Overland Content Feedback Thread

Mayrael

SilverBride wrote: »

What I have observed is that some of those asking for more difficult overland have also stated that they don't currently play the game and haven't for awhile, but they may come back if difficulty was added. While most of us that are happy with overland as it is are currently playing and also subscribing.

That "most of us" is actually just you versus everyone else in this thread, so forgive me if I find it hard to believe that the majority of players are satisfied with the current state of overland (unless, of course, you have hard data to support your opinion).

Another point is that you're pulling desperate arguments and completely twisting them to your advantage.
First, the idea that if some player isn't currently playing, then the rest of us who are playing and want changes can't be right is nonsensical.
Second, if people are leaving the game and citing overly easy overland as a reason, that's a valid argument for considering an increase in its difficulty.
Third, One Tamriel wasn't introduced to reduce overland difficulty but to allow everyone to play together. The biggest factor in ESO's rise in popularity was the change in its business model, not the reduction in overland difficulty, which new players had no real knowledge of anyway.

Coerfroid

With regards to "overland difficulty", I guess it will be necessary to clarify what this actually means.
The average random mob is merely meant for the world not to feel empty and the main game mechanic is to be a minor nuissance that may force a dismount when travelling from A to B. Don't be brain afk then travelling and avoiding groups of these will save some time. Increasing the difficulty of such random encounters will only prolong the nuissance and not increas fun.
Open world map events (like world bosses, mini incursions, wandering bosses liek the West Weald minotaur band) are mechanicsplaced for increased challenge and reward. The difficulty of such encounters should not be trivial and increasing it may enhance the game experience for some. Same is true for special spots, like treasure in hidden or hard to reach spots or behind a ghroup of challenging adversaries.
More challenge -> more reward - > more fun can be very true as long as it does not prevent game progress.

BenTSG

I'm quite curious about this change. I meself am looking forward to what they could have in store. Telling us that we have challanging content already and to just 'go play that' is all well and good, until you've run it once and then get instantly bored running the same dungeons over and over again without any story since you blasted through it the first time around, even worse if the story plays into a chapter story that isn't fun because its too easy. That being said though, I get there are people who like overland for whatever their personal reasons are, so I hope whatever is planned still leaves room for the current players to enjoy it as they do.

old_scopie1945

If there is one thing I know and that is that our community is diverse. It is pointless to pigeon hole people as no size fits all. Though I don't believe there is going to be a blanket change to overland difficulty. There is the nub of the problem. Due to ZOS's cack-handed Implementation of the announcement it has caused unrest and uncertainty. And not for the first time. That is why we have , at the moment 254 pages to this article.

That being said I do understand why ZOS don't what to commit themselves at the moment. Although they obviously have a plan, not all of it is set in stone yet. It is just that ZOS are not comfortable at communicating with the player base, for whatever reason. I guess we have to get used to it as I suspect, with the best will, they won't change that much. They say they want feedback and I see no reason not to believe it. The problem is how or if they will implement it. The field looks rather muddy at the moment. This makes all the backbiting rather pointless until we get a clearer picture of the situation.

On to a different point. Some things some folk are saying is that we need harder difficulty to get players ready for harder content. This is totally foundless IMO, as continuous failure causes frustration. Direction and instruction is the way forward, and in no way is the game set up for, at the moment. Also it is something that can't be forced on folk.

I remember when the game first came out, like many I played it like an Elder Scrolls game. This of course didn't work out, and I jacked it in. This brings me to CCs, which play a very important role. In those days there was very little on line to provide direction.

I came back to the game with One Tamriel still very ignorant about MMOs. I didn't know what a tank, DPS and all that sort of stuff were and I kept having my backside handed to me on a plate. I eventually had enough of this and started searching the web. ESO is a very in-depth game with a rather steep learning curve and you have to work to get the most out of it. At this time the on-line community had improved and there was some rather talented CCs who provided information on how to play the game. Over time my confidence grew along with my knowledge and I slowly improved. This, IMO is how to improve, the willingness to learn, not continuously getting knocked down, not knowing what you are doing wrong.

Sometimes I think CCs have too much influence with game developers, but that is the nature of things. The good they do for the community far outweighs this. I will end this sermon with my thanks to the countless CCs for the help they have given me in this game and the others I have played.

SilverBride

Mayrael wrote: »

That "most of us" is actually just you versus everyone else in this thread, so forgive me if I find it hard to believe that the majority of players are satisfied with the current state of overland (unless, of course, you have hard data to support your opinion).

