We need End Game Zones

idk

lordrichter wrote: »

idk wrote: »

We had an end game zone. Craglorn and Upper Craglorn were the first two areas added to the game post launch. It was specifically designed and intended for end game. It was nerfed into oblivion because players did not want it that hard. Grouping was also removed but that is a separate story.

So if the player base did not want it then I do not see what has changed. I go for the content designed and intended to be a challenge that overall is not being nerfed, vet trials, and mostly HM. vMA is also a decent challenge. However, powercreep is still making all of this easier.

ZOS had the right idea with the Adventure Zones, but it was really too soon for them to be put in the game. That is my opinion. The game was not mature enough to support an end-game Adventure Zone concept, as implemented.

Many things have changed since then. I think that the game is now more than mature enough to support the idea. They have more players at the end-game stage, and the game systems and combat are years along from where they were.

From my perspective, the question is more along the lines of whether it fits into their vision for the game, and One Tamriel, as well as whether it fits into the monetization plan they have for the game.

While Zos did mess up and ignore those who like at least some time they can play solo, I would suggest it is never to soon to add content.

Craglorn was busy. It was full when it released to it does not seem it was to early. The issue is after Upper Craglorn Zos chose to not add any meaningful content to the game for over a year. A lot of players from solid raiders to casual left out of boredom. Many neve returned so Zos is not having to cater to a larger more casual player base while still trying appease what is left of the average to serious player with trials and arenas.

For a new Zone to offer a decent challenge it would be pretty empty or decent players would complain it is to easy leaving the more casual player to complain they cannot playa Zone they paid for. So Zos loses either way. Well, they lost years ago.

Elsonso

lelink88 wrote: »

Agree, Eso is a RPG. I hate the concept about endgame content. What's endgame content? It's a *** idea make by WoW bcause they want you spend alot of time and pay more sub. In Eso everything is content, there are no suchthing "Endgame content". Not many ppl do all the questline, explore all the world and understand all of its beautiful and they still argue about "Content". It's not *** Wow, It's Eso, there are no suchthing "Endgame Content" here, only content. Don't make Tamriel bcome Azeroth, Azeroth is dying, and we don't want to follow it.

WoW became successful because they created end game content. If WoW had been such that it did not have this content, likely no one here would have any idea what it was. People would have played the game, then moved on.

What WoW did that was bad, in my opinion, was make the end game the main reason to play the game, and then started rolling out new expansions that served the purpose to replace the old end game with a new one. It created a culture of end game progression, where each expansion moved the goal post. The expansions are for the end game players, not the new players.

Progression has become a disease in WoW. It is pervasive across the whole game. Everyone needs to move on to the next thing. New expansions create new content to replace the old content. Max crafters are no longer max crafters. Gear gets abandoned. Major hubs, once filled with players, become abandoned with the next expansion. Shattrath. Dalaran. These days, WoW is mostly made up of content that has been abandoned by the bulk of the players.

ESO is not like that. At least, not to the same degree. There is end game content here, but it there is no constant end game progression like what WoW had. End game is not driven forward by the Chapters, but added to incrementally by Chapters and DLC. New content in ESO does not supplant what was there before. New content is not only for end game players. It is refreshing to me.

Any future end game zone that ZOS might do for ESO needs to continue that trend.

MikaHR

Aenthel wrote: »

Gythral wrote: »

Craglorn

Guess you do not remember how that went..

It was actually fun, challenging, and how ridiculously annoying. Yet it was a fun challenge. But people whined.
I actually miss the times when zones had levels and not everything was the same everywhere.

Yeah it was SO fun it killed the game and they had to rework the ENTIRE game (including COMPLETE Craglorn revamp...on top of many changes made to it since and after)

SaintSubwayy

we once had the classic MMORPG system, with harder zones etc. and endgame zone craglorn.

