Overland Content Feedback Thread

spartaxoxo

Franchise408 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I'm just gonna share an very common piece of feedback from back when the game was harder.

The devs know more about their game and what made people quit than any or us ever could hope to, regardless of what our guilds of like-minded people tell us. They have an unbiased and non-anecdotal view of the entire playerbase. When they say that the vast majority of people will not like something and don't engage in something, they are the authority figures. We don't have the data. We don't have the uninstall feedback.

The developers do.

You cannot force vet overland.

Corporations make bad decisions re: misreading customer wants and desires all the time. It's not an uncommon thing. Online gaming in particular is notorious for not listening to what the player base wants and trying to force something in the name of what they find to be most profitable.

You have to remember, what is "profitable" isn't always what is best for the customer.

What's to misread about "I quit because the game is too hard" being anything other than quitting because it's too hard?

Again, a consistent piece of feedback they received was that the game was too hard. And that aligned with their data of the playerbase largely totally avoiding the harder content.

Shoot, even in single player rpgs where there are multiple difficulties....I have never seen a game where the number of people beating the game on lower difficulties is outweighed by the higher ones.

This game has a massive audience coming over from Skyrim and other scrolls titles, all of which are fairly easy rpgs.

You seriously can't force it. You're in the minority. It doesn't mean nothing should change. But forcing it would be bad for most players and bad for business.

Sylvermynx

Franchise408 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

Yup.

Dungeons and trials can only hold attention for so long. If you're going to tell a significant chunk of your player base that 90% of the game's content isn't for them, then our time in game is going to be about 90% less than what it could be.

And the types of players that are being driven away are the types that would spend money in the game on subs and crowns. The type of people that would be spending money on additional DLC's and chapters. These are the kinds of people you want in your game, because they are the ones tha tinvest the most into it.

Eh, well.... I'm not "one of you" - but I sub two accounts, I buy extra crowns when I need them, and I buy chapters (even when as with Greymoor I'll never play it). I invest a pretty good chunk of change over a year, and I spend a lot of hours every day in this game, having fun. But I'm okay with optional harder overland, unlike others.

Vhozek

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

There are people who believe everything being the same level is not a problem.

I think part of the problem is people focus too much on the level scaling.

Leveling up still gives you skill points and attributes and access to new abilities, all of which are vital to making your character more powerful. Then there is the gear progression and then finally Champion Points. So there is a lot of growth opportunity that is still inherent in the system. It's not as stagnant as it might first appear to people.

So does my opinion not matter? Because it is incredibly stagnant to me and others.
It is DREADFUL.

Of course it matters. I just don't think the problem is the level scaling itself.

The problem is - while there is plenty of room for newer players to grow and progress under the current system - there isn't for experienced players who eventually just become way too powerful for the current standard. That's why we need two One Tamriels, a normal version and then a veteran one that scales at a higher level that better accommodates veteran players.

Well I do think the problem is level scaling itself because it's stagnant and boring.
I don't even care for max level stuff. I want my level up experience to be meaningful, long, and engaging.
Why would I care about high level overland? There's already world bosses and a ton of dungeons and trials to do. The story itself, while I'm leveling up, is not believable and it's not engaging. It's not fun.

Franchise408

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

One Tamriel did address a few issues, but difficulty was most definitely on that list.

Nothing I saw in the advertising of One Tamriel mentioned anything about making the game easier. It was all about giving players free access to the content.

I played pre-One Tamriel, and left many times due to how un-engaging the gameplay was.

I returned post-One Tamriel, and as far as overland gameplay goes, it was the same unengaging gameplay that was more than a breeze to make my way through. The reason why the game appealed to me this time was due to other changes. The difficulty never changed. Other elements of the game design did. And I found new types of content to engage in.

spartaxoxo

Franchise408 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

That was clearly sarcasm what that player put. Literally sarcasm.

