Maintenance for the week of December 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
Overland Content Feedback Thread
-
Harvokaan✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »I will repeat, no idea is out of the table unless some dev will come here and say "hey we like this and that, we definietely won't do this and this because of engine limitations (for example). Same for thinking about cost efficiency as without data we cannot to a thing.
The devs have taken an option off the table, a separate normal/vet instances. They never say never but they have said no to that specific solution for years. Cost is not her reason, they are the devs reason. Also off the table was a buff slider. Again, maybe this thread will make them reconsider. But those are the two solutions that they have explicitly said "no" to doing in the past.
If you or anyone else is curious about which options they have said "no" to in the past, I encourage you guys to read the post a couple posts above as it still remains the dev comments on the matter until new comments are made.
[snip] They said they are not interested in making different overland but we have this thread to provide feedback, the topic pop ups more not only in forums but also on streams (for example like 2 days ago someone mentioned this thread on nefas stream, it ended up as one hour conversation about game difficulty and how it should be changed (and most ppl were in favor of changes, on chill stream were streamer was doing a greymoor questline).
With new feedback and option to provide feedback in one place things might change. They changed VR to CP after the feedback, the changed how trial works, they introduce OT after the feedback. It is not set in stone, if they would state that there is NO OPTION for vet overland, they would just state that in pinned message and close each thread about it.
They didnt specify in any response that any of the proposed solutions is out of the table
[edited for baiting]Edited by ZOS_Icy on December 21, 2021 11:41AM5 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭spartaxoxo wrote: »There should and easily could be room for both. Now, if the Devs don't want to do this for reasons, I very respectfully and humbly, would ask someone at some point in time to please answer us back on this if they wish and just tell us why this cannot be done. Note, this is not a demand. I am just asking because maybe they see something we don't but just looking over this entire situation something is missing.
They have actually responded to this. This thread is really long, so I am not sure if you saw their response. They haven't made a new response to this thread but they have addressed this topic before. Click the >> next to "Spartaxoxo wrote" for easier viewing.spartaxoxo wrote: »Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »
Therefore this idea is intended to make questing more interesting while still working within the developers self-stated reasons as to why we can't have a vet overland "too much work" (debuffs require little dev effort) and fractured playerbase (debuffs don't require splitting players up).
If you don't care about what the devs stated in the past they aren't going to do, that's fine. But some of us would rather find solutions they haven't come out against and meet their criteria because we think it's more feasible and the lowest impact on the rest of the playerbase.
Would you please be so nice and link me to where the devs ruled out vet overland instances for good?
Thanks in advance.
They have a policy to never say never but they have said no to vet Overland and why on multiples occasions. This is why I wanted to make a suggestion that wasn't vet overland but still made things harder. Because the playerbase has been told "no" for years to vet Overland.
I compiled some answers here with select highlights from Rich's twitch.spartaxoxo wrote: »Also here are some responses from Rich Lambert and Mike Finnagin that I had compiled in another thread that I think are pertinent here.
On Vet Overland: [Source for both following responses]
[source 2 just forumers discussing this video in case the link is broken]
"So, we had that, Jeulen, at launch. It was called Cadwell's Silver and Cadwell's Gold. Nobody did it and everybody hated it, so we took it out and we put the challenge into world bosses and into solo arenas and into dungeons and trials."
“People just did not like the extra difficulty in the story stuff. I get that 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.”
...
“I totally hear you on the difficulty thing. I like things to be more difficult. But the data doesn’t lie. And we have never been more successful than where we are today. And a lot of that has to do with just how much freedom players have to go an 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.”
On a Toggle:
"Uh, 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, you know? The satisfaction is 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 like I said, we went down that route. We built the game with difficulty in mind and 2/3 of the game was never played by players, so we changed it.”
On Splitting the playerbase using different difficulty sliders/settings[Source]
'We get this question or request a lot too. We built overland content to be inclusive because as an MMO we want to unify as much of the player base as possible in a given zone. Difficulty sliders and settings are a detriment to that."