I remember like the first week after release as I went to eastmarch with my lvl19 DK, and getting rekked by a sabetoothcat...that was fun
sadly it got removed with the OT update, and overland got watered down to be the same difficultys on all lvls.

about craglorn, well just grinded in this time, to keep max lvl and researched stuff, since it wasent really appealing to me...3 wasps could kill you way to easily IMO.
Altouh it was kinda okey, but it was not the right time for such content...we just gotten AA and HRC and SO with he 2 craglorn updates, and they were pretty hard back then, so was a bit too much for many players.

nowadays they could introduce such zones, however they should divide them into vet and normal, as dungeons can be divided, then someone who just wants to RP or get the stories can get them on normal, still gets all achievements which are story,WB, delve related etc. and players who like the challenge would have a challenge (but not as forced group challence thou) something a bit harder than vMA addwaves for example would be nice I think.
they should not die with 2LA and2 forcepulses, and force the player to use shields and heals for once.

ThePlayer

They can make a end game zone, like in Craglorn, but they should make too a group finder for the 4 players delves, coz right now to write in the zone chat for grouping in Craglorn is annoying.

MikaHR

Starlock wrote: »

This ‘end game’ term makes no darned sense. You are not asking for end game, OP, you are asking for hard game. This already exists. Most people do not play it. And when more is made (and more is being made) most still do not play it. Games are supposed to be fun. Forced grouping, dying all the time, and being required to play one way or else is not fun for most players.

DLC dungeons are DEAD content, now they (want) think "overland" and that it would be any different.

AndyMac

ZOS have pretty much confirmed ESO is a game for casuals so I don't have any hope of a Craglorn-like zone in the game in future.

And, imo, I think you'd have to say that Crag was a fail in the end.

Crag was brutal and fun when it dropped and there were plenty of players LFG'ing for a quite a while.

But needing players to be at the same place in a quest chain to make a group make sense was a big mistake. Eventually people got done with Crag and moved on. Players coming through later couldn't get a group for the quest chain and you couldn't solo the quest chain even if you wanted to.

ZOS won't do 2014 Crag again.

Hopefully ZOS can introduce some hard instances/ quests/ PD's/ delves etc for more overland challenge, but I'm not going to be surprised if they don't.

Tandor

I don't think past experience suggests a group-oriented open zone would be popular, but I certainly wouldn't object to one being developed for those who want it but only if it was in place of one of the dungeon DLCs. Groupers already get 2 of the 3 DLCs each year exclusively for them (just include a delve or two in them ZOS, and broaden their appeal!) plus extra stuff in the other DLC and chapter so I don't think they're hard done by.

Elsonso

idk wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

idk wrote: »

We had an end game zone. Craglorn and Upper Craglorn were the first two areas added to the game post launch. It was specifically designed and intended for end game. It was nerfed into oblivion because players did not want it that hard. Grouping was also removed but that is a separate story.

So if the player base did not want it then I do not see what has changed. I go for the content designed and intended to be a challenge that overall is not being nerfed, vet trials, and mostly HM. vMA is also a decent challenge. However, powercreep is still making all of this easier.

ZOS had the right idea with the Adventure Zones, but it was really too soon for them to be put in the game. That is my opinion. The game was not mature enough to support an end-game Adventure Zone concept, as implemented.

Many things have changed since then. I think that the game is now more than mature enough to support the idea. They have more players at the end-game stage, and the game systems and combat are years along from where they were.

From my perspective, the question is more along the lines of whether it fits into their vision for the game, and One Tamriel, as well as whether it fits into the monetization plan they have for the game.

While Zos did mess up and ignore those who like at least some time they can play solo, I would suggest it is never to soon to add content.

Craglorn was busy. It was full when it released to it does not seem it was to early. The issue is after Upper Craglorn Zos chose to not add any meaningful content to the game for over a year. A lot of players from solid raiders to casual left out of boredom. Many neve returned so Zos is not having to cater to a larger more casual player base while still trying appease what is left of the average to serious player with trials and arenas.

For a new Zone to offer a decent challenge it would be pretty empty or decent players would complain it is to easy leaving the more casual player to complain they cannot playa Zone they paid for. So Zos loses either way. Well, they lost years ago.

I might be wrong, but my impression is that the dearth of content while they made console was the problem. If anything, Craglorn would have been busier.

ESO today is a different beast, and while the original Craglorn might not work, the concept is not out of the realm of possibility.

Where Craglorn failed, and why I think it was too soon, is that ESO has a strong solo player component, and that requires a solo end game. Craglorn followed the traditional ideas of hard group content, but provided little to no support for creating groups, and had no support for solo.