Franchise408 wrote: »

.
4. If any of the above mentioned compromises are too much, then I would prefer to just see a wide spread increase in difficulty across the entire game and be made mandatory, not optional. Not changing anything is unacceptable to me, so if the above mentioned (or other) compromises are too much, then just increase the difficulty of the game to engage people who have been playing for years. This is my last preference tho, but it's better than just simply not addressing the issue.

No. It was not. It was their last preference and they stated they hoped it did not come to that, but they would rather it be forced than not have any of their solutions.

How is that difference than yourself, SilverBride, and others, trying to *force* me into easy overland?

Where did I state I'm trying to force you into anything? I don't agree with your solutions =/= I think no changes should be made to address this issue.

My solutions were (intended to all be done)

Give Debuffs to the player they can use in some way
Add challenge banners to story bosses
Add more content like the roaming bosses to the map to add threat near story zones

spartaxoxo

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

One Tamriel did address a few issues, but difficulty was most definitely on that list.

Nothing I saw in the advertising of One Tamriel mentioned anything about making the game easier. It was all about giving players the freedom to explore Tamriel as they wished.

This game was even easier before One Tamriel. It was a complete joke for anyone who took the time to fully explore and quest in. The only zones that had any challenge to them were the "endgame" zones or zones people went to early before they were at the recommended levels.

They nerfed that content which lead to a flood of cheers and jeers. Part of making it easier to play the way you wanted was letting pretty much any build work in Overland.

Jeremy

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

There are people who believe everything being the same level is not a problem.

I think part of the problem is people focus too much on the level scaling.

Leveling up still gives you skill points and attributes and access to new abilities, all of which are vital to making your character more powerful. Then there is the gear progression and then finally Champion Points. So there is a lot of growth opportunity that is still inherent in the system. It's not as stagnant as it might first appear to people.

So does my opinion not matter? Because it is incredibly stagnant to me and others.
It is DREADFUL.

Of course it matters. I just don't think the problem is the level scaling itself.

The problem is - while there is plenty of room for newer players to grow and progress under the current system - there isn't for experienced players who eventually just become way too powerful for the current standard. That's why we need two One Tamriels, a normal version and then a veteran one that scales at a higher level that better accommodates veteran players.

Well I do think the problem is level scaling itself because it's stagnant and boring.

So what would you prefer, having only a handful of zones on par with level 50 characters and all the rest of them under-leveled and pointless to play in?

Vhozek

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

I don't like being "forced" to do easy overland content without choice, which is what happened with One-Tamriel.

One Tamriel was implemented 5 years ago and has been very successful for a number of reasons, one being that it addressed the difficulty that was causing a lot of players to not even play 2/3 of the content. The problem of overland being too difficult back then was bad enough that they lost a lot of players over it, because it was extremely difficult to progress.
.

It was the exact opposite problem for me.

Before One Tamriel most of the zones became way too easy. You literally could not spend any amount of time in a zone questing and exploring without completely out-leveling the content and making it irrelevant and tedious to the point enemies would not even drop you loot.

One Tamriel was designed to address this problem, and allowed players to match the difficulty of the content no matter where they were so they could travel where they liked and do content when and where they wanted to. To accept any quest, fight any monster, and experience a world of adventure without limits!

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

Sounds more like they needed to fix that, not completely scrap it.

How else would you fix it if not by scaling the content? Because that's always been a big problem with the linear level design of MMORPGs, that players tended to out-level the content and render much of the game irrelevant and boring. So I think scaling was a step in the right direction. They just need to take that next step and allow for a Veteran Scaling of the overland like they already do with dungeons.

Give good reasons for high level players to go to low level zones.
Specific missions and delves that unlock at the started area once you reach max level because the first few enemies you killed held a grudge against you.
Make low level resources scarce in high level zones so you still have a reason to go to low level zones.