On what content players want to do these days (this was NOT said about Vet Overland, but instead was in an different interview where they asked him this question. While this response was never meant by him to address Vet Overland, I do think it's pertinent to know what is the vast majority of content that players engage in)[Source]
The vast majority of our player base loves the exploration, loves the lore, loves the story side of things. So we focus a lot of our time and effort on that. Two of our four major updates every year are focused on story and exploration. The other two are focused on quality of life, are focused on group-oriented activities with the dungeons or adding new systems.
In a nutshell, players want to see that you are going to put the effort into improving the game over time. And if you continue to do that, they’re going to stay and play and have a good time.
For the full transcript of the Rich interview check out SilverBride post.SilverBride wrote: »Rich Lambert recently addressed this in a Twitch stream here and gives an explanation as to why things are as they are now. I encourage others to please watch it for his perspective.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1133028256?t=1h48m0s 1:48:00 through 1:51:11
It appears the full video is no longer available and may have been taken down, but the first part of the stream is avaialble here: https://clips.twitch.tv/BovineLovelyGrassTakeNRG-IGkmH8s1XHeD9P2u
Click SPOILER for a written transcript of the complete 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 quick 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.
For an official interview check out Zathras postThe relative ease of content in Elsweyr and Elder Scrolls Online as a whole has been a common complaint as the game's playerbase ages. Players have asked for alternate difficulty options for the open-world questing experience, to have a challenge outside of dungeons and trials. Lambert says that this probably won't be coming because Zenimax Online wants the entire storyline to be accessible.
"Balance is obviously a tricky thing. What is too easy for one player is impossible for another," he tells us. "We try to balance so that the average player can have a good experience, especially with the main story content. That's our critical path. If they want to challenge themselves, they can go and do Public Dungeons, or Trials with 12 of their friends. We do make that conscious choice with the crit path to make it playable for as many people as possible."
"As for the extra difficulty, that's something our playerbase has talked about for a long time. A lot of our original players forget that we had that with [Cadwell's Gold and Silver] way back when. The feedback that we got about that was they didn't like it. It wasn't fun. The extra difficulty wasn't what they wanted. They wanted to enjoy the story. It's a catch-22."
Source
The TL:DR main reasons were
1. Too high cost in terms of dev time
2. Too few players would use it
3. Difficulty slider options splits the playerbase
Interesting. Thank you for your time compiling this. It's interesting because it shows there may be more going on behind the scenes, which I kind of figured there was but anyways.Edited by Vulkunne on December 20, 2021 11:11PMToday Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.2 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭spartaxoxo wrote: »I will repeat, no idea is out of the table unless some dev will come here and say "hey we like this and that, we definietely won't do this and this because of engine limitations (for example). Same for thinking about cost efficiency as without data we cannot to a thing.
The devs have taken an option off the table, a separate normal/vet instances. They never say never but they have said no to that specific solution for years. Cost is not her reason, they are the devs reason. Also off the table was a buff slider. Again, maybe this thread will make them reconsider. But those are the two solutions that they have explicitly said "no" to doing in the past.
If you or anyone else is curious about which options they have said "no" to in the past, I encourage you guys to read the post a couple posts above as it still remains the dev comments on the matter until new comments are made.
[snip] They said they are not interested in making different overland but we have this thread to provide feedback, the topic pop ups more not only in forums but also on streams (for example like 2 days ago someone mentioned this thread on nefas stream, it ended up as one hour conversation about game difficulty and how it should be changed (and most ppl were in favor of changes, on chill stream were streamer was doing a greymoor questline).
With new feedback and option to provide feedback in one place things might change. They changed VR to CP after the feedback, the changed how trial works, they introduce OT after the feedback. It is not set in stone, if they would state that there is NO OPTION for vet overland, they would just state that in pinned message and close each thread about it.
