Update Existing Zones Before Dropping New Content

El_Borracho

Look, I know that new content is what drives games like ESO. But I wish they would go back and add to or improve existing zones. I was in Gold Coast this weekend searching for the last lead for the Belharza Band (Thanks again for another treasure chest lead. LOVE THEM. ) It feels like a zone that is 2/3 done then never got completed. So much more could be put into it, but instead its full of weird shrines, ruins, and a castle, all of which serve no real purpose. The whole side of the zone west of Anvil is an empty space

Gold Coast and Hew's Bane should have been one great zone, but are split into two underwhelming zones. There are others, like Blackwood (A giant zone with more open spaces than relevant locations), Northern Elsweyr (The nightmare of poorly placed wayshrines), or The Deadlands (Why go here after the quest?). But Gold Coast feels like the biggest whiff, and its a DLC zone, so you figure it should offer more..

I would love it if the devs would go back and add to or fix these zones. Not necessarily another group dungeon, as the 2 in Gold Coast don't really get you to travel to Gold Coast, but a reason to go there beyond lead hunting. I'm not even a quester, but another Tamriel-wide quest, similar to the Main Quest, with new locations in existing zones would be the most obvious and welcome solution. Running around rocks dodging minotaurs isn't a selling point.

wilykcat

I agree 👍

Dr_Con

I'll agree that Gold Coast/DB DLC is probably C tier (the arena is its saving grace from D tier), but Hew's Bane/TG DLC is probably a solid A tier (though the value of this DLC is probably pushed to S tier when you consider everything it has includes the MOL trial).

Gold coast is a bad zone and has a bad story. Additionally, you could only progress this boring story by doing repeatable quests to gain points in your DB skill line... I really can't give it many points for quality because of this, plus the merchants are split up in 2 locations (splitting up zone merchants is a bit meh, as merchant goods may be the only reason some people even go to certain places). Many people just do the zone dailies for the motifs and that's the only replayability factor.

In comparison to zones/chapters like High Isle and Galen, there's really no contest, however the scooby doo murder mystery story vibe still persists in the HI/Galen story quest, driving down the value of the replayability. High Isle in comparison to something like Gold Coast is an easy A: the visuals are stunning, and it even has the DSR trial which certainly raises the equity of these DLC... but the caveat is that the storyboarding could have used a lot of work. Thieves Guild in comparison has an amazing zone story and stunning zone visuals, the A I would give the recent chapters is not the same A I would give to the TG chapter. If we add in the value factor of the Thieves Guild DLC also giving access to Maw of Lorkhaj, one might even consider pushing the Thieves Guild DLC up to S tier- although there is a distinct disconnect

between an agent of Namira with the Thieves Guild DLC in general (why couldn't they have made it about Rahjin? Why couldn't it have been about some tomb raiders?).

But how do you "rework" a zone? How do you determine which zones need to be reworked first? I would wager that most people likely only get the DB and TG DLC just for the guild skills anyways, why shouldn't they just put those resources into new zones instead of old ones?

SilverBride

El_Borracho wrote: »

Running around rocks dodging minotaurs isn't a selling point.

The selling points for Hew's Babe and the Guild Coast are the Thieves Guild and the Dark Brotherhood. The focus for these zones are heists and contracts, not fighting the zone's trash mobs.

I_killed_Vivec

Vvardenfell...

In TES3 every tomb could be explored. Some might not have much in them (at least at first glance) but you could usually find a vampire or a skeleton in there. In Vvardenfell? Completely different - most of them are just surface features.

It's the same with houses just about everywhere. So may are inaccessible. At the very least they should be generic spaces, with maybe a recipe stuffed in a trunk somewhere to make them worth exploring.

Because that's what TES games are all about - exploration!

ArchMikem

Too bad they already officially claimed all Art released to the live servers is Final. And even then when they kinda sorta recanted, they only said they'd think about revisiting old zones only after the rest of the map was filled.

chessalavakia_ESO

Content that serves no real purpose can help make the world feel more alive.

