Overland Content Feedback Thread

Lysette

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

How then would you be worried about people in another instance enjoying the content differently than you?

Because it divides the playerbase.

CP5 wrote: »

Just like with dungeons, some people are in normal instances, some in vet, and people on neither side are impacted by others in another instance enjoying the content differently than them.

Dungeons and trials etc. are end game content. They are created specifically as an option for end game players who want the challenge.

Overland is the base game. It is not created to be end game content but rather is for everyone.

CP5 wrote: »

How do you feel an opt-in self nerf system would be any different from what we can already do? Why is it that everyone has to be in the same type of instance as you, even though you can't even begin to interact with all of them, what harm is there in people enjoying overland content rather than just logging out of the game? Is it better for people to stand around in town doing nothing or log out just so you can be content that they're all 'experiencing the same content as you', rather than efforts be made to allow them to actually enjoy the largest piece of content ESO has, the entire world of tamriel?

It would give players the flexibility to choose how much of a challenge they want and a very easy way to accomplish it. And it keeps us all in the same world.

Overland is not end game content and it shouldn't be turned into an end game alternative for players who choose not to participate in the end game content already provided.

"Because it divides the playerbase." Again, silver, you project this mentality of "people have to play with me my way or else leave." That divides people. When my trial group's raid ends, most of them leave until we run again the next week, because they don't feel like there is anything worth their time to do in the game. How does willfully pushing people away from the game help unify the community?

"Overland is the base game." And every single major and minor dlc. Nothing says "Overland must be for beginners at all times." Nothing says "Trials must be for veteran players only." either. By virtue of having a normal and veteran option, dungeons and trials are allowed to accommodate different types of players. Why is this a bad thing if applied to overland? Better to let people leave dissatisfied than to give them an option, in an instance you weren't going to ever visit in the first place?

"It would give players the flexibility to choose how much of a challenge they want and a very easy way to accomplish it. And it keeps us all in the same world."

Ok, so how? I suggest ZOS uses pre-existing tech, that they've already used in this application, to do something they already do everywhere else. What's your solution? A slider, that, depended on where it's set, applies some buffs or debuffs to players to make the content easier or harder? How would that fix the issue of enemies intentionally holding back and refusing to put up a memorable fight, basic mobs and bosses alike? How would that avoid making every fight nothing but a stale bullet sponge fight, like people suggest my idea would?


And as for your back and forth with Lysette, think of it this way. ESO is a video game. Most video games teach players during gameplay. The original Mario would kill players in the first 5s if they didn't jump. Was that too hard core? No, that game depended on a players' ability to jump to succeed, and they weren't going to lull players into the sense that 'all I need to do to win is walk right.' It made people know that 'these are the tools you need to learn, and as we go we'll teach you more.' That is where some players find the engaging content, being given a challenge and either learning a new tool to overcome it or learning how to apply the skills they already have. Let's see how overland fails at this.

Tank mobs have the same health, armor, and damage as their dps mob counterparts. Do players ever learn about the importance of armor penetration prior to doing vet pve or pvp? Honestly, no, there is no way for them to because the whole armor system is just this abstract thing until it becomes critical to know.

How about interrupting enemies? Real important skill, but name one enemy in overland who demand you interrupt them. Practicing skills like quickly interrupting or breaking free are vital for survival in more challenging content, but the only place to practice is where you're punished heavily for not already knowing.

How about getting out of red aoes. Or participating in fights where you have to actively know how your own skills work, or even fights where you have to use skills at all. I was in cloudrest and watched a player recast volley on multiple targets, and this player didn't know either that volley only starts damaging a few seconds after cast, and that you can only have 1 version of each skill out at a time. This player literally accomplished nothing, and at no point prior were they in a situation where they actually needed to understand what their skills did.

Veteran overland wouldn't be a "super try hard experience where every enemy is a boss fight." It would be a place where tank mobs actually tank, healer mobs actually demand priority, archer mobs actually apply ranged pressure and require a response, and where players can actually enjoy eso's gameplay at the most engaging it can be without needing to be in a group. And ZOS has the tech needed to do this, all without compromising your experience of power fantasy and new player approachability.

Yeah, this - and somewhat scalable, that one can grow into it without to be dead in just seconds. You mentioned armor penetration and there is as well critical resistance - afaik this doesn't matter in overland at all.

SilverBride

Lysette wrote: »

This said, I can certainly not tell them how to design the game - it is their game and their choice - but so is mine to choose, what I want to play and where my money goes - I will not allow them to force me to a playstyle I dislike.

I agree that we should choose how we want to play any game, this one or otherwise. What I don't agree with is expecting any company to completely change their base game into something it isn't because some may not enjoy it as it is.

This is why I only participate in the parts of the game I find enjoyable, and don't participate in the parts I don't.

CP5

It doesn't, but it's just one of the many systems that are left entirely up to players to learn about and understand, without some more direct means in content to be introduced to and understand.

Lysette

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

This said, I can certainly not tell them how to design the game - it is their game and their choice - but so is mine to choose, what I want to play and where my money goes - I will not allow them to force me to a playstyle I dislike.

I agree that we should choose how we want to play any game, this one or otherwise. What I don't agree with is expecting any company to completely change their base game into something it isn't because some may not enjoy it as it is.

This is why I only participate in the parts of the game I find enjoyable, and don't participate in the parts I don't.

