Overland Content Feedback Thread

LashanW

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

LashanW wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

I think they made the right decision with how it is split, with the veteran content in the dungeons, arenas, and trials.

One of my biggest issues with that sort of splitting is that it also split the content as solo and as group.

Very easy content -> Intended for solo
Challenging content -> Intended for groups

Solo content has to be easy enough to succeed at solo. Challenging content has to be hard enough that it requires a group or else it's not really challenging. How else could it be?

Have you ever actually done VMA or VVH?

It's pointless to argue with folks who have no experience about the difficult content in this game. This is partly why some folks here are so worried about "how difficult? where is the consensus?". They haven't seen how the difficult content in this game work, so they can't fathom the idea of veteran questing.
They will never understand unless they play the difficult content themselves.

SilverBride

LashanW wrote: »

They haven't seen how the difficult content in this game work, so they can't fathom the idea of veteran questing.
They will never understand unless they play the difficult content themselves.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

LashanW wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

I think they made the right decision with how it is split, with the veteran content in the dungeons, arenas, and trials.

One of my biggest issues with that sort of splitting is that it also split the content as solo and as group.

Very easy content -> Intended for solo
Challenging content -> Intended for groups

Solo content has to be easy enough to succeed at solo. Challenging content has to be hard enough that it requires a group or else it's not really challenging. How else could it be?

Have you ever actually done VMA or VVH?

No I haven't nor do I intend to. But that doesn't mean that I have no understanding of how veteran content works because I was very active in end game in other MMOs.

Challenges in MMOs are typically in dungeons and trials, and typically require groups. This is nothing new.

Lysette

Elsonso wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

If they sit down and design something that they think is the right answer to overland content...

They have never indicated that they think that overland is a problem that needs an answer. The overland we have today is the answer to the old veteran zones that no one played.

I am not certain how much that really matters, though.

One Tamriel may have been the overland they saw a need for 8 years ago, but what if they now see a problem where there used to be a solution? What if they are just not talking about it while the community stews over it, until it is time for their big reveal some cold January afternoon?

Personally, I am happy with Overland and see no reason for big changes. I think they made the right decision with how it is split, with the veteran content in the dungeons, arenas, and trials. While I might suggest some tweaking to overland to introduce pockets of harder content in the dark corners, that opinion is of little consequence in the grand scheme of things, as near as I can tell.

I just started a new necromancer - and so I'm in newbie zones and see how others play - I can definitely tell, who is new and who is just levelling an alt - for real newbies the difficulty is good enough, it is even challenging for them. We often forget, that for a newbie anything is new and (s)he has to get used to the game and skills and what they mean. Some struggle with quite easy enemies like goblins. It is rare that I see someone actually dying, but it happens.

Now I'm there as well and I try to not interfere with newbies, because that would frustrate them, when I rush through all of that, because I know the content by heart (having done it like 25 times before). Now imagine when you have even more experienced players in the same environment with a different difficulty setting. How confusing that would be for newbies, who can go anywhere from the very start. What will they think, when they see a veteran player struggling with content.

In my mind whatever ZOS might do in this context, veteran players on different difficulty settings should not play in the same instance as normal players and newbies. This will just cause problems. But if it is separated, then it is more a question of economical viability of that feature - well, confusing newbies can as well be economically bad.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

LashanW wrote: »

They haven't seen how the difficult content in this game work, so they can't fathom the idea of veteran questing.
They will never understand unless they play the difficult content themselves.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

LashanW wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

I think they made the right decision with how it is split, with the veteran content in the dungeons, arenas, and trials.

One of my biggest issues with that sort of splitting is that it also split the content as solo and as group.

Very easy content -> Intended for solo
Challenging content -> Intended for groups

Solo content has to be easy enough to succeed at solo. Challenging content has to be hard enough that it requires a group or else it's not really challenging. How else could it be?

Have you ever actually done VMA or VVH?

No I haven't nor do I intend to. But that doesn't mean that I have no understanding of how veteran content works because I was very active in end game in other MMOs.

Challenges in MMOs are typically in dungeons and trials, and typically require groups. This is nothing new.

I mean, I actually don't think you understand how a solo challenge would work if your frame of reference is group content. Not that you wouldn't understand a challenge more generally, but it is a different experience to raiding. You should give them a try or watch a VOD of someone with a relatively Middle-tier, low level vet spec. I say that so that they can't ignore mechanics.