When everything you run into is for quest x or quest y the world can end up feeling artificial.

AcadianPaladin

There is plenty of improving that can be done with the original zones. Even as they are, I prefer them to any of the new zones. That said, I'd urge an upgrade to Bleakrock Isle where, after you have completed the quests, Bleakrock Village is rebuilt. That village has a very good design and, with some repairs and eliminating the baddies and fires, could be a pretty good hub - good enough to help take some of the crowding load off of other good crafting hubs.

Edit: Oh, and Eyveya could use some after the questline love as well, even incorporating Velaste (if you saved her) into a leadership role there.

El_Borracho

@Dr_Con I agree with your points on Hew's Bane, which is why I wish they combined the two into one zone. When I say "rework" in terms of a zone like Gold Coast, I am focusing on adding more content or making the existing content relevant again. Dolmens, or their new equivalents, get people to repeatedly travel to zones they have been to before. Trading and crafting hubs like Mournhold pull in guilds and players. Undaunted camps. You can take your pick. But Gold Coast is the great empty. Even another world boss or second arena would improve it, which is saying a lot.

@SilverBride I completely agree, but it didn't need a whole zone. While they gave us companions with Blackwood and High Isle, the zone/expansion was the focus. With Gold Coast, it would be like creating a DLC for the Ragpicker. My whole point is that there are zones that can be improved, either story wise or a reason to visit the area over and over after completing the quests there. "Fetch" missions for the Dark Brotherhood don't even take place in Gold Coast for the most part.

SilverBride

El_Borracho wrote: »

"Fetch" missions for the Dark Brotherhood don't even take place in Gold Coast for the most part.

The Gold Coast is where the Dark Brotherhood has its headquarters, and where the player goes to pick up their contract for the day. The contract could be for anyone anywhere in Tamriel.

Hew's Bane is where the Thieves Guild headquarters is and where the player goes to pick up their assignments for the day. These also can take place anywhere in Tamriel.

Neither of these are meant to be large zones with self contained stories, so I wouldn't expect that the missions they send us on would all take place in these zones.

El_Borracho

@SilverBride exactly. They could have implemented both without the need for a zone. But they created zones for both. Using Gold Coast as an example, all I am saying is the zone could be better, especially for a DLC zone. The fact that the Dark Brotherhood is there is irrelevant for the most part.

I would compare Gold Coast to Artaeum. Despite Artauem giving us the Psijic Skill Line, along with its quest line, it was not its own DLC. (Even though the Psijic skill is arguably far more useful in the game than the DB skills.) Gold Coast is a little bigger in size with a couple of group bosses and a pair of small cities, but that's about it in terms of content. Once you are done with the story line in both, there is little reason to return, but for the occasional mythic lead. For a free standing DLC zone, I just think there should be more to Gold Coast than what there is, that's all.

SilverBride

El_Borracho wrote: »

They could have implemented both without the need for a zone. But they created zones for both.

But they couldn't because of the nature of these guilds.

The Mage's Guild and the Fighter's Guild are both fine having their headquarters in the cities of Tamriel because they are lawful and accepted by the citizens.

The Thieves Guild and the Dark Brotherhood, on the other hand, are both involved in criminal activities and needed to have an out of the way area for their headquarters. Thus the new zones.

Hapexamendios

I think the update of old zones should be done with QoL improvements and not in lieu of new content.

TaSheen

Hapexamendios wrote: »

I think the update of old zones should be done with QoL improvements and not in lieu of new content.

Yeah. Better idea.

Tandor

chessalavakia_ESO wrote: »

Content that serves no real purpose can help make the world feel more alive.

When everything you run into is for quest x or quest y the world can end up feeling artificial.

For some of us, yes, but don't under-estimate the number of players who don't even read, let alone listen to, the quest dialogues. Those players wouldn't bother to visit any content that served no real purpose. I doubt there would be sufficient appeal in visiting such content or revisiting old zones that had simply been revamped to warrant the development time and cost involved, especially if that development time and cost was diverted from producing new content which sells.