But if we never give feedback about what we like or dislike and what we would want to change, it would not be good either. The idea of ESO is afaik "game as a service" - a service serves customers and thrives, if it provides those services customers want to pay for ... so it is in the interest of ZOS to at least give it a serious thought - consider it based on the actual numbers they have, if it is worth doing or not - over time more and more will be veterans, but only if they are not leaving the game for good - so ZOS can basically decide, to keep them, but then it will be even more relevant to have content for them, or they can as well decide, that the game will stay mostly like it is - then they will need a steady stream of new players to keep it alive. And the latter will get harder over time and it will be even more important, to keep players for longer in the game.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

This said, I can certainly not tell them how to design the game - it is their game and their choice - but so is mine to choose, what I want to play and where my money goes - I will not allow them to force me to a playstyle I dislike.

I agree that we should choose how we want to play any game, this one or otherwise. What I don't agree with is expecting any company to completely change their base game into something it isn't because some may not enjoy it as it is.

This is why I only participate in the parts of the game I find enjoyable, and don't participate in the parts I don't.

Overland is part of the game, like any other piece of content. The only thing different about overland is that it only offers one way to enjoy it, unlike literally every part of the game. Like you said, you don't participate in content you con't care for, same for those who want to enjoy the world of tamriel but don't enjoy it. ZOS, as well as many players, would all serve to benefit from more players being able to enjoy the largest block of content in the game.

spartaxoxo

So I looked more into what LOTRO does, and it's mostly just debuffs on a slider. They do have a few enrage attacks that some enemies can do to players of higher difficulty.

Giving the mini-bosses enrage attacks they can access and launch at players using debuffs seems like a good compromise between literally overhauling the whole game and doing nothing but debuffs. And allows players to share the same instance. For some reason, I was under the impression that they put people into a different instance based on their difficulty level, but that is not the case. And it works out pretty good.

Apparently, in the game there are plenty of people who actually paid money to gain access to a subscriber only server specifically to use those debuffs. They obviously gain other benefits too, but I saw threads of people explicitly recommending non-subscribers to subscribe for the debuff slider, and those people saying they are going to do it or want to do it (but not sure if they can swing it financially).

I knew they were fairly popular but I'm surprised people are even willing to shell out money for it in that game. The complaints looked pretty similar to the ones about overland in this game. Too easy, makes it unengaging, even saw someone say they couldn't do a full rotation on the bosses. Interesting.

CP5

Interesting to hear, but going through mobs and tweaking all their base abilities to do special things to people with a particular debuff seems to be the same kind of task as duplicating them and modifying them. Plus it doesn't change their behaviors since those can't be player specific.

spartaxoxo

CP5 wrote: »

Interesting to hear, but going through mobs and tweaking all their base abilities to do special things to people with a particular debuff seems to be the same kind of task as duplicating them and modifying them. Plus it doesn't change their behaviors since those can't be player specific.

From my reading, it wasn't all the mobs that enraged but it was hard to tell exactly what did and what didn't. Just there was a few enrage attacks on some mobs. I think if ESO were to limit it to story mini-bosses it would be a lot less work than doing all the mob groups in the game. Which I only care about because they have been pretty open that they can't do a lot of stuff they'd like right now and we're getting pared down content. I am sure overhauling the entire overland means we'd lose something significant somewhere else.

If trash wasn't changed, but the side story bosses added an enrage attack that ONLY affected people with a debuff, then I think that would probably be a good compromise. They could of course still do the challenge banners for the big story bosses like Rada-Al-Saran.

tomofhyrule

For me, I think the overland difficulty is fine. Yes, it's easy, but that's what I'd expect out of overland. I main a tank and I don't feel like having to change into good sets just to go farm my treasure maps and surveys. I run through with my full tank sets and my Companion, and I listen to the dialogue and let my imagination fill in the gaps. A lot of the time, I even just hold block or light attack back so I can take screenshots to write up later.

If I want a challenge, I go to try to solo a dungeon or arena. If I want to relax, I play overland quests. If I want to experience the story, I let my imagination fill in the gaps.

But there's a lot to the question of a vet overland, so here are my (extensive) thoughts, which ended up being much more extensive than I'd thought they'd be:

On Vet instances:

It makes me really happy that I can just walk up and solo a random BG WB and don't have to call for help and then wait for someone to stop their crafting writs and decide to ride along. I remember when I was too new to do a WB by myself, and how it was always random whether "/z LFM Shivering Shrine" would get people to come or not. So many people have /z muted (especially in starter zones where they tend to get political), so there are a lot of new players who can't do these themselves who need help. I've seen loads of callouts for help at WBs in the starting zones, and without experienced players around to run by and help, it basically requires new players (who are generally less likely to have active guilds or friends online, or even considering the fact that ESO has really started to pivot to the solo RPG TES fanbase) to group up to do things, which will be harder for them considering their circumstances. Putting a vet instance of an overland will basically ensure that most of the players who could help them will not be in the normal overland zone.

Yes, the current zones are instanced. But some smaller zones may not even have enough players to fill the one instance they have, much less have new players and vets in separate instances. I feel like this is what they meant by 'riding the whole zone and seeing nobody' if the only reason to go to places like Malabal Tor is for story, and then all of the experiences players are gone, the new players there will feel like ESO is a ghost town. There are places in game outside of Vivec's crafting site, after all.

Now this could be fixed by allowing the 'normal' /z chat to call out to the 'vet' chat so that vet players could port over to help out. But that would require vet players to want to do that.

On Boss Mechanics:

I get that story bosses are set at a low common denominator. However, they have been getting more mechanically intense over time - I recently finished the MQ on one character, and I wanted to get screenshots of the fight. It's physically impossible to die and reset that fight without running out of the arena and jumping off the cliff. And even then, the boss comes back with less health each time you reset. He has the same three attacks the whole time, and you even have a massive damage buff. All of this is explained in game as you receiving the blessing of a literal god so you can do it.