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I mean, I actually don't think you understand how a solo challenge would work if your frame of reference is group content. Not that you wouldn't understand a challenge more generally, but it is a different experience to raiding. You should give them a try or watch a VOD of someone with a relatively Middle-tier, low level vet spec. I say that so that they can't ignore mechanics.

I don't want to even do a normal arena more than the one time I have done them on each character just for the achievement. The tedium of multiple mobs repeating over and over and over is pure mental torture to me.

But the point I was making is that it is not unusual for easy content to be solo and challenging content to be group. It's been this way in MMOs for decades.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I mean, I actually don't think you understand how a solo challenge would work if your frame of reference is group content. Not that you wouldn't understand a challenge more generally, but it is a different experience to raiding. You should give them a try or watch a VOD of someone with a relatively Middle-tier, low level vet spec. I say that so that they can't ignore mechanics.

I don't want to even do a normal arena more than the one time I have done them on each character just for the achievement.
The tedium of mobs multiple mobs repeating over and over and over is pure mental torture to me.

But the point I was making is that it is not unusual for easy content to be solo and challenging content to be group. It's been this way in MMOs for decades.

Yeah. I'm not much of a fan of the mob phases either, but the boss fights are challenging and fun. Regardless, I think the solo arenas quite instructive to what I'd like to see out of a challenge banner for story bosses. Those are naturally instanced and flagging is inherently optional, so it shouldn't bother anyone else. I really don't see why that shouldn't be implemented.

Daraklus

[snip]

I will concede however that I may have made it a bit sloppily as it was basically the first hour and half of me playing in the first starter zones, that the first few levels are easy but the later ones progress to being harder.
But I would argue from the many a times I would play a new character in different methods, the outcome was the same: Overworld being not very difficult.

And if it is like that for the first few hours, I am not sure if newer players would look at it favorably enough to want to see if it gets better later on (Which it *kind* of does in Veteran dungeons, but it's a whole different experience playing those).

[edited to remove quote and baiting]

ZOS_Lunar

Greetings everyone!

We've removed some posts from this thread as they violated our rules on baiting. It’s okay to disagree and debate, but we do ask that you keep all disagreements civil, constructive, and on-topic. If a discussion gets heated and turns into a debate, remember that you should stick to debating the post and/or thread topic. It is never appropriate to resort to personal comments or jabs about those participating in the thread discussion.

Thank you for your understanding, and please keep the Community Rules in mind when posting on the forums.

KoIIegoIas

SilverBride wrote: »

KoIIegoIas wrote: »

So, you know like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3rds of the game was never played by players so we changed it.''

That is the Proof of their Data, wich displayed that 2/3 people played cadwells silver and gold.

What Rich said was that the 2/3 of the game that was Cadwell's Silver and Gold was not played.

"It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out."

Whatever, it doesnt change the what i wanna say in the end.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

KoIIegoIas wrote: »

There was no Data, no complains from people in the forum nothing about own faction overland wich people needed to start cadwells. People complained about cadwells silver and gold and not about own faction overland before one tamriel.
But what happened, ZOS nerfed own faction overland aswell, just because they can. Instead of trying out that difficulty for the whole overland zones.

While they haven't discussed that data, they did a deep dive of player feedback when the game almost failed and they looked into making One Tamriel.

I don't think it's either here or there though, as the game's changed significantly since then. The max power level is world's apart from where it used to be. That reason alone should make them reconsider.

What do you mean they havent disgussed that that data? Rich lambert said that their data shows that a ton played it compared to cadwells silver and gold. There was no need to disguss it because there was no issue with.

@ZOS just nerfed overland own Faction to the ground, without anyone asking for it. They issue was Cadwells and Zos fixed it. The issue wasnt Own faction overland difficulty for anyone in the game and forums, but Zos even turned down that difficulty, what is in my opinion the main reason why this Theard exists.

One camp is happy for sure and that are the people wich see overland just as a exp grind to max lvl.

The own faction difficulty before One Tamriel would be enough to satisfy people.

SilverBride wrote: »

LashanW wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

I think they made the right decision with how it is split, with the veteran content in the dungeons, arenas, and trials.

One of my biggest issues with that sort of splitting is that it also split the content as solo and as group.

