spending quantity of time playing the game, not quality, and so grinding and dramatic changes work better for that goal.

In short, ZOS is not incapable. Nevertheless. ZOS has decided that this is the most profitable way forward. They will continue unless failing profits prove them wrong.

ESO has more content updates than most MMORPGs. From the end of WoW Legion to BFA launch I believe it was a nine month lull in content.

Final Fantasy XIV goes 90 days without anything being added and sometimes it's very small. They then have nearly twelve months from the last raid tier (now) until the next expansion.

I think you're speculating quite a bit about why they are making these dramatic changes. I seriously doubt it's to keep us interested.

Keep in mind, when a player feels powerful and enjoys their class they don't want that to go away. They find that to be upsetting and often times leave the game after grinding and building up their gear.

Gear aside there is CP to grind for months if someone really was kept interested in progressing constantly vs grinding new sets every few months.

So Knowledge, why do you think ZOS is so seemingly committed to enforcing the grind through dramatic changes?

According to you, it shouldn't make sense,

And yet ZOS does it anyway.

Why?

Iccotak

Ilithyania wrote: »

TES single player games are awesome. But after 3000 hrs in Skyrim, the world felt kinda stale and lonly

Agreed, there's only so many times I can play the same game over and over, ESO doesn't play like a single player title but it does bring alot to the franchise

Knowledge

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

I think that ZOS has decided that making:
2 Dungeon DLCs
1 Chapter
1 Quest DLC
In a year is insufficient to keep the interest of enough players to meet their goals.

And honestly, it is, without reasons for players to grind and replay the content.

If you remain interested without the grindy changes and you play the game as much as ever, excellent. ZOS is delighted to have players like you.

Nevertheless, it seems pretty clear that ZOS isn't betting on players like you. ZOS' development strategy banks on players spending quantity of time playing the game, not quality, and so grinding and dramatic changes work better for that goal.

In short, ZOS is not incapable. Nevertheless. ZOS has decided that this is the most profitable way forward. They will continue unless failing profits prove them wrong.

ESO has more content updates than most MMORPGs. From the end of WoW Legion to BFA launch I believe it was a nine month lull in content.

Final Fantasy XIV goes 90 days without anything being added and sometimes it's very small. They then have nearly twelve months from the last raid tier (now) until the next expansion.

I think you're speculating quite a bit about why they are making these dramatic changes. I seriously doubt it's to keep us interested.

Keep in mind, when a player feels powerful and enjoys their class they don't want that to go away. They find that to be upsetting and often times leave the game after grinding and building up their gear.

Gear aside there is CP to grind for months if someone really was kept interested in progressing constantly vs grinding new sets every few months.

So Knowledge, why do you think ZOS is so seemingly committed to enforcing the grind through dramatic changes?

According to you, it shouldn't make sense,

And yet ZOS does it anyway.

Why?

If they really were adamant about forcing us into a grind they would just make new and appealing sets and new arena weapons - like they are.

It's not necessary to gut a class to attain the same goal. Also gutting the shield meta only forces a portion of the player base, if they even care about the meta, to chase new gear or reroll. It isn't a widespread "forced grind" like adding new gear, perfected pieces (trials), or arena weapons.

Pendrillion

I said it many times... Before we get more traction with all of this balancing stuff, the whole Stack Crit Stack Shield and Focus on one Attribute stuff has to go...

We get 3 different attributes to use. To decide whether we want to be squishy but powerful must be an option. Gear should never stand or compensate our attribute choices. I feel we need diminshing returns on attribute points spent and factor that into the CP system. So no one gets overly better than another player. Only then we have some interesting fights in this game. Outclassing everyone by overinvesting in Magicka and Stamina and disregarding health was the ONE big error that ZOS let slip, in my eyes... Everything else is just for people who don't want to work for their success...

Knowledge

Pendrillion wrote: »

I said it many times... Before we get more traction with all of this the whole Stack Crit Stack Shield and Focus on one Attribute stuff has to go...

We get 3 different attributes to use. To decide whether we want to be squishy but powerful must be an option. Gear should never stand or compensate our attribute choices. I feel we need diminshing returns on attribute points spent and factor that into the CP system. So no one gets overly better than another player. Only then we have some interesting fights in this game. Outclassing everyone by overinvesting in Magicka and Stamina and disregarding health was the ONE big error that ZOS let slip, in my eyes... Everything else is just for people who don't want to work for their success...

I just think there's far too many set pieces to fully balance the game. Adding more only makes it worse.

Starlight_Knight

Yea i agree - I love the game and love that its "evolving" but its doing so at the expense of players, i hate having to re-craft and almost relearn how to play every new patch. Also the way its becoming a casual game and there is nothing to work towards is bad.