One Tamriel wasn't introduced to reduce overland difficulty but to allow everyone to play together. The biggest factor in ESO's rise in popularity was the change in its business model, not the reduction in overland difficulty, which new players had no real knowledge of anyway.

This transcript addresses both of these.

Click SPOILER to read a transcript of Rich Lambert discussing these in his stream.

Can we get a vet mode for delves and quests? Uh, so we had that ... at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out. We put the challenge into World Bosses, and into solo Arenas, and into Dungeons and Trials.

[Speaks about skyshards then returns to the topic.]

People didn't do it because they had to go through their own alliance first? That's not actually true. A ton of people completed their own alliance storylines to get to silver and gold. A ton of people did. People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff.

I get there’s a lot of people that do like the harder difficulty, but a HUGE portion of our player base just wants to do story, and they don’t want to have to struggle with difficult things. And so that was why we did what we did and said story is soloable and crit path will always be soloable and if you want the extra challenge you can go seek out other things to challenge you.

I totally hear you on the difficulty thing. I like things to be more difficult. But you know, the data doesn’t lie. And we have never been more successful than we are today. And a lot of that has to do with just how much freedom players have to go and experience story.

And yes, go look at Craglorn. There’s not a lot of people in Craglorn and that’s not super difficult but it’s more hard than the regular overland.

Would it be an option just to give people the choice? It is not as simple as just flip a switch and make things more difficult. There is a TON of work and then as Lucky mentioned earlier you have to also incentivize that. Like just making something more difficult for no reason, if you’re not going to get anything out of it why do it? The satisfaction's there sure but players are always going to do the thing that is the most efficient and is the least difficult thing for their time.

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.

Franchise408

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

While I am not asking for mandatory vet trial level content in overland, and I do believe that overland should be a degree easier than the rest of the content designed for higher challenge, I feel that ESO would be a far better game if it committed to an actual vision other than "we don't want to isolate players".

It DOES have a vision. It wants players to be able to play the way that they want to play. It wants to be solo friendly. It's established itself as a popular casual game. They talked a before about how they have, in their opinion, been in the "meta verse" type space before those companies tried share world ideas. They don't even really fully consider themselves an MMO.

This vision may not align with your own, but "play the way you want," has been their mantra from the very beginning. And they have done a very good job of allowing people to pick and choose how they want to engage in the space

It because of this "play how you want" vision that overland not having a way to do that stands out so much, and not in a good way. They like that they are the accessible game. It's good for games like that to be on the market.

Walking sims may not be your cuppa but they are an entire, successful genre of game. That's what overland provides fo some people and they prefer it that way. They are engaging with the game and they are enjoying it. ESO has committed to such people for nearly a decade.

Where I disagree on the vision is that I don't see one single element in this game that can't be found in other MMO's already. There is nothing unique or innovative in ESO's game design. It's a mishmash of MMO's that came before it, without really adding anything new to those designs. Their motto might be "play how you want" - due to being an Elder Scrolls game that motto was already built in - but ESO doesn't really provide any more "play how you want" flexibility than any other MMO out there.

That isn't a testament to the level of quality of said content. I do like the vast majority of dungeons and trials, with a few exceptions. I do think that the stories are fairly well written, even if I don't enjoy playing through them due to the gameplay. But there's nothing in ESO that makes it stand out from other MMO's on the market. The only reason why I've chosen ESO over other MMO's is because it is part of the Elder Scrolls IP, but outside of race selections, lore, and locales and setting, there's nothing about it that is reminiscent of an Elder Scrolls game. When I'm playing it, it actually doesn't even feel like an Elder Scrolls game to me. It just feels like a game. That's where the lack of identity comes from. There's not much of anything in the ESO experience that I couldn't go and get from other MMO's, and often times (but not all times) those things are done better in those other games.

Then you add in the solo questing in overland, and it has even less of an identity because there's no actual engaging with the game design to go through it. I'm not engaging with my character builds and development, because it doesn't mean anything. Everything remains the same level of difficult from level 1 to level 50, and all mobs are just reskinned versions of the same exact things. Encounters are identical whether it's a skeever or a bandit, and the encounters are so simplistic that I don't even actually get to engage with the game design mechanics. This leads to an experience where I'm not playing a game with an identity, I'm just occasionally pressing a button to kill off whatever skin of their mob is aggro'ing me for the simple purpose of being tedious on my trip. You say the game wants to be "solo friendly", but for a solo experience, I can go pop in a single player RPG and have a far more engaging experience than anything that ESO could even pretend to offer. You say it's "play how you want", but I can get the same experience in any other MMO out there. It doesn't actually stand out in any area, because it's not actually committing to any sort of identity other than just being something with a familiar IP that allows anyone and everyone to log in with zero push back, so ultimately there's no actual game there.