Compare this to the Lady Belain fight in Markarth. She has several phases and goes invulnerable, forcing you to actually play the mechanics. She's got less health, but you don't have the damage buff. While she still goes down easily for an experienced player, even someone with 100k+ DPS will need to do her mechanic at least once since she goes invulnerable. The Lady Belain fight is much harder for a new player to deal with than the final boss of the BG MQ since there is a lot more going on.

I even noticed that ZOS is moving to keep mechanics involved in other fights. For the Witches Festival last year when they added the Crowborne Horror boss, I soloed that my first time (on my tank, with a companion). It took a while, and I really had to focus on the mechanics. Then I did it the next day with two high-DPS friends. I didn't realize the boss had invulnerable phases since doing it solo took long enough, but the boss forced its mechanics and went invulnerable when my friends were burning it down. Again, they're adding (unskippable) mechanics to bosses, but most of the complaints I ended up hearing were "ugh, forced mechanics!"

A lot of peoples' idea of 'I'm good at this game' is 'I can burn down the boss before the mechanics happen!' So that begs the question of whether it should have mechanics like this (which would then need to be forced, and will make it take longer since the boss will have invulnerable phases). And again, someone who does 25k DPS but is perfect at mechanics may actually be better at the game than a 110k DPS who spends the entire fight in the red and dies right away.

On that note, we could use more tank- and heal-checks and fewer DPS checks in the game. I was really proud of my first vMA clear because I did it on a tank with a tank build. It's impossible in vVH because of the DPS check. Maybe have a boss fight that hits you with something like vRG Death's Touch pre-nerf. I know I could Magma armor and be fine, but I feel a lot of leet DPS players would riot if you needed to actually change to a tanky- or healy-build to clear content. Why can't support roles be the ones who don't have to change their build for once?

On Mob mechanics:

This is a topic that even this thread teds to disagree on. Some people say they want a vet mode the easiest way possible "just buff the mobs attacks!" Some people say the mobs don't need to be touched, only the bosses "why fight a wolf for 5 mins?" And some people want everything changed "the mobs just back up and take 5 minutes to toss one silly dagger!"

Basically, there's not even a consensus on what 'vet overland' means.

Designing the mechanics of dungeons takes a decent amount of time. Even in the newest DLC dungeons, we still have the generic dagger-tossers. They have added a few new mob archetypes like the alchemists and the teleporty cauterizers, but the game has never suddenly gotten Smash-Bros-lv. 9-CPU level AI. Trying to make 'smart' enemies in that way may be more than just a simple "oh, just use the 'good AI' checkbox and done!"

On Workload:

The easiest way to make a vet instance of overland would be the same way they made vFG1 from nFG1 - make the enemies have more health and do more damage. And then in Hardmode, the boss has even more health and does even more damage. All of the basegame dungeons pretty well have the same idea. The 'new mechanics for HM' really came with the vCrag trials, which originally didn't have a normal mode. Now, DLC dungeons and trials have major differences between n, v, vHM modes, including certain attacks or mobs that don't exist on the easier modes.

The idea here is that the basegame was not built for different mechanic modes. The newer stuff is. That means we'd be likely to see more mechanically-intense fights (different mobs, more different attacks) in something that was built with different levels of difficulty in mind. Adding these to the basegame zones (and the current DLC zones) would be a massive undertaking. And we're already seeing that people in various other threads (PvP, Dungeon story mode) are mainly arguing against things because ZOS does have limited time to do things and everyone would rather they spend their limited time doing the thing they want. Sure, to many in this thread, spending all of 2022 to redo the basegame zones to make a vet instance would be a positive... but would the shareholders see it that way if it's at the expense of new content. Would that be able to turn a profit?

And if vet overland was needed to be done by the encounters team, that would likely mean fewer dungeons for the year. Which some people may like, but that's still actively taking something away from people who prefer running group content to solo stuff.

Also how could this be done? Would 'ESO hardmode' be a DLC that people get with ESO+? Would it be a separate 'chapter'-esque purchase? A completely separate purchase like the assistants? Per zone? At what point would this be profitable to spend time on versus the amount of people willing to go for it? I don't have the answers.

And then of course the eternal question - when people are playing it and complain it's too hard, do you nerf it to keep those players entertained? What about the players who can find a way to breeze through it, do they need a 'super vet mode' before they walk out?

On Incentive:

A lot of people are trying to reduce most 'vet overland' arguments to "you just want better rewards!" And the response is "we'd do it even without the rewards! We just want the challenge!"

I can understand - I'm one of those people who would want to see dungeon quests repeatable for no reward other than the story. But I realize that doing anything other than deactivating one of the two levers/plates in Direfrost to make them able to be soloable would be a decent amount of work... and certainly changing the difficulty to Delve-level would be an undertaking. And on top of that, nerfing difficulty by removing things is much easier than adding more mechanics - we've seen many post-PTS patches to nerf a dungeon, but we haven't really seen anything where they added some mechanics or difficulty before.

To address the "we'll still do it even if it's harder for no loot!", there are even people in this thread who say they'd like something more, from anything from purple overland gear to special achievements or titles. This does suggest that the number of people who would do it just for the story is pretty small comparatively, so would it be worth it to overhaul the overland? What if there are new rewards, will people come onto the forums and complain that vet overland is too hard? After all, if we consider vMA, is there incentive outside of score-pushing to not use sigils? There are no achievements for it, and there's no trifecta. Are we happy just doing vMA nosigil for the fun of it, or are there a lot of people who want 'nosigil' to be added as an achievement or drop bonus loot/style pages/etc.?