I would prefer to see a new levelling system more than anything else as this CP thing feels unfinished and gear we're crafting 160 gear with 10 million cp cap lol..

VaranisArano

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Knowledge wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hello, Knowledge. It's been a while.

I think that ZOS is committed to balancing PVE and PVP together, for better and for worse.

I think that ZOS is also comitted to making drastic changes. Thanks to needing horizontal progression, ZOS would rather that we spend more time playing/grinding the game than risk that we feel happy with our characters, get bored, and leave. Therefore, ZOS has to constantly change the meta, which in this case means balancing PVE like its a game of King of the Hill. This time, its Magsorc's time to be dethroned along with mag builds with damage shields. In the same light, everyone can take a pretty good guess that nightblades's won't stay king of the hill forever. Our enjoyment is immaterial - as long as enough of us arent frustrated enough to leave and we keep grinding, ZOS' strategy works.

So while ideally I think ZOS would make smaller, sensible changes that promote player enjoyment, the reality is that ZOS is comitted to making dramatic changes that change the meta and "encourage" players to grind the game in order to stay on top. Its not a strategy that promotes player enjoyment, but it certainly does keep more players around longer, spending their money and time on ESO.

So, you believe that Zenimax is incapable of providing us with fun and interesting content to keep us interested in their game and must instead make dramatic class or ability adjustments so that we're always on some grindy gear treadmill to keep us subbed?

That is contrary to most modern MMOs and is quite the opposite of what the player base wants. Guild Wars 2 allows players to easily attain relevant gear and doesn't use any sort of "item sets". Instead, they rely on stats and stat weights. There is limited to no grind unless you seek out Legendaries which offer at best a 1 - 2% advantage.

World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth has removed tier set pieces from raiding in their latest expansion and relies heavily on item level and item power. It doesn't require players to seek specific sets for countless hours and then after they seek the sets out, change them, to force the players back into the same grind.

I don't think Zenimax makes boring content, I enjoy the voice acting, I enjoy the lore, I like the quests, I like the story lines, I don't feel that we need dramatic class changes in order to keep us interested.

I think that ZOS has decided that making:
2 Dungeon DLCs
1 Chapter
1 Quest DLC
In a year is insufficient to keep the interest of enough players to meet their goals.

And honestly, it is, without reasons for players to grind and replay the content.

If you remain interested without the grindy changes and you play the game as much as ever, excellent. ZOS is delighted to have players like you.

Nevertheless, it seems pretty clear that ZOS isn't betting on players like you. ZOS' development strategy banks on players spending quantity of time playing the game, not quality, and so grinding and dramatic changes work better for that goal.

In short, ZOS is not incapable. Nevertheless. ZOS has decided that this is the most profitable way forward. They will continue unless failing profits prove them wrong.

ESO has more content updates than most MMORPGs. From the end of WoW Legion to BFA launch I believe it was a nine month lull in content.

Final Fantasy XIV goes 90 days without anything being added and sometimes it's very small. They then have nearly twelve months from the last raid tier (now) until the next expansion.

I think you're speculating quite a bit about why they are making these dramatic changes. I seriously doubt it's to keep us interested.

Keep in mind, when a player feels powerful and enjoys their class they don't want that to go away. They find that to be upsetting and often times leave the game after grinding and building up their gear.

Gear aside there is CP to grind for months if someone really was kept interested in progressing constantly vs grinding new sets every few months.

So Knowledge, why do you think ZOS is so seemingly committed to enforcing the grind through dramatic changes?

According to you, it shouldn't make sense,

And yet ZOS does it anyway.

Why?

If they really were adamant about forcing us into a grind they would just make new and appealing sets and new arena weapons - like they are.

It's not necessary to gut a class to attain the same goal. Also gutting the shield meta only forces a portion of the player base, if they even care about the meta, to chase new gear or reroll. It isn't a widespread "forced grind" like adding new gear, perfected pieces (trials), or arena weapons.

They accomplish the same thing of making us grind new gear, not only by adding new stuff all the time but also by nerfing the old meta so that people switch.

If you haven't picked up on how ZOS forces players who want to chase the meta to grind with an ever-changing cycle of buffs and nerfs, I really don't know what to tell you. This conversation sure isn't going to go anywhere.

Your point seems to be, if I'm understanding correctly, that ZOS' methods are inefficient at what they are trying to do. Nevertheless, you fail to explain why ZOS has chosen the methods they use, be they inefficient or not. Until you have an explanation for that, I'm going to stick with my explanation: ZOS uses dramagic changes to encorage players to play the game longer than they would if they were satisfied with their characters because that is more profitable for ZOS.