Vhozek

replied by accident

SilverBride

Franchise408 wrote: »

Dungeons and trials can only hold attention for so long. If you're going to tell a significant chunk of your player base that 90% of the game's content isn't for them, then our time in game is going to be about 90% less than what it could be.

It is the player's choice to participate in as little or as much of the content as they choose. I don't enjoy veteran dungeons and trials so I made the choice not to participate in them... no one told me I couldn't. Some players don't like overland and the story so they choose not to participate in it... but no one is telling them they can't. That is a personal choice.

Franchise408 wrote: »

And the types of players that are being driven away are the types that would spend money in the game on subs and crowns. The type of people that would be spending money on additional DLC's and chapters. These are the kinds of people you want in your game, because they are the ones tha tinvest the most into it.

Players who like more difficult content are no more likely to invest their time and money in this game than anyone else. Many of us who are happy with overland as it is now are already ESO+ and buy chapters and dlc's and crowns, and are already actively supporting the game.

Franchise408

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

That was clearly sarcasm what that player put. Literally sarcasm.

Franchise408 wrote: »

.
4. If any of the above mentioned compromises are too much, then I would prefer to just see a wide spread increase in difficulty across the entire game and be made mandatory, not optional. Not changing anything is unacceptable to me, so if the above mentioned (or other) compromises are too much, then just increase the difficulty of the game to engage people who have been playing for years. This is my last preference tho, but it's better than just simply not addressing the issue.

No. It was not. It was their last preference and they stated they hoped it did not come to that, but they would rather it be forced than not have any of their solutions.

How is that difference than yourself, SilverBride, and others, trying to *force* me into easy overland?

Where did I state I'm trying to force you into anything? I don't agree with your solutions =/= I think no changes should be made to address this issue.

My solutions were (intended to all be done)

Give Debuffs to the player they can use in some way
Add challenge banners to story bosses
Add more content like the roaming bosses to the map to add threat near story zones

And we have explained ad nauseum why those solutions do nothing to address the issue.

Vhozek

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

There are people who believe everything being the same level is not a problem.

I think part of the problem is people focus too much on the level scaling.

Leveling up still gives you skill points and attributes and access to new abilities, all of which are vital to making your character more powerful. Then there is the gear progression and then finally Champion Points. So there is a lot of growth opportunity that is still inherent in the system. It's not as stagnant as it might first appear to people.

So does my opinion not matter? Because it is incredibly stagnant to me and others.
It is DREADFUL.

Of course it matters. I just don't think the problem is the level scaling itself.

The problem is - while there is plenty of room for newer players to grow and progress under the current system - there isn't for experienced players who eventually just become way too powerful for the current standard. That's why we need two One Tamriels, a normal version and then a veteran one that scales at a higher level that better accommodates veteran players.

Well I do think the problem is level scaling itself because it's stagnant and boring.

So what would you prefer, having only a handful of zones on par with level 50 characters and all the rest of them under-leveled and pointless to play in?

No, why would I want that?

Franchise408

SilverBride wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Dungeons and trials can only hold attention for so long. If you're going to tell a significant chunk of your player base that 90% of the game's content isn't for them, then our time in game is going to be about 90% less than what it could be.

It is the player's choice to participate in as little or as much of the content as they choose. I don't enjoy veteran dungeons and trials so I made the choice not to participate in them... no one told me I couldn't. Some players don't like overland and the story so they choose not to participate in it... but no one is telling them they can't. That is a personal choice.

Franchise408 wrote: »

And the types of players that are being driven away are the types that would spend money in the game on subs and crowns. The type of people that would be spending money on additional DLC's and chapters. These are the kinds of people you want in your game, because they are the ones tha tinvest the most into it.

Players who like more difficult content are no more likely to invest their time and money in this game than anyone else. Many of us who are happy with overland as it is now are already ESO+ and buy chapters and dlc's and crowns, and are already actively supporting the game.

The difference is, by choosing not to participate in vet dungeons because they are too hard, you are missing out on maybe 5% of the game's content.