Supreme_Atromancer

I agree very strongly there is a need to update old zones.

Dr_Con wrote: »

How do you determine which zones need to be reworked first?

I think this is a great question, and the variety of answers would demonstrate how everyone is going to have their own view.

For instance, for me, I think that the Gold Coast is still absolutely gorgeous to this day. Moving between Gold Coast (2016) and Blackwood (2021), for instance, feels more or less like moving between the two sides of a cohesive Cyrodiil land, where moving between, say Base Game Bangkorai (2014) and "year one" Orsinium (2015?), the aesthetic quality is *grating*, despite how close they were in release time: the quality of the zones increased drastically after release, and it shows, and pairing other new-old zones- Daggerfall and High Isle. Reaper's March and Northern Elsweyr. Stonefalls and Vvardenfell- only reinforces it.

Not only are the aesthetics vastly better in anything released 5 minutes after launch, the design philosophy improved dramatically. I think that ZOS took the criticism about launch zones being gratingly inaccurate to heart, and future zones did a FAR better job at trying to replicate equivalent areas represented in more recent games. You can see that especially with Western Skyrim, but its apparent in pretty much every post-launch zone (excepting maybe Craglorn, which could arguably be lumped with base-game).

For me, therefore, I think base game zones should be the priority, aesthetically.

Supreme_Atromancer

Hapexamendios wrote: »

I think the update of old zones should be done with QoL improvements and not in lieu of new content.

This is a great comment, and highlights something that I think the developers recognise: In an early stream, Rich acknowledges the demand for a base-game refresh. He acknowledges the problems with base game zones, and expresses a few things he would do differently today (and those things are largely born out in everything we see from Orsinium, onwards). In order to encourage his audience to think about it from a developer's perspective, he says that while the team would absolutely love to revisit old zones, doing so would not be possible without being at the expense of new content, and people want new content.

These questions, though, become particularly interesting in the context of Matt Firor's recent letter to the community. In it, he explicitly says that newer players are feeling overwhelmed at, amongst other things, the number of zones. This encourages the observation that if the number of new zones is problematic, couldn't now be the time to capitalise on what they've already done? The broad theme apparent in the letter of wanting to capitalise on what they do have, replayability, and repeatable content feels like it could support such an idea.

Depending on the extent of any rework, base-game zones could be redone to such an extent they would feel like new zones, while not increasing the feeling of being overwhelmed that actual new zones would seem to be being argued would cause. They could take the opportunity to fix gratuitously wrong geography, and make those zones fit more into the world.

Further, by bringing these zones up to the aesthetic and design-philosophy standards of the absolutely gorgeous zones designed more recently, they could better support a greater framework of repeatable content, dailies, or whatever new systems Matt hinted was their intended direction in the future because people will want to do those activities in zones that are enjoyable to be in. I agree with the sentiment that they should capitalise on old zones, that they could look at overland difficulty, that they could bring some of the cooler design elements such as wandering bosses and dynamic world events, more dailies, more things to grind and anything they might be imagining, but I find it hard to believe that would be worthwhile in zones that are deprecated, relatively ugly, with frustrating exploration and design that was done at a time when the direction of the game was completely different.

I like to picture the differences between Western and Eastern (Eastmarch and The Rift) Skyrim in ESO as an example of the value of a base-game refresh. The latter two zones compare poorly with Western Skyrim- which is beautiful and accurate to what we see in TES5 Skyrim. Imagine if the zone was reworked with the design principles, aesthetics and accuracy we see in W. Skyrim. Imagine having the cold stone 1st era Windhelm we see in TES5 rather than the warm, wooden base-game depiction, or if, with their improved handling of verticality, the plataeu upon which Riften sits actually lead down to the volcanic tundra and snow of Eastmarch. Combined with new gameplay reasons to actually be in these zones, I think it would absolutely feel like brand new content, without resulting in overwhelming newer players with sheer number.