They didnt specify in any response that any of the proposed solutions is out of the table
Absolutely. There must be an interest somewhere. And that's good because it helps demonstrate they want to move on from the before time. *chuckles*
[edited to remove quote]Edited by ZOS_Icy on December 21, 2021 11:42AMToday Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.1 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭They didnt specify in any response that any of the proposed solutions is out of the table
As I explicitly stated before, maybe this thread will make them reconsider as they never say never.
However, it is a fact that the most recent response to a separate instance/toggle is no. They did tell us that they were not doing those things and why in this year, 2021.Edited by spartaxoxo on December 20, 2021 11:21PM1 -
Harvokaan✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »
No, most recent response to any overland change is no, not for toggle specific. Hopefully the popularity of this topic will at least force devs to acknowledge that overland difficulty requires some work and that this topic can get some acknowledge from devs.
I think to the very recent times they weren't even aware that it is a problem and fact that ppl start talking about it on streams, forum, discords and even industry media raise this topic might change how they see this issue.1 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »
No, most recent response to any overland change is no, not for toggle specific.
That is incorrect. Again read the developer's response.
Rich was asked about a separate instance and a toggle and said no to both of those.
Finn (the lead encounter designer for ESO) was also asked about lotro style toggle and explicitly stated no.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thefinninator/status/1415440700007751682?s=200 -
Harvokaan✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »
No, most recent response to any overland change is no, not for toggle specific.
That is incorrect. Again read the developer's response.
Rich was asked about a separate instance and a toggle and said no to both of those.
Finn (the lead encounter designer for ESO) was also asked about lotro style toggle and explicitly stated no.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thefinninator/status/1415440700007751682?s=20
Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns1 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »
No, most recent response to any overland change is no, not for toggle specific.
That is incorrect. Again read the developer's response.
Rich was asked about a separate instance and a toggle and said no to both of those.
Finn (the lead encounter designer for ESO) was also asked about lotro style toggle and explicitly stated no.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thefinninator/status/1415440700007751682?s=20
Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
"Finn's Tweet wrote:We built overland content to be inclusive because as an MMO we want to unify as much of the player base as possible in a given zone. Difficulty sliders and settings are a detriment to that."
That is a direct quote from Finn. He explicitly states that difficulty sliders are a detriment to their design goalEdited by spartaxoxo on December 20, 2021 11:44PM1 -
Harvokaan✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »
No, most recent response to any overland change is no, not for toggle specific.
That is incorrect. Again read the developer's response.
Rich was asked about a separate instance and a toggle and said no to both of those.
Finn (the lead encounter designer for ESO) was also asked about lotro style toggle and explicitly stated no.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thefinninator/status/1415440700007751682?s=20
Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
"Finn's Tweet wrote:We built overland content to be inclusive because as an MMO we want to unify as much of the player base as possible in a given zone. Difficulty sliders and settings are a detriment to that."
That is a direct quote from Finn. He explicitly states that difficulty sliders are a detriment to their design goal
Check the tweet he was answering to. Sliders and settings (not vet toggle tho) are mentioned only because the tweet he was responding to mentioned: "Did you guys see the LOTRO landscape difficulty sliders they've done for that MMO"
Context matters. Here he clearly states that difficulty shouldn't be changed (i disagree and hope that at some point devs will ackowledge opinion of ppl similar to me in that discussion) and didn't specify "we might change the difficulty but definietely not by sliders because...".1 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »
No, most recent response to any overland change is no, not for toggle specific.
That is incorrect. Again read the developer's response.
Rich was asked about a separate instance and a toggle and said no to both of those.
Finn (the lead encounter designer for ESO) was also asked about lotro style toggle and explicitly stated no.
https://mobile.twitter.com/thefinninator/status/1415440700007751682?s=20
Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
"Finn's Tweet wrote:We built overland content to be inclusive because as an MMO we want to unify as much of the player base as possible in a given zone. Difficulty sliders and settings are a detriment to that."