The fact that the game has been moving more casual seems to imply that locking rewards away is not the way they'd go. Monster helms used to not be guaranteed, and now they are. The stickerbook has seriously reduced grind. The existence of normal vs. perfected gear...

I also notice that people are rarely doing the hard content that is in the game. I'm in a phase where I really want to practice solo arenas, which don't require anyone else and also are serious tests of individual skill. And I can make the weekly leaderboard for completing it no matter what my score is. If lots of people were interested in "I just want to push myself no matter the rewards!", then why can I get a leaderboard mail after a week of vVH with a score of 30k due to a 4+ hour run? (And I'm happy I'm up to 200k and 12/15 vitality in 52 min now, at least Undying Song is looking plausible for me now)

Let's also not talk about the people who complain that ESO+ is a detriment to their playstyle since they might end up in a DLC random instead of a basegame random. If we're suggesting that difficulty should be its own reward and that DLC dungeons are more intense (difficult/mechanics) than basegame, then it should follow that there would be people who would love if they could exclude basegames from the random rotation and not the other way around.

On Gameplay and Story Segregation:

The stories do hype up the big enemies a lot more than they are, but for characters who aren't doing high DPS, it isn't like they can be deleted in seconds. Again, I quest on my trial-ready tank so I think I can pull maybe 10k single-target if I'm lucky. I won't be in any danger of dropping below 95% health, but the fights usually do take more than three seconds.

I understand that a too-easy final boss can cheapen the experience, but I came into this game with the expectation that Overland and story = made for new players so I let my imagination fill in the gaps in the story. I can buy my fight against Rada al-Saran because I let myself think that the story is true. I even play the mechanics like they had in game to debuff him since I want to see the story. And then I finish and am happy to see the end. I'm not placing my enjoyment in the act of playing. Contrast that to Maebroogha, who is about an 11 minute pull if I'm lucky in a totally different gear setup that I'm not a fan of that leaves me with a pounding heart and in a cold sweat. After I beat her, I need to stop playing since I'm not even paying attention to the story (or anything else) since I need to walk away from the screen. Sure, that is much more exciting, but then I feel like I'm being pulled out of the game because I'm not playing a character anymore. I'm playing a sweaty guy playing a computer game.

Of course, that's personal. Some people are drawn into the world by the intensity. I find that super intense difficulty, especially if I need to build around it, takes me out of the world since I can't play my character as I intend, I have to play as the game mechanics dictate. It's no longer "play the way you want," it's "play the way you have to."

And besides, talking again about the time commitment it would take - you only get to see the story bosses once per character. And if "Oh, King Svargrim went down in less than a minute!" seems unrealistic, how is "Hey, we can go back and fight him as much as we want!" any more realistic? He's dead and the world is saved, end of story.

In Conclusion:

The overland is easy. It's relaxing. It's nice to go flower picking when you're not running from pre-OT Craglorn wasps. It's not where to go if you want to be challenged. There are parts of the game that challenge exists, and many of those aren't used very much. But the overland and story bosses are made for casuals. It's good to have some content for people for whom dungeons like nFG1 is too intense (and there are people that can't do those).

We don't make a version of Kyne's Aegis (and especially one with Lieutenant Njordal) for someone who doesn't have the ability to play FG1, and thinking that some content should be gated for more experienced players isn't controversial. In the same way, I know overland is for new players and I don't think a vet version of that is needed. I understand the overland isn't tuned for me, and I know where I can find things that are challenging to my level.

So it's a touchy subject and I can see why people would want it. However, just as some players are pulled into the story more with difficulty, other players are pulled out of the world with difficulty, particularly if you have to rebuild your character into something you don't want specifically to clear one thing.

It would also be a lot of work unless they went the easy way of buff/debuff, and that seems insufficient based on what a lot of people are requesting. I'd guess the easiest way would be to add CP slottables in the blue and red trees that allow you to deal less/take more damage, which would have the dual effect of making the enemies higher level and also getting rid of Champion buffs. But to redo enemy AI would be a massive undertaking and may need to lessen or replace any other thing they wanted to do during the year. I do see that DLC zone stories have been getting harder bosses and it's been going in that direction, but a lot of people are asking for even more and to go back and redo as much as the entire game itself.

I would like however if zone boss and mini-boss areas could be private instances, since it is a bit immersion breaking to see someone run past and nuke a named zone NPC while you're being told that the door has been locked for hundreds of years and you have the only key.

CP5

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

Dungeons can only be played one way... in a group. I know a lot of players can solo many dungeons, but not everyone, and they are not designed to be solo. Some even have plates that need to be stood on by more than one player, for example, making them impossible to complete alone. Players have asked for solo dungeons for a very long time now but it's not happened.

Lysette

When I look at it with a realistic mind, I don't see ZOS adding new mechanics to older content, simply because it is a huge amount of work with little benefit to the whole player base. To this adds, that we have pretty much all a different idea what a more challenging overland even means - some of you want it basically just for experienced veterans and in this case, you cannot expect to get support from us for it - as much as I can understand your point of view, but it has no benefit at all for us, who will never get there - and I'm pretty certain, that is most of the player base, who will not get any near to that level by various reasons - like life is changing in ways, which don't allow to play that much as before - you know, people fall in love and the focus is changing to real life end game content - as in getting married, raising a family, making the relationship work - you know, the really challenging group-oriented stuff - commonly known as real life.