Very easy content -> Intended for solo
Challenging content -> Intended for groups

Solo content has to be easy enough to succeed at solo. Challenging content has to be hard enough that it requires a group or else it's not really challenging. How else could it be?

With that opinion about difficulty in general that the current overland is challenging and hard for you, Vet Maelstrom Arena or Vet Vateshran hollow should be impossible for you.
Everyone who honestly thinks that the current overland content is hard and challending, will never beat the the difficulty of current VMA.
In the past you said that current Eso Overland content is hard and challenging for you. Now you said that you were active in other MMO's Endgame? Then your statement contradicts itself, because the content of other MMO's difficulty is way higher than the current ESO overland content by far. And i know what i am talking about, because i played every famous MMO since Daoc.

LashanW

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Have you ever actually done VMA or VVH?

No I haven't nor do I intend to. But that doesn't mean that I have no understanding of how veteran content works because I was very active in end game in other MMOs.

Challenges in MMOs are typically in dungeons and trials, and typically require groups. This is nothing new.

Ok I will try to respond again but this time with my best effort not to violate any rules. I believe the point I'm trying to make is important to this thread. So I hope this post will be allowed to stay.

Veteran content in ESO is vastly different compared to other MMOs.
Here we don't have to manage long cooldowns on a large amount of skills active at the same time. We have a singular global cooldown of 1 second and finite resource pools to keep ability casting on a leash. We don't have auto-attacks, we have light attack weaving which is a manual process. We have very limited skill slots which makes choosing each skill much more meaningful. Basic combat maneuvers such as blocking, dodging and interrupting is important for all players in veteran content (not just a few players who are in tank role for example, even DDs and healers must respect these).

To me this makes combat in ESO very engaging, fun and skill-based. It's much more akin to an action game compared to other MMOs. And this is why ESO will likely be the only MMO I can tolerate. I've seen endgame content in other MMOs via videos and info from my friends. I want NONE of that in ESO. I picked ESO to be my only MMO precisely because combat is different here.

All these fun combat mechanics and our character abilities are the same between overland and veteran content in ESO. Only difference is the opponents and the challenges our characters face. So if someone tries and becomes good at the combat system after playing dungeons and trials, well the overland content becomes trivial after that. And no this is not a case of a new player power leveling and rushing to endgame. I've been playing for 4-5 years now. I didn't touch veteran content until my 3rd year.

This overland becoming trivial happens because players retain their combat effectiveness after doing veteran content, even when playing a new character with no CP and crap gear. Why? Because combat in this game is designed to be skill-based. Can remove all CP, gear and passives. Can't unlearn skill and knowledge.

In my opinion combat system in ESO has the potential to provide an amazing questing experience for solo players who like some challenge. I experienced this when I was soloing normal DLC dungeons for the quest and in veteran Vateshran Hollows. The story in Maelstrom arena however wasn't really interesting, only gameplay and loot is good there. I also don't like the "waves of enemies". Luckily it's only there in Maelstrom Arena and the other 2 group arenas.

A lot of my raiding friends (across several raiding guilds on discord) play ESO pretty much only when we have scheduled trial runs. Other times we do endeavors and maybe daily writs and then we log off. This is because this game barely has fun challenging things to do when playing solo PvE. Rest of the solo content feels too trivial compared to what we usually do.

SilverBride

KoIIegoIas wrote: »

With that opinion about difficulty in general that the current overland is challenging and hard for you, Vet Maelstrom Arena or Vet Vateshran hollow should be impossible for you.
Everyone who honestly thinks that the current overland content is hard and challending, will never beat the the difficulty of current VMA.

I never once said that overland is challenging and hard for me because it isn't. I find overland easy and I like it that way. Questing and map completion are what I do to relax, and I love that I can now easily beat mini bosses and quest bosses and world bosses etc. that gave me trouble before. This shows me that my character has become more powerful, and that is a feeling I enjoy. But overland is hard and challenging for some and they also need to be considered.

I find normal Maelstrom Arena easy as well and have no doubt that I could do it on veteran. The reason I don't is because I find arenas tedious and boring. If I don't enjoy a certain aspect of the game I just don't do it. There are plenty of other things I do enjoy that I can spend my time on.