Today, we have group finder, and the ability to scale zones, and a much larger player base.

Any end game zone in ESO will need to feature group and solo content, whether separate or overlapping modes.

We can have normal, veteran, and hard mode group content. A zone would have to provide the same for solo.

Of course, none of this works if end game looks like a wall.

And who knows, maybe the person above is right and solo players are just looking for easy content. All ESO offers for solo end game content is an Arena and the easier group dungeons and world bosses. Maybe that is all that is needed.

BrightOblivion

As someone who has beaten every quest he can find, and done vMA over and over again, I'd have to say I agree...that it's a terrible idea.

As others have said, where zones are concerned, there is no endgame. Each furthers a story, if only through the NPCs who make a reappearance. This year, they've decided to tie all the releases together in the "Season of the Dragon," with each release building upon the ones previous. From the sound of it, these themed releases may be more than a one-time thing. For a not-inconsiderable group of players, locking part of that ever-growing story behind a difficulty barrier is like ripping a chapter out of a book and expecting them to follow along with what's happening. The more zones you do that with, the more of the story you tear out, and the less people are able to follow along and attach themselves to it. This game is an RPG, as well as an MMO, meaning that the player's character plays a major role in how things turn out, and the story matters.

Your description of "group dungeon" difficulty also depends on which part of group dungeons you're talking about. If you're speaking about mobs and mob density, which isn't actually difficult but more tedious, with 5+ enemies every 10 or so steps, then absolutely not. I've no desire to slog through that as I run from quest giver to destination, or after I finish the story as I'm looking for side quests, chasing books, fishing, gathering resources, looking for random events (like the argo assassin or the tribal travelers in Murkmire) and take twenty minutes to get from one wayshrine to the next.

If you're talking about the difficulty of the bosses (moreso the side ones than the group event bosses), then maybe? I admit that it'd be nice for a boss to last longer than it takes for him/her to complete his/her opening taunt and for him/her to have some (basic) mechanics that encourage blocking/interrupting/moving, but would err on the side of accessibility.

In regards to forced grouping for quests, there are several issues I have with this, even if you ignore the fact that ZOS has difficulty keeping eidetic memory books consistent from one quest stage to the next, much less keeping two questers on the same page. The first is that very few people interact with a zone the same way. When I did Murkmire a couple weeks ago, I would do a couple quests, sprint around half the map looking for books, run over here to look for Choixth, stop mid-quest to check every bookshelf, pause to listen to that pair of npcs' dialogue. Some people stop and grab every resource node they come across. Others run nonstop from A to B and spacebar through all the dialogue. Even the order people do sidequests in differs. In four man dungeons (the other instance questing and group content intersect), I catch maybe 60% of the story as I'm running from one boss to the next after people who insist on sprinting everywhere, aggroing all the mobs and leaving the people who aren't as fast to dash through the gauntlet. An entire zone of quests like that or (gods forbid) a final boss conflict locked behind a dungeon or trial? I'd rather wax my legs with sandpaper.

The second issue is that zones just gradually die out. It's a natural course of things. Eventually, even if you're running multiple toons through the zone's content, you run out of things to do and move on to the next zone. When I was running through Murkmire's story, I came across at most 4 other people at any given time (while doing the main story, not even side quests). I'll see maybe 5 while doing my dailies each day? This came out in October. What will it be like in six months? Eventually, those who want to do the content will have done it, and it becomes prohibitive to lock interaction with the story behind group content. GW2 discovered this the hard way when they put the end of the core game's story behind a 4 man dungeon and had to rebalance it to be soloable as a result.

Regarding those who fondly look at Craglorn and go "More zones should be like this," I strongly disagree. Craglorn is without question my least favorite zone, be it for questing, dungeon-diving, resource-gathering, or even just running around. Shada's Tear is the only place in this game I refuse, on no uncertain terms, to run again, and I wouldn't change my mind if you paid me. Regardless of why one might argue the Craglorn experiment failed, the fact of the matter is that it did fail, and, as far as I'm concerned, it can stay in Craglorn where it belongs.

"But we need endgame zones!" No, we don't. In ESO, the endgame is trials. The endgame is vet hard mode DLC dungeons. The endgame is PvP, if you enjoy such things. The endgame is not, and should never be zones and their continuing story. I get that you find current overland content boringly easy, and I sympathize to a degree. However, if it comes down to you being entertained or the vast majority being able to experience the content at their own pace without the need for grouping, you will lose. Every. Single. Time.