I think if you really want a more challenging overland, then it has to be something what many can play or it will not be done - it is just too much work with too little benefit to do it that hard, that most are excluded from it - a waste of development time. So let's think about something, what more than just the most experienced veterans can play and enjoy - and if it is in this case even worth doing, seen from your perspective. I have somewhat the feeling, that for you experienced veterans it is an all or nothing thing - either it is as hard as you expect it or it won't be played - and this is realistically seen not going to happen.

Lysette

On the other side, we have seen, that ZOS is eventually willing to make major changes to the game, if they deem it necessary - like One Tamriel - that was a huge redesign of the whole game concept, and they did it, because they realized, that 2/3 of the content isn't played by most, when it was harder and level-gated. And it solved the problem, where friends couldn't play with friends, if their levels differed a whole lot - this shows, if ZOS is seeing a benefit in something, they are not afraid of putting in some major redesign work to achieve it - but the same is not valid, if it has little to no benefit for most of the player base.

colossalvoids

Imo as a kinda "veteran" player generally when I'm discussing this topic with other players be it discord or in-game every new update this topic emerges and it's mostly not that "all or nothing". Engaging could mean million of things, sure, but some work is better than no work so to speak. It's already agreed upon that scrolls or banners on quest instanced bosses would not be a problem, which is already a huge win for a community if that part would be heard loudly enough. It's not really about having a new challenge or some new alternative to dungeons or whatever, it's about making huge part of the game playable and enjoyable at the same time for people who learned the game mechanics. Sure they can throw a debuff whilst everyone else around stays the same but one goal is missed then entirely. Not holding my breath to any changes anyway, whilst there would be influx of new players checking the game they won't really turn their heads on retaining old ones. If pvp performance would be fixed in 2-3 years from now this topic would kinda die out by itself. Edit: it won't fix overland, just I'm personally and a lot of people I know would quit it completely for good.

Lysette

colossalvoids wrote: »

If pvp performance would be fixed in 2-3 years from now this topic would kinda die out by itself. Edit: it won't fix overland, just I'm personally and a lot of people I know would quit it completely for good.

This is a very good point you made there, because I pretty much think the same - there is not more challenge than to fight real people - and if that part of the game works fluently, it will be the focus and questing is on the shelf of those loving pvp.

But on the other side, if this is the case, the conclusion would be, it is not worth doing a veteran overland - as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Edit: hm, I might be wrong with the latter, because there are a lot who never pvp -.they might still want a more challenging overland.

colossalvoids

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

If pvp performance would be fixed in 2-3 years from now this topic would kinda die out by itself. Edit: it won't fix overland, just I'm personally and a lot of people I know would quit it completely for good.

This is a very good point you made there, because I pretty much think the same - there is not more challenge than to fight real people - and if that part of the game works fluently, it will be the focus and questing is on the shelf of those loving pvp.

Yeah and also feeling of belonging if that's the word in english. Currently I have nothing to do after our dungeon team evenings because pvp is unplayable and helping newer players with wb's and stuff was my go to before this whole discussion started. Got to know I was just a prop for them to not leave it and my own fun is irrelevant in this game, no "dividing" allowed so suck it up.

Only problem with this is that I'm actually a lore person (my whole reason to start eso was to read new books lol), so I won't be "stoked" about it so to say, but it's kinda the way it is. If I can't enjoy the story and zones myself I'd better watch someone enjoying it on stream or something in spare time.

colossalvoids

as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Not quite, some of us just have nowhere to go else (well, can quit the game at all lol) so it would be kinda "solution" - not engaging with it at all. I would love to have elder scrolls in ESO (which I have only in dungeons now) but I'd be personally fine with just working pvp as it's better than nothing. I'm surely not a majority with that, not even inside the very minority circles.

ShalidorsHeir

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

Dungeons can only be played one way... in a group. I know a lot of players can solo many dungeons, but not everyone, and they are not designed to be solo. Some even have plates that need to be stood on by more than one player, for example, making them impossible to complete alone. Players have asked for solo dungeons for a very long time now but it's not happened.

That does not really relate to his quote and does not makes sense at all ... group content is group content and solo content is solo content, no matter the difficulty (or generally content you can play on your own). So his point remains valid. So to satisfy solo players we need more arenas (maybe alsomore story and quest stuff inside) and adjustements to overland.

Lysette

colossalvoids wrote: »

as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Not quite, some of us just have nowhere to go else (well, can quit the game at all lol) so it would be kinda "solution" - not engaging with it at all. I would love to have elder scrolls in ESO (which I have only in dungeons now) but I'd be personally fine with just working pvp as it's better than nothing. I'm surely not a majority with that, not even inside the very minority circles.

We have quite different experiences with what a TES game is though - I played those on "normal" difficulty, because I think that is the intended way to play it and then it doesn't feel that much different from how it is in ESO I have tried both though, playing it on both ends of the spectrum - the only thing what changed, was the order in which I acquired the skills in this case - and not even that was consistent - like in Skyrim it was beneficial to have blocking skills and a shield, whereas in Oblivion on hardest difficulty, using a shield was just begging to be slaughtered.

We don't have a real common experience about what a TES game actually is like - we all made different experiences with it.

colossalvoids

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Not quite, some of us just have nowhere to go else (well, can quit the game at all lol) so it would be kinda "solution" - not engaging with it at all. I would love to have elder scrolls in ESO (which I have only in dungeons now) but I'd be personally fine with just working pvp as it's better than nothing. I'm surely not a majority with that, not even inside the very minority circles.