And if the game's identity is to be just a non-challenging walking simulator, then it probably shouldn't be an Elder Scrolls game. Elder Scrolls comes with certain expectations, and I can say from my perspective, ESO has not lived up to a single one of those.

Franchise408

Mayrael wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

What I have observed is that some of those asking for more difficult overland have also stated that they don't currently play the game and haven't for awhile, but they may come back if difficulty was added. While most of us that are happy with overland as it is are currently playing and also subscribing.

That "most of us" is actually just you versus everyone else in this thread, so forgive me if I find it hard to believe that the majority of players are satisfied with the current state of overland (unless, of course, you have hard data to support your opinion).

Another point is that you're pulling desperate arguments and completely twisting them to your advantage.
First, the idea that if some player isn't currently playing, then the rest of us who are playing and want changes can't be right is nonsensical.
Second, if people are leaving the game and citing overly easy overland as a reason, that's a valid argument for considering an increase in its difficulty.
Third, One Tamriel wasn't introduced to reduce overland difficulty but to allow everyone to play together. The biggest factor in ESO's rise in popularity was the change in its business model, not the reduction in overland difficulty, which new players had no real knowledge of anyway.

Agreed with this, 100%. I especially want to echo the point about One Tamriel. The purpose behind One Tamriel was because players weren't allowed to play together. There may have been some problems with the way difficulty was tuned, because the vet system at that time wasn't completely perfected yet, but that was hardly the determining factor.

Also, just because someone isn't currently active doesn't mean their opinion is less valuable. If they are a potential customer, then their feedback is absolutely important to ZOS. While I might be considered "active" still, as I do still log in a couple times a month to do trials with my guild, I am not regularly active. That being said, I've been playing ESO since beta. I have my beta monkey, I was around at launch, I have the game on 2 platforms (PC and X-Box), and in the past I've been a somewhat regular purchaser of crowns, and currently own every chapter expansion, with duplicates of a few of them on both platforms. I'd like to think that even if I'm not currently as active as a lot of other players, or even as much as I used to be, that I'm still a member of ESO's intended audience as a long term player who has gone through multiple chapter stories, and been a guild tank for vet endgame dungeons and trials, someone who's been invested in this game in numerous areas. ZOS certainly doesn't have to cater to me, and given my overall view of ESO, I'd say they never did, and my view certainly isn't any more important than anyone else's except to myself, but I certainly don't think that being less active because the game hasn't met my expectations means that my voice is less valid. I'm clearly someone who's very invested in the state of this game, and I don't think that counts for less just because someone is currently more active.

SilverBride

Franchise408 wrote: »

And if the game's identity is to be just a non-challenging walking simulator, then it probably shouldn't be an Elder Scrolls game. Elder Scrolls comes with certain expectations, and I can say from my perspective, ESO has not lived up to a single one of those.

Elder Scrolls comes with an excellent reputation. Single player games don't directly translate to a multiplayer world as many different playstyles will all be in the world together. They have to take this into consideration and cannot be expected to meet individual players personal expectations.

SilverBride

Franchise408 wrote: »

I especially want to echo the point about One Tamriel. The purpose behind One Tamriel was because players weren't allowed to play together. There may have been some problems with the way difficulty was tuned, because the vet system at that time wasn't completely perfected yet, but that was hardly the determining factor.

Please read the transcript I posted above.

thatnewcatsmell

My two cents: Quest encounters or elite mob encounters should feel more impactful IMO, you shouldn't be able to burn the 'big bad' down in a matter of seconds. I'm on the fence about difficulty sliders or options in general, but I guess it's fair to offer an 'easy' option considering the fact that some people already seem to struggle with some quest encounters, I wouldn't be in favour of blocking people's story progression. That still leaves plenty of room for upping the difficulty in other spots.

I would also support reintroducing a sense of progression. There's already a 'soft progression' between older and newer zones (i.e. newer zones have more difficult encounters) and ZOS probably should lean into that idea a bit more IMO, also to help new players ease into ESO's combat system which is heavily underutilised by many.