Starlock

I feel precisely the opposite, actually. No changes have felt dramatic to me, aside from adding a new class or new content. The ‘balance’ changes feel trivial to me. Probably because I don’t treat this game like some sort of competition. They barely impact how I play the game, or my enjoyment of it. Where they do, it’s for the positive most of the time. There’s only a few changes they’ve made for ‘balance’ that I really disliked. Removing the cool knockback and things exploding in blue flame from the crossbow, for example. it was signature to one of my characters. And that’s the thing - changes never manage to ruin my characters. Until they do, it would be blatant hyperbole to call the changes made ‘extreme.’

DanteYoda

The issue with ESO to me and their biggest flaw is their balance is for ***. Honestly look at Nightblade and then the rest and say how this games balance isn't bias as all hell..

The rest of the game is pretty good, buggy as all heck but a fun game when you wade through the horrible aspects.

Way overpriced as well but thats games in general.

Prabooo

I wonder how the cast time for shields would be something "positive" or "enjoyable". It is a step back regarding combat mechanics evolution... Shame on you ZOS

UnseenCat

MMOs all have their core playerbase, who love the game and stick with it no matter what.

Trouble is, that group is rarely large enough to keep the game financially stable over the long haul.

So... MMOs have to appeal to more segments of the MMO audience at large... which means appealing to PvP-focused, PvE-focused, and casual players' various specific wants and needs. That's where things start to get fragmented and every step taken to appeal to one style risks messing things up for the others.

Then there's the problem of analyzing audience metrics -- are the stats valid? Are they being evaluated correctly? Is marketing chasing the stats or soft-pedaling them in favor of broader market trends to attract more new players? Every MMO's marketing department has to deal with things like that. And again, the decisions made always carry a risk of disappointing established players.

The one thing that ESO has going for it is that it's part of the Elder Scrolls universe, and because of that it has an incredibly rich world-building aspect that's second to none in gaming. That's ESO's stock in trade, and as long as ZOS never dilutes that, the game will survive even if changes do (temporarily) alienate some player groups. ESO has been around long enough that long-term players know that nerfpocalypses come and go. (I main a Nightblade -- and there was a "Nerf NBs! spree long before "Nerf Sorcs" was a thing.) Sometimes you just need to roll an alt and try something new as a diversion while the dust settles. But that's something that long-term players are more apt to do then casuals or newer players who haven't realized that ZOS doesn't keep the game static.

Ultimately, staying static will result in a game fading away in favor of the new shiny at some point -- so for longevity, it has to change some or it will die.

Part of the problem is that players really like when ESO is on a fast release cadence for new DLC. But fast releases mean limited time for good, meaningful testing. The player base gets bored and grouchy when there are long breaks between releases of new content. But those longer stretches do allow for more feedback from beta testing -- it's a double-edged sword.

ZOS has a long history of throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks. That's kind of been the nature of ESO development from the beginning. The benefit is that sometimes really nifty things come out of the process. The downside is that major stumbles happen. Generally the mess gets cleaned up, though it takes longer to fix the mis-steps than it does to make them. It's part of the landscape of ESO.

Players have been screaming for attention and changes to Cyrodiil. Well, now changes are coming. Best thing to do is roll with it and see how it works out. It will get revised. (Think how forward camps were put in, abused, taken out, and put back in with revisions. It happens)

Chasing meta is hard to avoid. Adding new classes is just another way to chase the meta. Not changing the meta will make gameplay become static, which generates boredom. I don't think ZOS has found a way to shift the meta without generating unintended consequences, partly because the combat and gear system has so many statistical factors that can shift gameplay results. Players like the depth of ESOs combat and gear systems, but it's got to be hell for developers to make adjustments to it. Playing safe would leave combat feeling static and stale year-to-year. Making changes will inevitably make some things go off a cliff from time to time.

The best outcome would probably be for ZOS' spokespeople to ignore the marketing department's canned happy-talk scripts and just come out and say "Yes, this didn't work like we wanted it to, so bear with us while we walk it back" when things go off the rails. And, we the players need to cut them some slack now and then, too. It's easy to criticize. Doing it politely and constructively is harder.

Balancing PvE and PvP into the same meta may never work. What really nags at some players is that some character builds are basically good enough for both, as long as you selectively swap out skills and gear pieces. But the UI makes quick adjustments a pain, so they just don't do it. And grinding a similar character up to level is a pain. For PC players, addons make gear and skill swapping much easier -- but console players don't have that option. The UI is a barrier to some simple solutions.

The Skills Advisor addition to the UI is a step in the right direction, especially for newer players, but it's not a cure-all, and only partially addresses guiding players along the major meta build lines. There's still no major help for assigning or re-assigning CP. That's an aspect of the game that can use more love from the developers. More influence from PC addons that help with meta-analysis would benefit players when changes come down.