That is a direct quote from Finn. He explicitly states that difficulty sliders are a detriment to their design goal
Check the tweet he was answering to. Sliders and settings (not vet toggle tho) are mentioned only because the tweet he was responding to mentioned: "Did you guys see the LOTRO landscape difficulty sliders they've done for that MMO"
Context matters. Here he clearly states that difficulty shouldn't be changed (i disagree and hope that at some point devs will ackowledge opinion of ppl similar to me in that discussion) and didn't specify "we might change the difficulty but definietely not by sliders because...".
I never started that said yes to difficulty increase.
I stated that they explicitly said no to an instance and sliders/toggle (which are the same thing) and you disputed that.
They have said no in general, and no to those particular ideas. But they never said never and now we have this thread. So all we can do is hope it changes their mind.Edited by spartaxoxo on December 21, 2021 12:01AM0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
I read the Tweet. When a ZOS dev says those words, I interpret it to be as close to "NO" as they can get, without actually saying "NO".
What it means is that if it ever comes a "YES", we won't know for 2 or 3 years after they decide to do it.Edited by Elsonso on December 21, 2021 12:20AM1 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
I read the Tweet. When a ZOS dev says those words, I interpret it to be as close to "NO" as they can get, without actually saying "NO".
What it means is that if it ever comes a "YES", we won't know for 2 or 3 years after they decide to do it.
Yeah developers don't like saying "never" because they want to be able to change their minds. And they don't like confirming features until they are set in stone for the same reason, because if something comes up and they can't do it, people feel lied to even if it was truly the plan at the time it was stated.
Also sometimes developers say "no" to things but then the community is so persistent that they decide to give the people what they want and change things.
Like Overwatch for example had an avoid list that caused problems so they removed the feature and said they wouldn't do them. But people complained about needing an avoid so badly to deal with toxicity enough that they changed their mind. And now we have one again, but it's much more limited than the first time around.
That's an example of a developer changing their mind as they listened to the feedback of the community.
So just because the answer is no for now, doesn't mean that can't change in the future as a result of this thread. It doesn't change though that they did state no to those ideas for the time being. It doesn't mean we can't still discuss them, as your continued feedback may change their mind! It just means that we do have a current developer statement, that's all.
So by all means continue to support your dream ideas!Edited by spartaxoxo on December 21, 2021 12:44AM0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
I read the Tweet. When a ZOS dev says those words, I interpret it to be as close to "NO" as they can get, without actually saying "NO".
What it means is that if it ever comes a "YES", we won't know for 2 or 3 years after they decide to do it.
Yeah developers don't like saying "never" because they want to be able to change their minds. And they don't like confirming features until they are set in stone for the same reason, because if something comes up and they can't do it, people feel lied to even if it was truly the plan at the time it was stated.
Also sometimes developers say "no" to things but then the community is so persistent that they decide to give the people what they want and change things.
Like Overwatch for example had an avoid list that caused problems so they removed the feature and said they wouldn't do them. But people complained about needing an avoid so badly to deal with toxicity enough that they changed their mind. And now we have one again, but it's much more limited than the first time around.
That's an example of a developer changing their mind as they listened to the feedback of the community.
So just because the answer is no for now, doesn't mean that can't change in the future as a result of this thread. It doesn't change though that they did state no to those ideas for the time being. It doesn't mean we can't still discuss them, as your continued feedback may change their mind! It just means that we do have a current developer statement, that's all.
So by all means continue to support your dream ideas!
Yup. The main point I was trying to get across with my comment is that if this was a thing that they were looking at, Finn would have answered differently. That means that it is not something they are looking at, and if that ever changes, it will take 2 or 3 years before we get to see it. So, even if they change their mind, I would not expect anything before 2024.2 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Did you even read Finn tweet? It is clearly stating no for changes to difficulty at all, not no to specific solution of sliders and vet zone. He was mentioning those particular because of points raised by another person but first part of tweet clearly states the context. Again, no option is off the table and I hope this (and other) discussions will force the devs to look at this problem closer and acknowledge the concerns
I read the Tweet. When a ZOS dev says those words, I interpret it to be as close to "NO" as they can get, without actually saying "NO".