On the other hand: I really wish there was a way to pacify (more) filler mobs in zones, like random wolves and bandits. These are mostly a nuisance, not actual content. In games like Final Fantasy XIV a lot of mobs stop bothering you once you've sufficiently outleveled them, but that wouldn't make a lot of sense in ESO because all zones have the same level nowadays. Maybe they could tie it into one of the overarching zone achievements, kind of like how some areas in older zones are pacified by completing certain quests.

spartaxoxo

Franchise408 wrote: »

And if the game's identity is to be just a non-challenging walking simulator, then it probably shouldn't be an Elder Scrolls game. Elder Scrolls comes with certain expectations, and I can say from my perspective, ESO has not lived up to a single one of those.

The developer's vision has nothing to do with whether any individual player is enjoying themselves or finding it engaging. It has to do with if the developers vision for the game is met.

They told us that it launched without a vision. But they took a hard look at the game with One Tamriel and decided on a solid vision. And they changed the game to meet it.

They have also said that they wanted players to be able to go anywhere and explore. They want them to be able to choose to do group stuff or not. And they want them to be able to put on fantasy build they feel like and roam and explore Tamriel, just as they can in the single player games. For the developers the core of an elder scrolls game is to be able to play however you want and explore.

And that's exactly what the game offers. Yours, mine, or any individual players idea of fun has nothing to do with it. The developers make a game they find fun. And then they hope to attract enough players that also find it fun to be a success. ESO has done precisely that.

I don't play Cuphead because the developers made the game too punishing for me to feel immersed in the game world. This doesn't mean they didn't have a vision and a successful one at that. It's clear that the devs of that game wanted a punishing game and they succeeded. It's just not my Cuphead of tea.

Cooperharley

SilverBride wrote: »

What I have observed is that some of those asking for more difficult overland have also stated that they don't currently play the game and haven't for awhile, but they may come back if difficulty was added. While most of us that are happy with overland as it is are currently playing and also subscribing.

I wouldn't say you speak for a large portion of the playerbase by any means - and no rudeness meant by this as neither do I! But, my personal experience is the opposite. I have TONS of friends that play daily that want overland difficulty to change. They also all subscribe, as do I again after hearing about this difficulty change coming along with other stuff.

I don't think anyone has wanted it to be anything other than optional, which is where any sort of argument over this in my mind is silly. Enabling options for the playerbase to play how you want and at a difficulty you want, like LOTRO or even other single player RPGs is a fantastic option. I would never have a negative opinion about providing MORE OPTIONS for players to play a game they played for and that they're playing. Especially if some cool rewards are tied to the more difficult gameplay, it will often incentivize people to try something different and re-visit old content, most of which is currently pretty lifeless.

I for one am EXTREMELY excited about this change and am looking forward to virtually everything in @ZOS_MattFiror 's letter.

Happy holidays

Cooperharley

Erickson9610 wrote: »

If we get more difficult overland content, then at least our Companions will be more useful! Maybe more people will post Companion builds.

Lol - I think the opposite will become apparent. They're pretty ineffective in most content outside of current overland and questing. Not to say they can't be fun! I've completed some vet dungeons solo with isobel tanking for instance, but I think more and more people will see their weakness as more apparent rather than the opposite. That system needs a MAJOR update in my opinion.

Cooperharley

SilverBride wrote: »

There is a reason One Tamriel happened. But the thing I want to know now is are any difficulty increases going to be optional or not?

I doubt it'd be sweeping changes across the board - think that'd bite them in the butt a bit and would alienate players that aren't "the most skilled" that already struggle in base game, which is hard to imagine for most of us I feel like, but it's true!

One Tamriel didn't happen because the world was too difficult, it happened to open up the world so people could play with their friend whenever and wherever they want - not because there was people complaining they couldn't kill an overland mob.. lol

spartaxoxo

Cooperharley wrote: »

One Tamriel didn't happen because the world was too difficult, it happened to open up the world so people could play with their friend whenever and wherever they want - not because there was people complaining they couldn't kill an overland mob.. lol

It happened for both reasons and they devs have explicitly stated as much. Which I consider a piece of evidence that overland difficulty will not be forced. I seriously doubt they're doing anything as extensive as One Tamriel.

Deserrick

spartaxoxo wrote: »

they want them to be able to put on fantasy build they feel like and roam and explore Tamriel

That is exactly what I wanted, which is why I hope whatever difficulty change they implement is an option that can go either way. My fantasy builds were not able to complete overland content. My newer builds carve through it with no difficulty, but I miss the more interactive, engaging, and imaginative builds that just couldn’t make it.

Being able to change difficulty both ways would allow fantasy builds while also allowing builds that are orders of magnitude more effective to be challenged.

Blackbird_V

colossalvoids wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't agree that a minority of players, many of whom do not actively play and haven't for quite awhile, should be accomodated over those that are happy with the game as it's been for 8 years and are actively playing and supporting it by subscribing all this time.