About Cadwell's Silver and Gold, I do see the point you are making. You are right that players did often complete their own faction's normal zones and the bulk of the complaints were about Silver and Gold's veteran levels. I don't know why they nerfed all the original base zones down with One Tamriel rather than just the veteran Silver and Gold zones. Only they can tell us that.

SilverBride

LashanW wrote: »

...To me this makes combat in ESO very engaging, fun and skill-based. It's much more akin to an action game compared to other MMOs. And this is why ESO will likely be the only MMO I can tolerate. I've seen endgame content in other MMOs via videos and info from my friends. I want NONE of that in ESO. I picked ESO to be my only MMO precisely because combat is different here.

I don't see the combat as significantly different than any other MMO I've played, but that is just a difference in our perspectives. But you compared ESO to an action game which it is not. ESO is story based and should remain true to that.

LashanW

SilverBride wrote: »

But you compared ESO to an action game which it is not. ESO is story based and should remain true to that.

I don't get it. "Action" and "Story based" isn't mutually exclusive.
This is from Steam product page, the vendor I bought ESO from,

SilverBride

LashanW wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But you compared ESO to an action game which it is not. ESO is story based and should remain true to that.

I don't get it. "Action" and "Story based" isn't mutually exclusive.
This is from Steam product page, the vendor I bought ESO from,

Story based games do have action but in the context of playing through the story. But in action games the combat is the main focus and there isn't always a very well developed story.

But it seems we are not discussing the same thing so let's just agree to disagree.

Tornaad

What I see from this is the following.
They used to have an increased difficulty level but because (as near as I can tell) it took 30 hours to increase your difficultly level and had poor advertising about what it was doing, along with no obvious way to change it back, no one used it. Now, they are using the fact that no one used their poorly implemented difficulty level adjustment as a justification for why it is not needed now.
For players, I see some saying they are fine with the difficulty as is and others saying they do not see a need for it, but if they were to just reimplement but make it easier to use (ie the flip of a switch) and make it better advertised about what is going on then everyone would have what they want. What would be the problem with that?

SilverBride

Zuboko wrote: »

What I see from this is the following.
They used to have an increased difficulty level but because (as near as I can tell) it took 30 hours to increase your difficultly level and had poor advertising about what it was doing, along with no obvious way to change it back, no one used it. Now, they are using the fact that no one used their poorly implemented difficulty level adjustment as a justification for why it is not needed now.
For players, I see some saying they are fine with the difficulty as is and others saying they do not see a need for it, but if they were to just reimplement but make it easier to use (ie the flip of a switch) and make it better advertised about what is going on then everyone would have what they want. What would be the problem with that?

I played beta and at launch and I don't know anything about taking 30 hours or being able to increase our difficulty level.

What happened was that first a player completed their own alliance's zones. After they completed these they were given quests called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold to do the other 2 alliance's zones. But these zones were veteran level and the player had no way to adjust the difficulty. Because of this very few players completed them. That is one of the reasons this was changed with One Tamriel.

Tornaad

SilverBride wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

What I see from this is the following.
They used to have an increased difficulty level but because (as near as I can tell) it took 30 hours to increase your difficultly level and had poor advertising about what it was doing, along with no obvious way to change it back, no one used it. Now, they are using the fact that no one used their poorly implemented difficulty level adjustment as a justification for why it is not needed now.
For players, I see some saying they are fine with the difficulty as is and others saying they do not see a need for it, but if they were to just reimplement but make it easier to use (ie the flip of a switch) and make it better advertised about what is going on then everyone would have what they want. What would be the problem with that?

I played beta and at launch and I don't know anything about taking 30 hours or being able to increase our difficulty level.

What happened was that first a player completed their own alliance's zones. After they completed these they were given quests called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold to do the other 2 alliance's zones. But these zones were veteran level and the player had no way to adjust the difficulty. Because of this very few players completed them. That is one of the reasons this was changed with One Tamriel.

And you only get access to Cadwell's Silver and Gold by completing the main quest, which effectively meant that they wanted you to play through 30 hours of content, per character, to get access to harder content.

Daraklus

LashanW wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But you compared ESO to an action game which it is not. ESO is story based and should remain true to that.

I don't get it. "Action" and "Story based" isn't mutually exclusive.
This is from Steam product page, the vendor I bought ESO from,

I don't see any mention of "Story-based" either. Just that it's Action, Adventure, an MMO and an RPG.