What it means is that if it ever comes a "YES", we won't know for 2 or 3 years after they decide to do it.
Yeah developers don't like saying "never" because they want to be able to change their minds. And they don't like confirming features until they are set in stone for the same reason, because if something comes up and they can't do it, people feel lied to even if it was truly the plan at the time it was stated.
Also sometimes developers say "no" to things but then the community is so persistent that they decide to give the people what they want and change things.
Like Overwatch for example had an avoid list that caused problems so they removed the feature and said they wouldn't do them. But people complained about needing an avoid so badly to deal with toxicity enough that they changed their mind. And now we have one again, but it's much more limited than the first time around.
That's an example of a developer changing their mind as they listened to the feedback of the community.
So just because the answer is no for now, doesn't mean that can't change in the future as a result of this thread. It doesn't change though that they did state no to those ideas for the time being. It doesn't mean we can't still discuss them, as your continued feedback may change their mind! It just means that we do have a current developer statement, that's all.
So by all means continue to support your dream ideas!
Yup. The main point I was trying to get across with my comment is that if this was a thing that they were looking at, Finn would have answered differently. That means that it is not something they are looking at, and if that ever changes, it will take 2 or 3 years before we get to see it. So, even if they change their mind, I would not expect anything before 2024.
Yeah, development takes quite a while. And they were already working on whatever the next expansion is before this thread. I think the earliest things might change (which I doubt but might) is the Q4 DLC of next year.
That's kind of another reason I was hoping for debuff food. It's a much simpler ask in terms of time needed.Edited by spartaxoxo on December 21, 2021 1:17AM0 -
FlopsyPrince✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".PC
PS4/PS52 -
FlopsyPrince✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Debuff food is certainly not a solution. Simply because it's essentially the same thing as taking off all your armor and using a white/green weapon, which gives exactly the same results: you take more damage incoming and you deal less damage to the enemies.
All approaches that would apply to all content are the same. Adding HP to the mobs or making them hit harder, or you being weaker overall.
The alternative is to tune each and every encounter and the level of effort that would require is prohibitive.PC
PS4/PS51 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.2 -
FlopsyPrince✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.
And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?
PC
PS4/PS54 -
FlopsyPrince✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭1. I see people talking about forcing harder content on everyone, with the thoughts that people will just learn and get better. It doesn't work that way.
ANet tried that with Guild Wars 2 1st expansion "Heart of Thorns" - made the gameplay a lot harder, more group focused, more player-skill reliant, etc. Just as had been asked for by a vocal minority on their forums for years.
The result was a massive loss of players as a huge chunk of the casual playerbase left the game. ANet suffered their biggest ever 6-month loss of revenue after the launch of HoT - a 66-67% loss, something not seen by them previously or since.
So no, forcing harder content in overland on everyone will not make people learn-to-play, or encourage them to play better. They will just leave and go find another game that is easy-to-play and lets them just do what they want without stress, worry, etc.
I remember when the Marvel Heroes MMO put some content behind a similar gate. Some players loved it and thought it was a great thing. Others (like me) who could not really make it through the gate (at least not with the alts - other superheroes) did not like it at all.
They had many other problems of course, but I expect this was a part of what caused them such problems.
You need to provide content to talented hard core players, but you can't focus the whole game around them or you will not have a large enough player base to weather the storms when people get tired of the game, even for a period.PC
PS4/PS51 -
Franchise408✭✭✭✭✭I keep hearing all this talk about unifying the playerbase, not splitting the playerbase, etc... but everyone is against creating a game experience that actually requires the playerbase to work together.
The fact is, MMO's are declining in quality in large part because everyone wants to solo, simplifying the content to such mundane levels that a 3 year old can do it, and don't want any sort of obstacle or challenge.
The entire purpose of MMO's is to play amongst a community of other players. And yes, there should be ability to solo content, and I can't think of a single MMO - even the most challenging and punishing of MMO's - that did not support solo play, but MMO's are at their best when a community has to actually work together. That's the purpose of keeping populations together, because the populations actually have to work together.