What "we need" is for as many people who care to, to be able to experience the story. The moment they aren't, we're closing the book on them. And I suspect the game wouldn't be incredibly far behind.

starkerealm

BrightOblivion wrote: »

In ESO, the endgame is trials. The endgame is vet hard mode DLC dungeons. The endgame is PvP, if you enjoy such things.

Endgame is housing. Or Fashion. Or, really, whatever you make of it. Overland content isn't your endgame, and that's fine, but unless you're living in an echo chamber, you've got to realize, for a lot of people, endgame is fishing, and they like it that way.

BrightOblivion

starkerealm wrote: »

BrightOblivion wrote: »

In ESO, the endgame is trials. The endgame is vet hard mode DLC dungeons. The endgame is PvP, if you enjoy such things.

Endgame is housing. Or Fashion. Or, really, whatever you make of it. Overland content isn't your endgame, and that's fine, but unless you're living in an echo chamber, you've got to realize, for a lot of people, endgame is fishing, and they like it that way.

I was more referring to "endgame" in the concept of where the extreme challenge the OP seems to hunger for lies. Hence his use of the term "endgame zones."

My primary goals right now- my endgame, I guess- are fishing my way through DLC zones and Craglorn (now that I'm finished with Master Angler) and gathering all the books on my main, which currently consists of waiting for ZOS to fix the last 8 eidetic memory books I need and watching to see what the anniversary event does to the last 8 or 9 motifs I need to finish. As you say, I'm pretty content with that.

I've completed, if not all the quests, at least the vast supermajority and, while I'd like to delve more into the vet dlc dungeons, my currently uncertain schedule makes that difficult. So I'm waiting to go Elsweyr.

Dark_Lord_Kuro

KEEP YOUR MASOCHIST DONGEON DIFICULTY OUT OF MY ZONE

Iccotak

Again, it's not difficulty that I am aiming for or what I really want. I'm not a Dark Souls guy

The thread is about incentives to encourage people to play together, to be social out in the open world zones. Do quests together, etc.
If increased difficulty in specific zones doesn't work then ok, but I would like to hear other suggestions to encourage (not force) people to play together.
Or what other kind of group content ZOS could make

Chaos2088

Yeah it’s been tried and tested and was in game for a while....Craglorn.
Was a dead zone, till they revamped it. plus would go against the whole point of the one Tamriel update.

srfrogg23

Meh. I'm not sure how they would differentiate it from the rest of the zones, but I doubt it would be worth it.

One of the reasons for why I play ESO over other MMOs is because relevant end game content is not relegated to a tiny handful of zones. The entire game is an endgame zone.

Tandor

lordrichter wrote: »

And who knows, maybe the person above is right and solo players are just looking for easy content. All ESO offers for solo end game content is an Arena and the easier group dungeons and world bosses. Maybe that is all that is needed.

The first sentence always frustrates me. Solo players aren't just looking for easy content, they're just looking for soloable content. Most soloers aren't averse to difficult or challenging content, and many would welcome it provided the rewards were commensurate with the challenge. They often don't understand why it's the groups who breeze through content with strength of numbers and all roles covered that get the best rewards ! If a dozen players defeat a world boss mob in a couple of minutes then they should get a standard level of reward, but if a single player can overcome that world boss mob over a longer and much tougher encounter then that should be reflected in a better reward.

In any event, what I suspect no-one wants - be they soloers, groupers, PvEers or PvPers - is to be able to follow a particular playstyle for 99% of a game's progression only to discover that the remaining 1% at the end requires a different playstyle. All playstyles should be provided for throughout a game, and that includes the endgame. That doesn't mean that the whole game's content should be available to all playstyles, there will always be group content that cannot be soloed etc, but it does mean that if someone plays a particular playstyle then the content for that playstyle shouldn't dry up partway through the game forcing a different playstyle on the players who want to continue beyond that point.

Deter1UK

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Me, I would love to see whole zones with a "public dungeon" level of difficulty, meaning geared for groups of two, but soloable by a large number of people once they get good enough...

That would be good!