Elsterchen

Knowledge wrote: »

I feel like ESO is one of the best MMORPGs out there to play currently. Even some of the games on the horizon pale in comparison to what ESO offers. I love the lore, the game play, and crafting systems. The unique auction house is also fantastic. Overall it's a fun game at its core.

Agreed.

Knowledge wrote: »

The problem I have with the game, and maybe you can relate, is that the balancing is always a roller coaster. Every time a patch comes out we're faced with class crippling nerfs or extreme buffs that the community, for the most part, can't understand. I've only just returned and I don't even know what I want to play given the possible Murkmire adjustments.

For some it has been tough right from the beginning...

Knowledge wrote: »

More often than not I find myself replacing armor sets constantly every time a DLC drops. The adjustments to classes, sets, and abilities almost seem as though they have an RNG nerf generator. Nothing makes sense. I believe that some of the changes are so dramatic and senseless that that is why they put those explanations beneath the change in an effort to try and rationalize what was done.

Personally I still have the impression its more like lottery, but i can relate to how you feel.

Knowledge wrote: »

I'd rather have a sorc shield stacking than have the entire shield meta gutted completely. This is just one of many examples but I am sure we can all think of dozens of ways to adjust the shield issues beyond making them nearly useless. These dramatic changes hurt the core game fun for a lot of people that enjoy playing their way and enjoy the classes they've built.

I can relate to that feeling, I play stamina templar. Yet I think its gotten better over time, and now lately with class reps. Developer comments have been the first step, now many changes of current PTS include the feedback that was given in the forums. The quality of feedback was improved, too ... this is a buff, if... . Just look at the current situation: We are a few days into PTS 1 testcycle and there are comments from the devs in feedback threads. Some changes are already said to be adjusted in PTS 2, others are acknowledged and shifted to PTS 3. There are still changes I find hard to understand and there are still changes I think are not well thought out, but I do see differences to how it worked a few years ago, too.

Knowledge wrote: »

I'd like to see more gradual and sensible adjustments to things in the future. I'd also like to know why something will be brought up 4% and then dropped 4% in the followup patch. That doesn't make sense mathematically. If you're working off of a baseline equation or using any form of logic you would only need to adjust the value a single time unless, once again, they use some RNG adjustment system or just change things based on how they "feel". Basing changes off how something feels will never work out right because there are varying skill levels. The adjustment should surround a baseline formula and be adjusted according to that unless power creep changes its potency (which 30 CP does not).

No, please not. We have been there. Its very frustating if you are represented small changes without at least an idea about the whole change. Currently we have time to discuss things in the forum, try the changes on PTS, share feedback and with the class reps: a fixed date to talk to the dev-team. We need that time to cool down drama, test and discuss changes.

Adding to it, if your class/race/build happens to be in focus of changes it might mean that you need to adjust on a weekly basis, expect devs to think about changes/feedback on a weekly basis, and all people providing feedback will have to do that every week, too...

pattyLtd

Completely agree, they seem to have alot of dumb internal rules they stick too.
Like bakance pve and pvp together and “broad changes for balance” once every x months.

The changes are always excessive, the opposite of balance.
Small changes that they can then evaluate and adjust accordingly.
This would be easier for them and also easier for us.

I am on console and if the certification process for console makes this to costly then i wouldnt mind wait bit longer and only get working and good changes after PC tested it for us

Also, welcome back

Tandor

Knowledge wrote: »

<snip> I feel like ESO is one of the best MMORPGs out there to play currently. Even some of the games on the horizon pale in comparison to what ESO offers. I love the lore, the game play, and crafting systems. The unique auction house is also fantastic. Overall it's a fun game at its core. <snip>

I agree with all of that except the comment on the trading system which is far too restrictive in the number of sellers that can participate, far too cumbersome for buyers, and far too dependent on add-ons for effectiveness which means that console users aren't operating on a level playing field with PC users (I'm a PC user but don't use add-ons and don't use the trader system other than for the very occasional purchase probably averaging once a year or so).

As for the rest of the original post, I don't personally have a problem with the balancing changes as they never affect me and most times I wouldn't even notice them if I didn't glance through the patch notes or frequent the forum. In other games where such things have affected me I have welcomed the game's evolution and enjoyed the challenge of adapting to change rather than being stuck in a game that has stood still for years. The one area of concern I have in theory is that I have always found it better for skills to be balanced separately for PvE and PvP, although in practice the present arrangement hasn't been an issue for me as a solo/cooperative PvE player with no interest in competitive or meta-based gameplay.