By not being able to participate in overland because is actively pushes us away, we are missing out on about 90% of the game's content.

Yours is not an equivalent comparison.

Jeremy

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

One Tamriel did address a few issues, but difficulty was most definitely on that list.

Nothing I saw in the advertising of One Tamriel mentioned anything about making the game easier. It was all about giving players the freedom to explore Tamriel as they wished.

This game was even easier before One Tamriel. It was a complete joke for anyone who took the time to fully explore and quest in. The only zones that had any challenge to them were the "endgame" zones or zones people went to early before they were at the recommended levels.

They nerfed that content which lead to a flood of cheers and jeers. Part of making it easier to play the way you wanted was letting pretty much any build work in Overland.

They didn't "nerf" the content. They scaled it. There is a difference.

For example: Stone Falls, Deshaan, Shadowfen, the Rift etc. are all a lot more challenging for a level 50 character in One Tarmiel then it was before One Tamriel. And you could say the same for every other zone in the region except for the last ones. Forget pretty much any build working in the Overland, you could have done those zones naked at level 50 with your fist before One Tamriel. Enemies literally could not even hurt you.

Let me ask you something: did you play this game before One Tamriel?

Jeremy

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

There are people who believe everything being the same level is not a problem.

I think part of the problem is people focus too much on the level scaling.

Leveling up still gives you skill points and attributes and access to new abilities, all of which are vital to making your character more powerful. Then there is the gear progression and then finally Champion Points. So there is a lot of growth opportunity that is still inherent in the system. It's not as stagnant as it might first appear to people.

So does my opinion not matter? Because it is incredibly stagnant to me and others.
It is DREADFUL.

Of course it matters. I just don't think the problem is the level scaling itself.

The problem is - while there is plenty of room for newer players to grow and progress under the current system - there isn't for experienced players who eventually just become way too powerful for the current standard. That's why we need two One Tamriels, a normal version and then a veteran one that scales at a higher level that better accommodates veteran players.

Well I do think the problem is level scaling itself because it's stagnant and boring.

So what would you prefer, having only a handful of zones on par with level 50 characters and all the rest of them under-leveled and pointless to play in?

No, why would I want that?

So without some kind of level scaling, how would you avoid that?

SilverBride

Franchise408 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Dungeons and trials can only hold attention for so long. If you're going to tell a significant chunk of your player base that 90% of the game's content isn't for them, then our time in game is going to be about 90% less than what it could be.

It is the player's choice to participate in as little or as much of the content as they choose. I don't enjoy veteran dungeons and trials so I made the choice not to participate in them... no one told me I couldn't. Some players don't like overland and the story so they choose not to participate in it... but no one is telling them they can't. That is a personal choice.

Franchise408 wrote: »

And the types of players that are being driven away are the types that would spend money in the game on subs and crowns. The type of people that would be spending money on additional DLC's and chapters. These are the kinds of people you want in your game, because they are the ones tha tinvest the most into it.

Players who like more difficult content are no more likely to invest their time and money in this game than anyone else. Many of us who are happy with overland as it is now are already ESO+ and buy chapters and dlc's and crowns, and are already actively supporting the game.

The difference is, by choosing not to participate in vet dungeons because they are too hard, you are missing out on maybe 5% of the game's content.

By not being able to participate in overland because is actively pushes us away, we are missing out on about 90% of the game's content.

Yours is not an equivalent comparison.

It's the exact same concept. No one is making anyone not play overland just as it is. It is a personal choice not to do so.

EDIT: I'd like to add that if you added up all the veteran dungeons, trials and arenas in the game it would total way more than 5% of the total playable content. A lot of what you see in overland is just open land area.

Vhozek

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

There are people who believe everything being the same level is not a problem.

I think part of the problem is people focus too much on the level scaling.