Kesstryl

Hapexamendios wrote: »

I think the update of old zones should be done with QoL improvements and not in lieu of new content.

Q3 would be the appropriate time for updating zones. I still want new content, but I'd also like to see old zones get some love. Bleakrock Isle should not be burning for all eternity. I'd like to see new chapters updating any situations in old zones if you already interacted with those NPCs, like update Castle Ravenwatch if you did both the Rivenspire story, Greymoor, and Markarth. I'm sure little things like this have numerous examples all over the place. It would make the world feel more alive and not stuck in temporal dimensions. One example where they did implement something like this is if you did Blackwood and Deadlands first, then went to Shadowfen, you meet Lyranthe and she actually has dialogue for you from the new content. I was pleasantly surprised and I'd like to see more things like this. Updating texture quality without changing the models themselves would be nice too.

El_Borracho

Hapexamendios wrote: »

I think the update of old zones should be done with QoL improvements and not in lieu of new content.

Well, yeah, that would be better. LOL. Was positing more of a "This or That" scenario, given that all we typically get is new content without the QoL most ask for.

phantasmalD

Those seemingly unfinished places are for worldbuilding. They are there to make the world fill more lived-in, to reward exploring, to hide chests and other loot, to let designers exercise their environmental story-telling muscles.

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

I like to picture the differences between Western and Eastern (Eastmarch and The Rift) Skyrim in ESO as an example of the value of a base-game refresh. The latter two zones compare poorly with Western Skyrim- which is beautiful and accurate to what we see in TES5 Skyrim. Imagine if the zone was reworked with the design principles, aesthetics and accuracy we see in W. Skyrim. Imagine having the cold stone 1st era Windhelm we see in TES5 rather than the warm, wooden base-game depiction, or if, with their improved handling of verticality, the plataeu upon which Riften sits actually lead down to the volcanic tundra and snow of Eastmarch. Combined with new gameplay reasons to actually be in these zones, I think it would absolutely feel like brand new content, without resulting in overwhelming newer players with sheer number.

Windhelm is NOT supposed to have 1st era architecture, it was sacked multiple times (at least twice).

Pocket Guide to the Empire, 1st Edition/Skyrim

Windhelm
Once the capital of the First Empire, the palace of the Ysgramor dynasty still dominates the center of the Old City. Windhelm was sacked during the War of Succession, and again by the Akaviri army of Ada'Soon Dir-Kamal; the Palace of the Kings is one of the few First Empire buildings that remains. Today, Windhelm remains the only sizable city in the otherwise determinedly rural Hold of Eastmarch, and serves as a base for Imperial troops guarding the Dunmeth Pass into Morrowind.

That's lore that predates TESV, pretty much the only part of the city that survived centuries of turmoil is the Palace.
Logically speaking ESO's Windhelm is more lore friendly than TESV's. But perhaps there have been some kind of neo-nordic architectural movement during the 3rd or 4th era. Would be a realistic course of action for the capital of ultra-nationalistic nords.

As per ESO, it's literally been just ~10 years since the Akaviri invaded and almost completely destroyed the city. It's even part of the zone's and EP's backstory. The in-game reason as for why you couldn't enter the Palace (until the Greymoor expansion at least) is that it's still being rebuilt.

The Second Akaviri Invasion

Four: The invasion was a complete surprise, and Windhelm was invested before Queen Mabjaarn could muster the Hold in defense. After a brief siege the invaders breached the southern gate and the city was sacked and burned. Both Queen Mabjaarn and her daughter and heir, Princess Nurnhilde, were slain in fierce fighting before the gates of the Palace of the Kings.

Also, ESO's Windhelm is still mostly stone based, wood is only used as an accent. AND TESV Windhelm uses a lot of wood as well, far more than I think you give it credit for.

Look at all the 2nd stories and roofs being wooden.