As it is, the only purpose served by not "splitting the playerbase" is so the higher level vet players can be at the beck and call of lower level players when they need help. There is no need for grouping in any capacity in ESO's overland. Even public dungeons can be solo'd with ease.
There is absolutely no need to keep the playerbase together - other than the serve the needs of the lower level players who want to use the services of higher level players at their need - if content is going to be so tediously easy that grouping will never be required.
It's a cop out excuse, plain and simple.8 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
Context here was about difficulty itself. Mechanics not discussed. However yes, experience and insight could be drawn from Vet runs, certainly. No reason to waste work that has already been put into good content.
Also, overall it's about us looking for solutions to help make Veteran difficulty possible. I realize that's not necessarily on everyone's mind.
It is possible however I'm sure there are some interesting reasons why it hasn't been done, none of these appear to be because it just isn't possible. They have their reasons. I still think we need to leave the door open on the idea and I still support it 100%. But also understand it may not be possible right now.Edited by Vulkunne on December 21, 2021 2:31AMToday Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.3 -
Sylvermynx✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Eh, grouping with the sort of ping I experience on satellite (the only connection available to me other than.... yeah, dialup....) is just not in the cards. I can't actually even envision how unhappy my average 750 ms would make people grouped with me. Serious. Yes, I have a couple of RL friends I can call on when I really need help with something - but they (unlike me) are not retired, and they do have lives, so *shrug* - they really aren't "on call"....
So for me, loving this game as I do, it's really great that I can do stuff by myself. No.... I can't do stuff by myself at a very high level (in other words, I die a LOT to more than a couple of mobs because high ping is a literal killer) - and even quest bosses can wipe the floor with me in less than the 1 second other people use to kill the same quest boss.
I pay my way here, ESO+ annually on two accounts, plus buy extra crowns over the course of a year. But apparently, you feel that I should just go away - because my situation means I can't "manage" the game the way you can.
Y'know, I really admire those of you who can kill Molag Bal in a few seconds.
I can't even kill Doshia in her current iteration the first time. Maybe the fifth or sixth - if I'm really lucky and lag forgets about me....0 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭FlopsyPrince wrote: »1. I see people talking about forcing harder content on everyone, with the thoughts that people will just learn and get better. It doesn't work that way.
ANet tried that with Guild Wars 2 1st expansion "Heart of Thorns" - made the gameplay a lot harder, more group focused, more player-skill reliant, etc. Just as had been asked for by a vocal minority on their forums for years.
The result was a massive loss of players as a huge chunk of the casual playerbase left the game. ANet suffered their biggest ever 6-month loss of revenue after the launch of HoT - a 66-67% loss, something not seen by them previously or since.
So no, forcing harder content in overland on everyone will not make people learn-to-play, or encourage them to play better. They will just leave and go find another game that is easy-to-play and lets them just do what they want without stress, worry, etc.
I remember when the Marvel Heroes MMO put some content behind a similar gate. Some players loved it and thought it was a great thing. Others (like me) who could not really make it through the gate (at least not with the alts - other superheroes) did not like it at all.
They had many other problems of course, but I expect this was a part of what caused them such problems.
You need to provide content to talented hard core players, but you can't focus the whole game around them or you will not have a large enough player base to weather the storms when people get tired of the game, even for a period.
The discussion has been refined to the point where we're not trying to focus vet difficulty around the entire game. We want Normal to remain and Overland Vet Difficulty to be an option. Same as with Dungeons having the choice between Normal and Vet.
Furthermore, ZOS has already focused the game around Vet content starting at CP 160. We're just trying to find a reasonable means of catching up the difficulty to that same level for those interested.Today Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.4 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭FlopsyPrince wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.
And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?
Difficulty is subjective. I've gone into Harrowstorms with a group, I've held my own and stayed alive long enough for ppl to come assist but can't really solo them by myself. There's a world of difference between content designed for a group in mind and content designed to be more compatible for players with a heavily invested CP.