SilverBride

Zuboko wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

What I see from this is the following.
They used to have an increased difficulty level but because (as near as I can tell) it took 30 hours to increase your difficultly level and had poor advertising about what it was doing, along with no obvious way to change it back, no one used it. Now, they are using the fact that no one used their poorly implemented difficulty level adjustment as a justification for why it is not needed now.
For players, I see some saying they are fine with the difficulty as is and others saying they do not see a need for it, but if they were to just reimplement but make it easier to use (ie the flip of a switch) and make it better advertised about what is going on then everyone would have what they want. What would be the problem with that?

I played beta and at launch and I don't know anything about taking 30 hours or being able to increase our difficulty level.

What happened was that first a player completed their own alliance's zones. After they completed these they were given quests called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold to do the other 2 alliance's zones. But these zones were veteran level and the player had no way to adjust the difficulty. Because of this very few players completed them. That is one of the reasons this was changed with One Tamriel.

And you only get access to Cadwell's Silver and Gold by completing the main quest, which effectively meant that they wanted you to play through 30 hours of content, per character, to get access to harder content.

I don't know how many hours it took, but yes you had to play these to move on to the veteran zones. Everything was very linear back then and zones had to be done in a somewhat specific order, which also changed with One Tamriel.

Tornaad

SilverBride wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

What I see from this is the following.
They used to have an increased difficulty level but because (as near as I can tell) it took 30 hours to increase your difficultly level and had poor advertising about what it was doing, along with no obvious way to change it back, no one used it. Now, they are using the fact that no one used their poorly implemented difficulty level adjustment as a justification for why it is not needed now.
For players, I see some saying they are fine with the difficulty as is and others saying they do not see a need for it, but if they were to just reimplement but make it easier to use (ie the flip of a switch) and make it better advertised about what is going on then everyone would have what they want. What would be the problem with that?

I played beta and at launch and I don't know anything about taking 30 hours or being able to increase our difficulty level.

What happened was that first a player completed their own alliance's zones. After they completed these they were given quests called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold to do the other 2 alliance's zones. But these zones were veteran level and the player had no way to adjust the difficulty. Because of this very few players completed them. That is one of the reasons this was changed with One Tamriel.

And you only get access to Cadwell's Silver and Gold by completing the main quest, which effectively meant that they wanted you to play through 30 hours of content, per character, to get access to harder content.

I don't know how many hours it took, but yes you had to play these to move on to the veteran zones. Everything was very linear back then and zones had to be done in a somewhat specific order, which also changed with One Tamriel.

And in my opinion, that was terrible implementation. Imagine needing to play through the entire main quest of Skyrim before you can adjust the difficulty level. Then imagine needing to do that on each new character before you could adjust the difficultly level on that character. Also imagine having to play through the main quest a 3rd time to adjust the difficulty level again.

I understand that fit the story well, but that does not change the fact that it was poor implementation. There are many other options they could have used to implement a higher difficulty level. The method they chose with implementing a harder difficultly level in veteran dungeons (reading the hard mode scroll) would be one they could have done. They could have also had Malacath speak to the player offering them a special artifact that would make things harder for them. The possibilities are endless. The way ESO chose to implement it is something I have never heard or seen done anywhere else, and making the player run through the entire main quest (about 30 hours) to adjust the difficulty level was poor implementation.

Now, I understand the reason to have easier content. I do not want that taken away.
I also think that if they did give a proper implementation of harder content, then I would want the zone chat to be the same across all difficultly levels so that when someone asks for help everyone sees it, not just those in that specific difficulty level.

Daraklus

Just a correction @Zuboko

The Cadwell Silver/Gold were more like New Game+ in a sense, not necessarily "Optional difficulty increases", but more like playing another faction's leveling experience from start to finish with a bump in difficulty.
At least, that's my interpretation of how it was.

SilverBride

Daraklus wrote: »

Just a correction @Zuboko

The Cadwell Silver/Gold were more like New Game+ in a sense, not necessarily "Optional difficulty increases", but more like playing another faction's leveling experience from start to finish with a bump in difficulty.
At least, that's my interpretation of how it was.

That is exactly how it was. The player had no control over the difficulty and could not adjust anything.

And yes, @Zuboko it was terrible implementation which is one reason they changed it.