I actually think they did Solitude a bit dirty by copying TESV so hard; it implies that the 40+ rulers that controlled the area during the next 1000 years did f-all with the city.
SOME buildings being the same is okay, of course, but ZoS def should have played around more with the layout, like the entrance courtyard should not have been a direct copy.

Morthal maybe shouldn't even have existed, but def shouldn't have had all 7 buildings in the exact same locations.

But I guess they did diverge from TESV in other areas (like Karthwatch and the Reach), so that balances it out.


Tbh I'd not mind seeing the newer architecture styles incorporated into the old zones, now that they exist.
Especially the ancient high elf architecture, that was probably the most egregious part of the base game, that Aldmer didn't get their own ruin architecture. ZoS instead resorting to using Ayleid architecture, but with yellow rocks.

I think that would help High Rock and Auridon a ton, if all those ruins that were meant to be Aldmer ruins looked like the ones on Summerset Isle.

Unlikely to happen tho, the chance of breaking something would be astronomical. Remove a single rock, now you broke an NPC's pathing that for some reason was hard coded to interact with it.

Snaggel

I'd support the base game zone visual appearance being updated. They look dated compared to what DLC zones past Orsinium/Gold Coast look like.

Supreme_Atromancer

phantasmalD wrote: »

Those seemingly unfinished places are for worldbuilding. They are there to make the world fill more lived-in, to reward exploring, to hide chests and other loot, to let designers exercise their environmental story-telling muscles.

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

I like to picture the differences between Western and Eastern (Eastmarch and The Rift) Skyrim in ESO as an example of the value of a base-game refresh. The latter two zones compare poorly with Western Skyrim- which is beautiful and accurate to what we see in TES5 Skyrim. Imagine if the zone was reworked with the design principles, aesthetics and accuracy we see in W. Skyrim. Imagine having the cold stone 1st era Windhelm we see in TES5 rather than the warm, wooden base-game depiction, or if, with their improved handling of verticality, the plataeu upon which Riften sits actually lead down to the volcanic tundra and snow of Eastmarch. Combined with new gameplay reasons to actually be in these zones, I think it would absolutely feel like brand new content, without resulting in overwhelming newer players with sheer number.

Windhelm is NOT supposed to have 1st era architecture, it was sacked multiple times (at least twice).

Pocket Guide to the Empire, 1st Edition/Skyrim

Windhelm
Once the capital of the First Empire, the palace of the Ysgramor dynasty still dominates the center of the Old City. Windhelm was sacked during the War of Succession, and again by the Akaviri army of Ada'Soon Dir-Kamal; the Palace of the Kings is one of the few First Empire buildings that remains. Today, Windhelm remains the only sizable city in the otherwise determinedly rural Hold of Eastmarch, and serves as a base for Imperial troops guarding the Dunmeth Pass into Morrowind.

That's lore that predates TESV, pretty much the only part of the city that survived centuries of turmoil is the Palace.
Logically speaking ESO's Windhelm is more lore friendly than TESV's. But perhaps there have been some kind of neo-nordic architectural movement during the 3rd or 4th era. Would be a realistic course of action for the capital of ultra-nationalistic nords.

As per ESO, it's literally been just ~10 years since the Akaviri invaded and almost completely destroyed the city. It's even part of the zone's and EP's backstory. The in-game reason as for why you couldn't enter the Palace (until the Greymoor expansion at least) is that it's still being rebuilt.

The Second Akaviri Invasion

Four: The invasion was a complete surprise, and Windhelm was invested before Queen Mabjaarn could muster the Hold in defense. After a brief siege the invaders breached the southern gate and the city was sacked and burned. Both Queen Mabjaarn and her daughter and heir, Princess Nurnhilde, were slain in fierce fighting before the gates of the Palace of the Kings.

Also, ESO's Windhelm is still mostly stone based, wood is only used as an accent. AND TESV Windhelm uses a lot of wood as well, far more than I think you give it credit for.

Look at all the 2nd stories and roofs being wooden.