We have quite different experiences with what a TES game is though - I played those on "normal" difficulty, because I think that is the intended way to play it and then it doesn't feel that much different from how it is in ESO I have tried both though, playing it on both ends of the spectrum - the only thing what changed, was the order in which I acquired the skills in this case - and not even that was consistent - like in Skyrim it was beneficial to have blocking skills and a shield, whereas in Oblivion on hardest difficulty, using a shield was just begging to be slaughtered.

We don't have a real common experience about what a TES game actually is like - we all made different experiences with it.

Obviously so, that's why a lot of people explained what it was to them pages and pages back me included. And yeah Oblivion was strange no matter it was my favourite from them all (nostalgic reasons), probably the only game I've played when you're adjusting difficulty down the more you level due to scaling.

Lysette

colossalvoids wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Not quite, some of us just have nowhere to go else (well, can quit the game at all lol) so it would be kinda "solution" - not engaging with it at all. I would love to have elder scrolls in ESO (which I have only in dungeons now) but I'd be personally fine with just working pvp as it's better than nothing. I'm surely not a majority with that, not even inside the very minority circles.

We have quite different experiences with what a TES game is though - I played those on "normal" difficulty, because I think that is the intended way to play it and then it doesn't feel that much different from how it is in ESO I have tried both though, playing it on both ends of the spectrum - the only thing what changed, was the order in which I acquired the skills in this case - and not even that was consistent - like in Skyrim it was beneficial to have blocking skills and a shield, whereas in Oblivion on hardest difficulty, using a shield was just begging to be slaughtered.

We don't have a real common experience about what a TES game actually is like - we all made different experiences with it.

Obviously so, that's why a lot of people explained what it was to them pages and pages back me included. And yeah Oblivion was strange no matter it was my favourite from them all (nostalgic reasons), probably the only game I've played when you're adjusting difficulty down the more you level due to scaling.

See. again a quite different experience - I had to scale it up more and more, because I started to feel more and more like a demi-goddess in Oblivion - with just enchanted clothes - no armor at all, I would have to repair that, didn't want to do that. Using absorbing fast weapons, which absorb the strength and endurance from opponents - which makes me increasingly stronger and more powerful with every hit, whilst draining their very life-force from them with every scratch of my dagger. It was not even important that the dagger doesn't do much damage - but it is fast and lethal due to it's absorbing powers.

colossalvoids

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Not quite, some of us just have nowhere to go else (well, can quit the game at all lol) so it would be kinda "solution" - not engaging with it at all. I would love to have elder scrolls in ESO (which I have only in dungeons now) but I'd be personally fine with just working pvp as it's better than nothing. I'm surely not a majority with that, not even inside the very minority circles.

We have quite different experiences with what a TES game is though - I played those on "normal" difficulty, because I think that is the intended way to play it and then it doesn't feel that much different from how it is in ESO I have tried both though, playing it on both ends of the spectrum - the only thing what changed, was the order in which I acquired the skills in this case - and not even that was consistent - like in Skyrim it was beneficial to have blocking skills and a shield, whereas in Oblivion on hardest difficulty, using a shield was just begging to be slaughtered.

We don't have a real common experience about what a TES game actually is like - we all made different experiences with it.

Obviously so, that's why a lot of people explained what it was to them pages and pages back me included. And yeah Oblivion was strange no matter it was my favourite from them all (nostalgic reasons), probably the only game I've played when you're adjusting difficulty down the more you level due to scaling.

See. again a quite different experience - I had to scale it up more and more, because I started to feel more and more like a demi-goddess in Oblivion - with just enchanted clothes - no armor at all, I would have to repair that, didn't want to do that. Using absorbing fast weapons, which absorb the strength and endurance from opponents - which makes me increasingly stronger and more powerful with every hit, whilst draining their very life-force from them with every scratch of my dagger. It was not even important that the dagger doesn't do much damage - but it is fast and lethal due to it's absorbing powers.

Yes, some would be using custom spells, doing alch-enchant loops etc resulting in various outcomes and difficult level needs, for example I'm mostly played without actually imbuing my gear or using much ability altering potions so I'm oblivion it would a turning down for me to avoid "damage sponges", whilst in Skyrim no matter what I do it's going up, even on a thief wearing clothes and no armour. Mix up mods here and it's different games from player to player (esp Skyrim, for a lot of people it's just a sandbox and they didn't saw vanilla since it's release).

But it's eso anyway, which already have preset levels of difficulty be it normal group one, hm or solo arenas ones for different content. I'd guess using those formulas won't be that hard of an issue while designing any solution. At least as a starting point. Hoping for whole new experience would be probably unrealistic even for new content going forward.

Lysette

colossalvoids wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

colossalvoids wrote: »

as it would just be a surrogate for the lack of fluently playable pvp content.

Not quite, some of us just have nowhere to go else (well, can quit the game at all lol) so it would be kinda "solution" - not engaging with it at all. I would love to have elder scrolls in ESO (which I have only in dungeons now) but I'd be personally fine with just working pvp as it's better than nothing. I'm surely not a majority with that, not even inside the very minority circles.

We have quite different experiences with what a TES game is though - I played those on "normal" difficulty, because I think that is the intended way to play it and then it doesn't feel that much different from how it is in ESO I have tried both though, playing it on both ends of the spectrum - the only thing what changed, was the order in which I acquired the skills in this case - and not even that was consistent - like in Skyrim it was beneficial to have blocking skills and a shield, whereas in Oblivion on hardest difficulty, using a shield was just begging to be slaughtered.