Tornaad

Daraklus wrote: »

Just a correction @Zuboko

The Cadwell Silver/Gold were more like New Game+ in a sense, not necessarily "Optional difficulty increases", but more like playing another faction's leveling experience from start to finish with a bump in difficulty.
At least, that's my interpretation of how it was.

And @Daraklus between what you and @SilverBride said, that only adds weight to the idea of it also being poorly advertised as there seems to be confusion about what it actually involved.

Tornaad

SilverBride wrote: »

Daraklus wrote: »

Just a correction @Zuboko

The Cadwell Silver/Gold were more like New Game+ in a sense, not necessarily "Optional difficulty increases", but more like playing another faction's leveling experience from start to finish with a bump in difficulty.
At least, that's my interpretation of how it was.

That is exactly how it was. The player had no control over the difficulty and could not adjust anything.

And yes, @Zuboko it was terrible implementation which is one reason they changed it.

And with that in mind, I would love to see a proper implementation of a difficultly level setting.

SilverBride

Zuboko wrote: »

Daraklus wrote: »

Just a correction @Zuboko

The Cadwell Silver/Gold were more like New Game+ in a sense, not necessarily "Optional difficulty increases", but more like playing another faction's leveling experience from start to finish with a bump in difficulty.
At least, that's my interpretation of how it was.

And @Daraklus between what you and @SilverBride said, that only adds weight to the idea of it also being poorly advertised as there seems to be confusion about what it actually involved.

I agree it was a bad setup but I don't remember it ever being advertised that a player had any control over the difficulty of the overland zones.

Tornaad

SilverBride wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

Daraklus wrote: »

Just a correction @Zuboko

The Cadwell Silver/Gold were more like New Game+ in a sense, not necessarily "Optional difficulty increases", but more like playing another faction's leveling experience from start to finish with a bump in difficulty.
At least, that's my interpretation of how it was.

And @Daraklus between what you and @SilverBride said, that only adds weight to the idea of it also being poorly advertised as there seems to be confusion about what it actually involved.

I agree it was a bad setup but I don't remember it ever being advertised that a player had any control over the difficulty of the overland zones.

Which only adds to my point.

SilverBride

Zuboko wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I agree it was a bad setup but I don't remember it ever being advertised that a player had any control over the difficulty of the overland zones.

Which only adds to my point.

I am confused. The game didn't have any option to control difficulty nor did it advertise that it did, so why would players expect that it would? Most MMOs do not by default have options for the player to control the difficulty so I don't see why this would be expected.

Tornaad

SilverBride wrote: »

Zuboko wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I agree it was a bad setup but I don't remember it ever being advertised that a player had any control over the difficulty of the overland zones.

Which only adds to my point.

I am confused. The game didn't have any option to control difficulty nor did it advertise that it did, so why would players expect that it would? Most MMOs do not by default have options for the player to control the difficulty so I don't see why this would be expected.

The control the player had was whether they chose to go into the specific zone which would have the harder content or not. And so while there was no switch they could press, the difficultly level adjustment was there. It was just so poorly implemented that even when people saw it, they may not have realized what they were looking at.

Daraklus

It was still a lot better than what we have now. Not perfect for certain, but certainly better.

SilverBride

Zuboko wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I am confused. The game didn't have any option to control difficulty nor did it advertise that it did, so why would players expect that it would? Most MMOs do not by default have options for the player to control the difficulty so I don't see why this would be expected.

The control the player had was whether they chose to go into the specific zone which would have the harder content or not. And so while there was no switch they could press, the difficultly level adjustment was there. It was just so poorly implemented that even when people saw it, they may not have realized what they were looking at.

The player has always had control over what content they choose to play, but just not playing certain zones isn't control over the difficulty. Control over the difficulty would be a slider or other option that adjusted the difficulty to the player's preference.

Most chose not to play the veteran zones because they just didn't like the added difficulty to the story. But the only other option was to just keep rolling alts and just play through their alliance's zones, or go to Craglorn which they wouldn't be high enough level for if they didn't level through the veteran zones because Craglorn was so difficulty that even higher level players had to group to do anything. So if they didn't like the veteran zones they certainly wouldn't have liked Craglorn.

I don't know of anyone who was upset that they couldn't get to the veteran zones any sooner.