Leveling up still gives you skill points and attributes and access to new abilities, all of which are vital to making your character more powerful. Then there is the gear progression and then finally Champion Points. So there is a lot of growth opportunity that is still inherent in the system. It's not as stagnant as it might first appear to people.

So does my opinion not matter? Because it is incredibly stagnant to me and others.
It is DREADFUL.

Of course it matters. I just don't think the problem is the level scaling itself.

The problem is - while there is plenty of room for newer players to grow and progress under the current system - there isn't for experienced players who eventually just become way too powerful for the current standard. That's why we need two One Tamriels, a normal version and then a veteran one that scales at a higher level that better accommodates veteran players.

Well I do think the problem is level scaling itself because it's stagnant and boring.

So what would you prefer, having only a handful of zones on par with level 50 characters and all the rest of them under-leveled and pointless to play in?

No, why would I want that?

So without some kind of level scaling, how would you avoid that?

Give players a reason to come back to low level zones.
There are many ways to do it from low level mobs holding a grudge against you to new problems arising in old areas due to what you did.
We have this in real life, the solutions are there they're just not being looked at.
One group of bad people irl gets taken down another one pops up somewhere in the deserts somewhere in the world.
You go live out in the mountains because of specific reasons but what you had back home is missing there, so you sometimes gotta go back home for what's missing.

The Elder Scrolls takes a lot out of how real life works. I mean, Vivec did some pretty nasty stuff with Molag Bal and that spear Vivec is holding is not a spear. Sounds kinda like the crazy stories told in religions. Why can't this random goblin mob boss grow a bigger and stronger army while seeking revenge for what you did?

The real problem is that it has been narrowed down to systems and rewards that the argument for "we want it to be more accessible for the story" just doesn't hold up.
Now, wanting to make the story more believable makes for a stronger argument for caring for the story than just wanting handouts.
I think the people that truly care about the story were left out in the dark.

Jeremy

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

I don't like being "forced" to do easy overland content without choice, which is what happened with One-Tamriel.

One Tamriel was implemented 5 years ago and has been very successful for a number of reasons, one being that it addressed the difficulty that was causing a lot of players to not even play 2/3 of the content. The problem of overland being too difficult back then was bad enough that they lost a lot of players over it, because it was extremely difficult to progress.
.

It was the exact opposite problem for me.

Before One Tamriel most of the zones became way too easy. You literally could not spend any amount of time in a zone questing and exploring without completely out-leveling the content and making it irrelevant and tedious to the point enemies would not even drop you loot.

One Tamriel was designed to address this problem, and allowed players to match the difficulty of the content no matter where they were so they could travel where they liked and do content when and where they wanted to. To accept any quest, fight any monster, and experience a world of adventure without limits!

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

Sounds more like they needed to fix that, not completely scrap it.

How else would you fix it if not by scaling the content? Because that's always been a big problem with the linear level design of MMORPGs, that players tended to out-level the content and render much of the game irrelevant and boring. So I think scaling was a step in the right direction. They just need to take that next step and allow for a Veteran Scaling of the overland like they already do with dungeons.

Give good reasons for high level players to go to low level zones.
Specific missions and delves that unlock at the started area once you reach max level because the first few enemies you killed held a grudge against you.
Make low level resources scarce in high level zones so you still have a reason to go to low level zones.

But what about all the content in the earlier zones players missed while leveling up? How would level 50 characters be able to go back and get all that done without having to deal with the tedium of content designed for characters far below their level?

jaws343

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Vhozek

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

I don't like being "forced" to do easy overland content without choice, which is what happened with One-Tamriel.

One Tamriel was implemented 5 years ago and has been very successful for a number of reasons, one being that it addressed the difficulty that was causing a lot of players to not even play 2/3 of the content. The problem of overland being too difficult back then was bad enough that they lost a lot of players over it, because it was extremely difficult to progress.
.

It was the exact opposite problem for me.