We don't have a real common experience about what a TES game actually is like - we all made different experiences with it.

Obviously so, that's why a lot of people explained what it was to them pages and pages back me included. And yeah Oblivion was strange no matter it was my favourite from them all (nostalgic reasons), probably the only game I've played when you're adjusting difficulty down the more you level due to scaling.

See. again a quite different experience - I had to scale it up more and more, because I started to feel more and more like a demi-goddess in Oblivion - with just enchanted clothes - no armor at all, I would have to repair that, didn't want to do that. Using absorbing fast weapons, which absorb the strength and endurance from opponents - which makes me increasingly stronger and more powerful with every hit, whilst draining their very life-force from them with every scratch of my dagger. It was not even important that the dagger doesn't do much damage - but it is fast and lethal due to it's absorbing powers.

Yes, some would be using custom spells, doing alch-enchant loops etc resulting in various outcomes and difficult level needs, for example I'm mostly played without actually imbuing my gear or using much ability altering potions so I'm oblivion it would a turning down for me to avoid "damage sponges", whilst in Skyrim no matter what I do it's going up, even on a thief wearing clothes and no armour. Mix up mods here and it's different games from player to player (esp Skyrim, for a lot of people it's just a sandbox and they didn't saw vanilla since it's release).

But it's eso anyway, which already have preset levels of difficulty be it normal group one, hm or solo arenas ones for different content. I'd guess using those formulas won't be that hard of an issue while designing any solution. At least as a starting point. Hoping for whole new experience would be probably unrealistic even for new content going forward.

I'm guilty of having used Skyrim as well as a sandbox - basically converting it into a survival style game - Winter Edition, Frostfall hardcore, Better Needs - the environment and climate was more of a challenge than anything else in my game. It was so frigid in most places, that wearing anything else but fur armor was a no go. And water was just swimmable in areas, which are somewhat warm - in most places it was absolutely lethal to stay for more than few seconds in frigid water and warming up and getting dry was a must have afterwards - well, I died in front of the stable door in Windhelm after crossing the river in the water - I was so cold before already, but I had to take the chance or die on the spot - well, it didn't work, I died in front of the stable door - it would have been warm inside, but I was so frozen already, that I could not do anything anymore.

Lysette

But playing like this - you cannot imagine what a feeling of bliss it was on a "radiant" sunny day, where I could actually wear something else than fur and did not have to pitch a tent ever so often during the day - it was rare, but when it happened, it was such a good feeling to have this radiant sun in a beautiful sky in this otherwise arctic environment - I love Winter Edition and I guess that is why I love as well frozen planets in NMS - I feel so at home there.

A radiant day was as well the best time to travel - either on horseback or using the scenic carriages (which actually moved through the landscape) - on a radiant day I could book a carriage to something further away, because I could stay warm for long enough to arrive safely - on a frigid day, I had to use shorter distances and warm up in inns before taking the next carriage and so on - it is a very different experience like this. And having no fast travel gets quite a few dragons into the sky as well - so you get used to having them around. They cause havoc to wildlife if there are many at a time - quite interesting.

I even think that it was originally planned to have carriages moving through the landscape and that it's cut content - because the driver makes quite a few remarks to locations on the way, which you never experience in the vanilla game.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

Dungeons can only be played one way... in a group. I know a lot of players can solo many dungeons, but not everyone, and they are not designed to be solo. Some even have plates that need to be stood on by more than one player, for example, making them impossible to complete alone. Players have asked for solo dungeons for a very long time now but it's not happened.

Like ShalidorsHeir pointed out, normal dungeons and veteran dungeons both offer different experiences. If they didn't, and if they played out the same, then adding a veteran overland would also result in a similar experience. By intent normal and vet dungeons play differently, and I would be surprised if you would suggest otherwise.

SilverBride

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

Dungeons can only be played one way... in a group. I know a lot of players can solo many dungeons, but not everyone, and they are not designed to be solo. Some even have plates that need to be stood on by more than one player, for example, making them impossible to complete alone. Players have asked for solo dungeons for a very long time now but it's not happened.

Like ShalidorsHeir pointed out, normal dungeons and veteran dungeons both offer different experiences. If they didn't, and if they played out the same, then adding a veteran overland would also result in a similar experience. By intent normal and vet dungeons play differently, and I would be surprised if you would suggest otherwise.

Regardless of normal or veteran difficulty, dungeons are still designed to be played only one way... in a group. Some players want veteran overland and some want solo dungeons, but we have neither because that is not how the game is designed.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

Dungeons can only be played one way... in a group. I know a lot of players can solo many dungeons, but not everyone, and they are not designed to be solo. Some even have plates that need to be stood on by more than one player, for example, making them impossible to complete alone. Players have asked for solo dungeons for a very long time now but it's not happened.

Like ShalidorsHeir pointed out, normal dungeons and veteran dungeons both offer different experiences. If they didn't, and if they played out the same, then adding a veteran overland would also result in a similar experience. By intent normal and vet dungeons play differently, and I would be surprised if you would suggest otherwise.

Regardless of normal or veteran difficulty, dungeons are still designed to be played only one way... in a group. Some players want veteran overland and some want solo dungeons, but we have neither because that is not how the game is designed.

It's not currently but something should happen for both IMO.

A difficulty slider similar to LOTRO's seems like a good compromise. It mostly works as a debuff slider, but it also adds a few enrage attacks to a few mobs that don't effect casual players at all because they only hurl them at debuffed players. The difficulty remains trivial if it's your thing. The debuff slider approach with a couple enraged attacks added to quest mini-bosses (which are a challenge banner wouldn't help because they aren't instanced) alongside challenge banners for the story bosses would probably go a long way to make things more immersive while being less work than redoing all the old mobs entirely.