These two things are not the same.Edited by Vulkunne on December 21, 2021 2:29AMToday Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.3 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭FlopsyPrince wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.
And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?
Difficulty is subjective. I've gone into Harrowstorms with a group, I've held my own and stayed alive long enough for ppl to come but can't really solo them by myself. There's a world of difference between designed for a group in mind and content designed to be more compatible for players with a heavily invested CP.
These two things are not the same.
So are you trying to make vet overland more along the lines of a vet dlc trial? Because Harrowstorms are most definitely made with people with a high cp in mind, but not necessarily high skill dps.0 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.
And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?
Difficulty is subjective. I've gone into Harrowstorms with a group, I've held my own and stayed alive long enough for ppl to come but can't really solo them by myself. There's a world of difference between designed for a group in mind and content designed to be more compatible for players with a heavily invested CP.
These two things are not the same.
So are you trying to make vet overland more along the lines of a vet dlc trial? Because Harrowstorms are most definitely made with people with a high cp in mind, but not necessarily high skill dps.
They was talking about them in a solo sense. When I say group I mean more than one person. Like what I said about waiting for other people to show up. Nothing as grandiose as a PvE Trials Crew. Just meaning they're not really made to be solo'd.Today Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.3 -
LashanW✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Wrong. This was addressed earlier in this thread. I love endgame group content, doing vet trials with my trial guildies is my favorite thing to do in ESO. But I have little to no experience in hard content in overland. Why? Because they serve no purpose other than just "being" there. Seen world bosses enough. I have seen a Summerset geyser once. Don't even know what a harrowstorm look like.FlopsyPrince wrote: »I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
When I'm in overland, I want to follow stories. Hard content in overland are not part of the story, they give shite rewards for doing them. Why on earth would I bother with them? Of course I'd get bored and move on even if I did them. Challenge alone is not a good enough incentive for storyless content.
I'd spend a lot of time in overland if there's a veteran version. I'd do quests with all my different characters, because their different skills will actually make for a unique experience. Hell I could even do Co-Op with my RL buddies in overland.
Right now what's the point of all the different skills and classes for doing story? Things die in seconds regardless (assuming you have a bit of competency and no other limitations).
Been waiting for them to fix DK gap closer bug since last year so I can enjoy some pvp on my preferred class, still radio silence. They are not going to devote effort to fix bugs even if they are not working on new content/features.FlopsyPrince wrote: »They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?---No longer active in ESO---
Platform: PC-EU
CP: 2500+Trial Achievements
Godslayer, Gryphon Heart, Tick-Tock Tormentor, Immortal Redeemer, Dro-m'Athra Destroyer, vMoL no death
Arena Achievements
vMA Flawless, vVH Spirit Slayer
DLC Dungeon Trifectas
Scalecaller Peak, Fang Lair, Depths of Malatar, Icereach7 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.
And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?
Difficulty is subjective. I've gone into Harrowstorms with a group, I've held my own and stayed alive long enough for ppl to come but can't really solo them by myself. There's a world of difference between designed for a group in mind and content designed to be more compatible for players with a heavily invested CP.
These two things are not the same.
So are you trying to make vet overland more along the lines of a vet dlc trial? Because Harrowstorms are most definitely made with people with a high cp in mind, but not necessarily high skill dps.
They was talking about them in a solo sense. When I say group I mean more than one person. Like what I said about waiting for other people to show up. Nothing as grandiose as a PvE Trials Crew. Just meaning they're not really made to be solo'd.
I see was just asking because it's kinda hard to determine what people want the challenge line to be.0 -
Vulkunne✭✭✭✭✭
✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »FlopsyPrince wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Parasaurolophus wrote: »Here are some of the main complaints about the current overland:
1) Mobs are absurdly easy. I have not seen this in any other game. This is ridiculous.
They are easy in WoW, they were easy in Rift, there are many many MMO's that have easy overland questing zones and mobs.Parasaurolophus wrote: »2) Quests are trivial. Talk to the marker, go further, click on the marker, go further, talk to the marker and so on. Yes, even in the new annual letter, Rich says that ZoS gives us stories. But please ... The game is more like a visual novel than an MMO or even an RPG. This is not at all what we expect.