Before One Tamriel most of the zones became way too easy. You literally could not spend any amount of time in a zone questing and exploring without completely out-leveling the content and making it irrelevant and tedious to the point enemies would not even drop you loot.

One Tamriel was designed to address this problem, and allowed players to match the difficulty of the content no matter where they were so they could travel where they liked and do content when and where they wanted to. To accept any quest, fight any monster, and experience a world of adventure without limits!

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

Sounds more like they needed to fix that, not completely scrap it.

How else would you fix it if not by scaling the content? Because that's always been a big problem with the linear level design of MMORPGs, that players tended to out-level the content and render much of the game irrelevant and boring. So I think scaling was a step in the right direction. They just need to take that next step and allow for a Veteran Scaling of the overland like they already do with dungeons.

Give good reasons for high level players to go to low level zones.
Specific missions and delves that unlock at the started area once you reach max level because the first few enemies you killed held a grudge against you.
Make low level resources scarce in high level zones so you still have a reason to go to low level zones.

But what about all the content in the earlier zones players missed while leveling up? How would level 50 characters be able to go back and get all that done without having to deal with the tedium of content designed for characters far below their level?

Well that's on the person playing. Are you really gonna farm up the same zone over and over again or are you going to explore like you claim you play the game for?
That shouldn't be an issue if you're actually exploring.

Vhozek

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Still the same level, still stagnant. The details don't matter much, what matters is that everything feels the same and that is BORING.
It also doesn't make the story believable.

jaws343

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Still the same level, still stagnant. The details don't matter much, what matters is that everything feels the same and that is BORING.
It also doesn't make the story believable.

The details absolutely matter when you make the claims you are making, namely, that it is easy for them to scale things now so it should be easy with whatever way you want to implement difficulty scaling. It's just false. When arguing for changes to the game, it helps to actually know how the game is even functioning in the first place. Credibility goes a long way. So yeah, the details matter.

Jeremy

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Blackbird_V wrote: »

I don't like being "forced" to do easy overland content without choice, which is what happened with One-Tamriel.

One Tamriel was implemented 5 years ago and has been very successful for a number of reasons, one being that it addressed the difficulty that was causing a lot of players to not even play 2/3 of the content. The problem of overland being too difficult back then was bad enough that they lost a lot of players over it, because it was extremely difficult to progress.
.

It was the exact opposite problem for me.

Before One Tamriel most of the zones became way too easy. You literally could not spend any amount of time in a zone questing and exploring without completely out-leveling the content and making it irrelevant and tedious to the point enemies would not even drop you loot.

One Tamriel was designed to address this problem, and allowed players to match the difficulty of the content no matter where they were so they could travel where they liked and do content when and where they wanted to. To accept any quest, fight any monster, and experience a world of adventure without limits!

So I don't think One Tamirel was implemented to make the game easier. It was implemenedt to allow for more freedom of play, which the game desperately needed.

Sounds more like they needed to fix that, not completely scrap it.

How else would you fix it if not by scaling the content? Because that's always been a big problem with the linear level design of MMORPGs, that players tended to out-level the content and render much of the game irrelevant and boring. So I think scaling was a step in the right direction. They just need to take that next step and allow for a Veteran Scaling of the overland like they already do with dungeons.

Give good reasons for high level players to go to low level zones.
Specific missions and delves that unlock at the started area once you reach max level because the first few enemies you killed held a grudge against you.
Make low level resources scarce in high level zones so you still have a reason to go to low level zones.

But what about all the content in the earlier zones players missed while leveling up? How would level 50 characters be able to go back and get all that done without having to deal with the tedium of content designed for characters far below their level?

Well that's on the person playing. Are you really gonna farm up the same zone over and over again or are you going to explore like you claim you play the game for?
That shouldn't be an issue if you're actually exploring.

I'm not talking about farming up the same zone over and over again. So I don't understand your point.