And I think that they should make it so that companions don't take AOE damage or damage from bosses where they seal themselves up into some harmful cask that kills you for standing to close while some other mechanic spawns (e.g. the last fight in the deadlands portals or the guy in frostvault with the lasers). And that additionally, companions should be able to handle the 2 player mechs of the dungeons that require them e.g. stand on the pressure pad in dire frost. Having the companions do a little more is probably less work than redoing all the old dungeons to an easier mode.

CP5

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

CP5 wrote: »

It is good that it offers what it does, but why should overland be the only place in game that only offers one way to enjoy the content? Especially when that is the majority of the content in the game?

Dungeons can only be played one way... in a group. I know a lot of players can solo many dungeons, but not everyone, and they are not designed to be solo. Some even have plates that need to be stood on by more than one player, for example, making them impossible to complete alone. Players have asked for solo dungeons for a very long time now but it's not happened.

Like ShalidorsHeir pointed out, normal dungeons and veteran dungeons both offer different experiences. If they didn't, and if they played out the same, then adding a veteran overland would also result in a similar experience. By intent normal and vet dungeons play differently, and I would be surprised if you would suggest otherwise.

Regardless of normal or veteran difficulty, dungeons are still designed to be played only one way... in a group. Some players want veteran overland and some want solo dungeons, but we have neither because that is not how the game is designed.

... And are you thinking a vet overland would be mandatory group content? We have neither because ZOS hasn't made it yet. We didn't have the outfit system until ZOS made it. We didn't have transmutation until ZOS made it. We didn't have jewlery crafting until ZOS made it. We didn't have the justice system until ZOS made it. We didn't have this little thing called one tamriel until ZOS made it.

Should ZOS have just kept ESO as it was at launch and put no efforts into adding things to make the game more enjoyable for players? You said it yourself, you left after you got to the silver and gold zones because they weren't engaging for you. Would the proper response have been for them to say, "if you want easier overland, then go back to the tutorial islands."? No, they saw a problem and fixed it, and just like how dungeons can accommodate those looking for either easier or more challenging content, so too could overland, yet you seem to hold it on a pedestal that it has to be the one unique piece of content in ESO tailor-made for only some players to enjoy while leaving the rest to look elsewhere.

Have you ever considered what people who run vet trials do when their raid is done and the group disbands? Normally, from those I run with, they log off until their next scheduled raid. Outside of group content, the game doesn't offer them any reason to log back in. So often they say "It'll be a minute, need to shuffle gear between alts, I would have done it earlier, but I only log on for raids." Would you tell them, "Just go run the solo arenas."? They've done that, to death. What else? Would you encourage them to leave, play another game? Then there goes your argument about unifying the community. What would be your answer to that, for an experienced player who finds anything outside of group content to be painfully dull.

spartaxoxo

CP5 wrote: »

What would be your answer to that, for an experienced player who finds anything outside of group content to be painfully dull.

Side note: This is exactly why I think that the solution should keep people in the same instance and also that vet overland should actually be on par with VVH. I know almost nobody is asking for it to be that brutally hard, but I want the challenge banners on bosses to be that brutally hard. And I don't think they should overhaul the entire game because then it would take dev time away from other things as their time is extremely limited at current time, but if they did I also hope that they make it that hard.

I don't think we need it to be current Craglorn difficulty, that's a total waste of time. That content is also stupid easy. The reason that I refer to it as 5 minute mudcrap fights isn't because I think it would literally take 5 minutes to fight a crab or anyone would want that, it's because the only thing that level of difficulty accomplishes is making trash take slightly longer. That zone is still very easy. You can already accomplish that level of difficulty by just taking off your gear. If you were debuffed enough to where practically every heavy attack could one shot you though, that would be a different story.

The vast majority of this game''s new content caters to mid-tier casual players, with even the group events and the public dungeons now catering to them. The new public dungeon is pretty rough on new players. The new group event is rough on new players. About the only thing they feel comfortable doing is the old overland, delves, and story questing. And on the top end you pretty much only have vet arenas and trials.

I don't want new player experience to be made worse because they can't get help, because a game's continued success requires that the game make a good first impression. I have seen many games completely crumble because they became too top heavy and stopped being attractive to new players.

At the same time though, it's impossible to ignore the complete lack of content for upper middle and elite players, especially if they prefer to play solo. THAT is who the difficulty level should be catered to, not some Tom, Rick and Joy with the 20k DPS who already have basically the entire game at their feet.

https://tiermaker.com/list/video-games/eso-elder-scrolls-online-content-tier-list-1225647/1614244

I made this tier list a while back and you'll notice there is hardly anything for Z tier and hardly any content for A+ difficulty. Almost all of it was in the middle.

I think it's easy to think Z list content is also mid-tier content, but all the non-stop threads about wanting to remove normal dlc dungeons, the new players that already make threads complaining that the older base game zones are already ghost towns in which it is hard to find help etc should show otherwise. A lot of those players already struggle in places like IDK Greenshade to get help and these are already largely single instance areas with only a small amount of established players available to help. I don't want to see a zone that already is struggling to have a population get further split apart.

Lysette

Now this is strange, as I experience pretty much all "old" zones to be quite crowded - I go back to pretty much all of them for antiquities, and from my point of view, they are quite filled with a new generation of players. Ok, they are doing Z content yet, and you might eventually not refer to them seeking help, but from what I can tell, these zones are pretty much alive.