No one is "accommodated over" anyone, except the bunch of people who currently have the status quo and actively trying to not let other players have the ability to enjoy overland content and questing when even development team finally decided to do something about it, seeing it as an issue or a development flaw.

Also consider a possibility that this "minority of so inactive players who don't play the game" are enough of a mass to make developers do something about their enjoyment. It's either a pretty significant mass of players overall or people who contribute enough to be considered worth investing in.

Silverbride also may be forgetting that people take breaks from games due to various reasons, one such example being "burnout".

I'm taking a break due to burnout and boredom. There's nothing to do anyone for me in ESO and dungeon releases and once a year now for x2, but hopefully that changes with the new system.

If it's a Veteran Overland Instace with something like Vet Vateshran level 3 difficulty, then I am all for it and totally down to play again. I'd even make Vet Overland my default for everything, even mat gathering etc.

SilverBride

Blackbird_V wrote: »

Silverbride also may be forgetting that people take breaks from games due to various reasons, one such example being "burnout".

More than once I have said that players come and go in all MMO's for a variety of reasons.

Kallykat

Well, I guess I should have continued arguing along with SilverBride on this thread because ZOS appears to have taken the complaints voiced here to heart. Hopefully other currently-content, silent, solo/story players will also be more vocal about their experiences and opinions once the increased overworld difficulty "experiment" gets underway. Matt's letter really worries me. There's already so much content in which I can't participate. I hope ZOS doesn't forget about the portion of the playerbase that enjoys overland as it is and isn't interested in group content or pvp.

TaSheen

Kallykat wrote: »

Well, I guess I should have continued arguing along with SilverBride on this thread because ZOS appears to have taken the complaints voiced here to heart. Hopefully other currently-content, silent, solo/story players will also be more vocal about their experiences and opinions once the increased overworld difficulty "experiment" gets underway. Matt's letter really worries me. There's already so much content in which I can't participate. I hope ZOS doesn't forget about the portion of the playerbase that enjoys overland as it is and isn't interested in group content or pvp.

Right there with you for sure....

olda90

After that the entire game got nerfed since years and the skilled dps killed i would say that increasing the open world difficulty would be the minimum that developers could do to make this game more serious. And of course this is not enough.

They have decreased overall difficulty to reduce the gap between skilled players and unexperienced players in order to make the game more affordable to the casual player hoping to increase population and we all have seen the results.

This game could have been at a much higher point today if they would have kept the learning curve progression as it was, there would still be many older players giving gravity to the game and at the same point the ones that really want to progress would not change game from one day to another.

So i would say not only to increase overland difficulty but to increase also DUNGEON and TRIAL difficulty.

If it was for me i would also have made it PvP openworld outside cities with some criteria, this game is too friendly, not challenging and not interesting.

But of course for who likes questing this game is perfect as an elder scrolls OFFLINE.

MidniteOwl1913

DenverRalphy wrote: »

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

old_scopie1945 wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

What ever happened to there being an actual reason you may need to stick to the roadways because otherwise you run the risk of running into something more challenging that you're ready to handle?

How are players supposed to stick to the roadways when their quest objectives are out in the wild and down in caves and delves etc.? And don't forget farming mats for crafting, etc..

Simple, you don't. You travel the roadways until you can't get any closer, then you step into the wild. That's when you have to start paying attention to your surroundings instead of just mindlessly stomping through. Farming resources shouldn't be a mindless activity either. And it hasn't always been this way. Over time it's just become easier and easier, until eventually everybody just became complacent with it.

Farming resources, what a mindless pain at the best of times. I don't need it to be more than a pain as it is. Done and dusted and onto something more interesting, asap. LOL (what a chore)

If bots can manage to farm resources without aggroing anything, it shouldn't be too difficult for a player who's paying attention.

Bots only do it in the starter areas. Serious farmers avoid those areas because you can't beat the bots.

Making overland harder will only make it annoying. If I want harder there are plenty of ways to get that in game. Why ruin the whole experience just to add one more?

I farm in DLC zones all the time. Probably significantly more often than most players. And I never have a problem avoiding aggro. If anything, I usually find that I have to go out of my way to intentionally get aggro if I decide I want some raw leather scraps or alkahest.

Increasing difficulty in overland areas wouldn't change that.

Well if the trash is sitting on the node, that doesn't work. Regardless why raise the difficulty. It won't be enough to satisfy the "hard mode" crowd and it will only hurt the newer players. There doesn't seem to be an upside.