The problem before One Tamriel was you would out-level the content if you did take the time to explore and do all the quests. So players were forced to deal with the tedium of doing content designed for players much lower than them. It was so bad players were asking for a way to turn off their experience bar.

Vhozek

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Still the same level, still stagnant. The details don't matter much, what matters is that everything feels the same and that is BORING.
It also doesn't make the story believable.

The details absolutely matter when you make the claims you are making, namely, that it is easy for them to scale things now so it should be easy with whatever way you want to implement difficulty scaling. It's just false. When arguing for changes to the game, it helps to actually know how the game is even functioning in the first place. Credibility goes a long way. So yeah, the details matter.

The details don't matter because it's still boring no matter which way you put it. Whether I scale to mobs, they scale to me, they scale to the trees, the rocks scale to me, it doesn't matter. The end effect it has caused has made the game boring and stagnant. If tree textures could affect how the game plays and I say it's the rabbit's fault, doesn't matter. The effect itself is what I'm reacting to and the issue, whether it is the textures or the rabbit, needs to be fixed.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

The problem before One Tamriel was you would out-level the content if you did take the time to explore and do all the quests. So players were forced to deal with the tedium of doing content designed for players much lower than them. It was so bad players were asking for a way to turn off their experience bar.

That is the exact opposite of what I experienced. I never out leveled anything and I do all the quests in every zone. I ended up leaving because I was stuck and unable to progress because all that was left after Silver and Gold was Craglorn.

Jeremy

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

The problem before One Tamriel was you would out-level the content if you did take the time to explore and do all the quests. So players were forced to deal with the tedium of doing content designed for players much lower than them. It was so bad players were asking for a way to turn off their experience bar.

That is the exact opposite of what I experienced. I never out leveled anything and I do all the quests in every zone. I ended up leaving because I was stuck and unable to progress because all that was left after Silver and Gold was Craglorn.

I don't see how that was possible, SilverBride. Because I remember out-leveling the zone before I even had a third of it completed. I honestly don't see how anyone who took their time in a zone and did everything in it before One Tamriel could do so without out-leveling it in the process.

And I wasn't alone, either. The forums were filled with threads of people having the same problem. As I mentioned, it was so bad it was a popular request on here that people be allowed to turn off their experience bar.

Jeremy

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Still the same level, still stagnant. The details don't matter much, what matters is that everything feels the same and that is BORING.
It also doesn't make the story believable.

The details absolutely matter when you make the claims you are making, namely, that it is easy for them to scale things now so it should be easy with whatever way you want to implement difficulty scaling. It's just false. When arguing for changes to the game, it helps to actually know how the game is even functioning in the first place. Credibility goes a long way. So yeah, the details matter.

The details don't matter because it's still boring no matter which way you put it. Whether I scale to mobs, they scale to me, they scale to the trees, the rocks scale to me, it doesn't matter. The end effect it has caused has made the game boring and stagnant. If tree textures could affect how the game plays and I say it's the rabbit's fault, doesn't matter. The effect itself is what I'm reacting to and the issue, whether it is the textures or the rabbit, needs to be fixed.

All the scaling does is treat all the zones as if they were level 50, which is where everyone is going to end up on an MMORPG anyway. It's not like it takes long to hit level 50 on this game.

So why would having a lot of lower level zones that most people generally avoid make the game any more exciting or less stagnant? If it was a single player RPG that people reached max level, beat and then moved on I could see it. But so much of an MMORPG revolves around content for max level players it really doesn't make much sense to design so much of a game for those early levels. It's why you see a lot of games, even a lot of the older MMORPGs, implement scaling.

Vhozek

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Still the same level, still stagnant. The details don't matter much, what matters is that everything feels the same and that is BORING.
It also doesn't make the story believable.

The details absolutely matter when you make the claims you are making, namely, that it is easy for them to scale things now so it should be easy with whatever way you want to implement difficulty scaling. It's just false. When arguing for changes to the game, it helps to actually know how the game is even functioning in the first place. Credibility goes a long way. So yeah, the details matter.