These other MMO's have quest markers, too.Parasaurolophus wrote: »3) Dead zones. After we finish all the quests at the location in 5-6 hours, we have absolutely no incentive to return there. I would like the zone to be something more than just a big decoration for questing.
Overland IS for questing, and telling a story. That is its purpose. It is not meant to be challenging content.
All PvE Content provides us with a choice between Normal and Veteran.
It seems collectively the argument is simply asking for ZOS to provide us with this same feature for Overland. The game is already instanced in other ways. I absolutely respect everyone's opinion however there is no reason this cannot be done. People have their reasons why it should not be done but judging from a technical perspective I highly doubt it will hurt anything. Besides, many times while I'm in zone my group indicator stays on vet. Let the vets have vet content and let everyone else have Normal in a separate instance.
Problem solved as simple as that.
No it is not as simple as that. How do they make all that "veteran" content? Veteran dungeons have different mechanics, etc. Tuning that for the entire world would take a serious amount of effort, something that I still never see acknowledged here.
Also, World Bosses, Dolmans and other PvE items do not all have Normal and Veteran versions. Those two at least have a single version. Add Harrowstorms and you get "impossible only".
I agree with this post almost 100%. But to be fair, dragons and harrowstorms are pretty obviously their attempt to put vet content into the overland experience. So I would imagine for those two in particular, they'd simply nerf them for a theoretical normal version rather than add even more mechs for a vet version.
And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
They could instead fix some long standing bugs and provide more quality of life issues, in far less time. Though I don't even see them spending much time on the former, since they wouldn't be longstanding if they were spending time there. Who thinks they are going to devote even more effort to veteran overland?
Difficulty is subjective. I've gone into Harrowstorms with a group, I've held my own and stayed alive long enough for ppl to come but can't really solo them by myself. There's a world of difference between designed for a group in mind and content designed to be more compatible for players with a heavily invested CP.
These two things are not the same.
So are you trying to make vet overland more along the lines of a vet dlc trial? Because Harrowstorms are most definitely made with people with a high cp in mind, but not necessarily high skill dps.
They was talking about them in a solo sense. When I say group I mean more than one person. Like what I said about waiting for other people to show up. Nothing as grandiose as a PvE Trials Crew. Just meaning they're not really made to be solo'd.
I see was just asking because it's kinda hard to determine what people want the challenge line to be.
Sure and this is why they probably decided to make some changes and let difficulty sort of work itself out for awhile. At least we have the foresight to know that difficulty will be subjective and whatever system is put in place should be well grounded on pre-established Veteran concepts as it will almost certainly face scrutiny.Edited by Vulkunne on December 21, 2021 3:35AMToday Victory is mine. Long Live the Empire.0 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭FlopsyPrince wrote: »And Harrowstorms illustrate the lack of value for most doing veteran overland content. I rarely see anyone doing these except during an event. I jumped in with 2 others the other day and spent 20-30 minutes trying to work it, but the pillars kept getting back to full health almost immediately, meaning we had absolutely NO PROGRESS after all that effort. This is "fun"?
At least less powerful players can do something to Dolmans. They can do nothing here because the towers are constantly healed with the spirits while masses of mobs spawn to kill you.
I am sure we will get some to jump on here that say "I solo those!" and I am sure they do. But how much of their time do they spend doing that? They most likely have gotten bored and moved on.
That is exactly what would happen to veteran overland. Lots of time making things very hard that the target audience would not stick with.
I couldn't agree more.
We already had veteran overland zones an no one played them. That and the split playerbase are two of the biggest reasons why One Tamriel was introduced. If anything ESO has gotten more casual over time and is doing better now than it ever has.
I believe it would be a huge step backward to split the playerbase again, and would cause a lot of casual players to leave, especially if a veteran overland offered better rewards.PCNA2