The details don't matter because it's still boring no matter which way you put it. Whether I scale to mobs, they scale to me, they scale to the trees, the rocks scale to me, it doesn't matter. The end effect it has caused has made the game boring and stagnant. If tree textures could affect how the game plays and I say it's the rabbit's fault, doesn't matter. The effect itself is what I'm reacting to and the issue, whether it is the textures or the rabbit, needs to be fixed.

All the scaling does is treat all the zones as if they were level 50, which is where everyone is going to end up on an MMORPG anyway.

Why would having a lot of lower level zones that most people generally avoid make the game any more exciting or less stagnant?

Who's talking about high level players?
They can do trials and dungeons.

SilverBride

Jeremy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

The problem before One Tamriel was you would out-level the content if you did take the time to explore and do all the quests. So players were forced to deal with the tedium of doing content designed for players much lower than them. It was so bad players were asking for a way to turn off their experience bar.

That is the exact opposite of what I experienced. I never out leveled anything and I do all the quests in every zone. I ended up leaving because I was stuck and unable to progress because all that was left after Silver and Gold was Craglorn.

I don't see how that was possible, SilverBride. Because I remember out-leveling the zone before I even had a third of it completed. I honestly don't see how anyone who took their time in a zone and did everything in it before One Tamriel could do so without out-leveling it in the process.

And I wasn't alone, either. The forums were filled with threads of people having the same problem. As I mentioned, it was so bad it was a popular request on here that people be allowed to turn off their experience bar.

I didn't see what you experienced either. All I know is players were quitting right and left because of the veteran zones and Craglorn and that drove me away, too.

Jeremy

Vhozek wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Vhozek wrote: »

If the server is able to maintain track of a player's level and scale everything to that person's level while at the same time taking into account the quote on quote "10 million" other player's level, then it should be able to maintain track of who has something like a "veteran mode" and scale levels differently so long as the toggle replaces the initial calculations with new calculations.

I believe the problem here is profit, not implementation.
Well, how about this? If I stop playing because it's boring, I won't buy what you put out.
This has to be the only logical conclussion. This topic has been alive for many years on the forums.

That isn't how scaling works at all.

All enemies are always at the same set level, which is level 50 cp 160 I believe. At no point are the enemies scaled to player level.

Players are given buffs below level 50 to be as strong as someone at level 50 cp 160. The players are scaled, but that scaling is done at the player stat level and not at the enemy level. It is far far far different than enemies scaling to player levels, which is not happening.

Still the same level, still stagnant. The details don't matter much, what matters is that everything feels the same and that is BORING.
It also doesn't make the story believable.

The details absolutely matter when you make the claims you are making, namely, that it is easy for them to scale things now so it should be easy with whatever way you want to implement difficulty scaling. It's just false. When arguing for changes to the game, it helps to actually know how the game is even functioning in the first place. Credibility goes a long way. So yeah, the details matter.

The details don't matter because it's still boring no matter which way you put it. Whether I scale to mobs, they scale to me, they scale to the trees, the rocks scale to me, it doesn't matter. The end effect it has caused has made the game boring and stagnant. If tree textures could affect how the game plays and I say it's the rabbit's fault, doesn't matter. The effect itself is what I'm reacting to and the issue, whether it is the textures or the rabbit, needs to be fixed.

All the scaling does is treat all the zones as if they were level 50, which is where everyone is going to end up on an MMORPG anyway.

Why would having a lot of lower level zones that most people generally avoid make the game any more exciting or less stagnant?

Who's talking about high level players?
They can do trials and dungeons.

It doesn't exactly take long to hit level 50 on this game.

Is there anyone in this thread who doesn't have a level 50 character?

And besides, without scaling all the dungeons and trials in the lower level zones would be out of the question as well.