I actually think they did Solitude a bit dirty by copying TESV so hard; it implies that the 40+ rulers that controlled the area during the next 1000 years did f-all with the city.
SOME buildings being the same is okay, of course, but ZoS def should have played around more with the layout, like the entrance courtyard should not have been a direct copy.

Morthal maybe shouldn't even have existed, but def shouldn't have had all 7 buildings in the exact same locations.

But I guess they did diverge from TESV in other areas (like Karthwatch and the Reach), so that balances it out.


Tbh I'd not mind seeing the newer architecture styles incorporated into the old zones, now that they exist.
Especially the ancient high elf architecture, that was probably the most egregious part of the base game, that Aldmer didn't get their own ruin architecture. ZoS instead resorting to using Ayleid architecture, but with yellow rocks.

I think that would help High Rock and Auridon a ton, if all those ruins that were meant to be Aldmer ruins looked like the ones on Summerset Isle.

Unlikely to happen tho, the chance of breaking something would be astronomical. Remove a single rock, now you broke an NPC's pathing that for some reason was hard coded to interact with it.

While I agree that TES5's Skyrim had wooden structures, I don't think that refutes the point that the visions are drastically different. TES5's Windhelm deliberately depicts a frigid, ancient and brooding, 1st-era Nord capital, setting a mood which reflects the the story the city is telling.


The city may have been sacked, even burned, but what we see in TES5 clearly indicates that the stone character of the city remains. I think anything else is an unnecessary contrivance in defence of what we know wasn't designed with accuracy to the PGE1 or unique character in mind, rather base-game resource limitations and deadlines- the same reason every other base game race is represented by only one tileset. Remaining beholden to that would be a massive shame. 8 years of fantastic work is testament that they could do far better.

vsrs_au

One change I'd like to see is fixing the transition between zones that are connected by roads, e.g. currently, when you take the road between Northern Elsweyr and Grahtwood, the entire scenery and climate completely changes.

phantasmalD

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

I think anything else is an unnecessary contrivance in defence of what we know wasn't designed with accuracy to the PGE1 or unique character in mind,

Coming up with unnecessary contrivances to defend inaccurate design decisions is part of the TES experience. See: levitation ban, CHIM, dragon breaks, furstock, etc.

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

Kind of unfair to compare these two shots to each other, as they don't both depict the exact same place. Second pic should be showing Candlehearth Hall.
Like this.

Although your pic did actually made me think.

You know, something that I think is quite interesting and worth noting is that Windhelm in general doesn't actually match the architecture of contemporary nordic cities.
Like look at this this.



Bromjunaar, or as colloquially known, the Labyrinthian.
A merethic era nordic city. Notice the overuse of stairs, the gigantic triangular archways; the uneven, worn, rounded stone.
The standalone, decorative menhirs.
The super-wide main entrance that goes from a triangle to a perfect circle.
The narrow pathways leading to precarious stone watchtowers, the round walls decorated with rudimentary trilithons.
The general lack of above ground housings.

Based on the ruins depicted in the game, ancient nords seem to have mainly built underground, utilizing pre-existing caves for their cities?!
With the occasional exception of tall, imposing towers.

As another example one could look at Skuldafn.



Or just any other nordic ruin.

Compared to this, Windhelm and it's main gate just looks too pristine. Like it's brand new, or freshly renovated. Little wear or tear.
I guess keeping your walls and main gate in shape is not a crime. Some would even say that it's the duty of a ruler.
But it's worth noting that the city also has these.

Commemorative plaques for ancient kings, nordic cultural heritage that's left to rot, 0 renovation done to make sure they remain readable.

There's also Whiterun, with it's super worn down walls. Although that might says a lot more about Whiterun than it does about Windhelm. Still, how come Whiterun is falling apart in a much milder environment, while Windhelm has walls that look like they were freshly chiseled to a 90°angle.


Hmmm, like look at those walls next to the gate.

See how small, even and regular those stone bricks are? Really doesn't look like something that was built in the same era or by the same people as Skuldafn, Bromjunaar or Saarthal.

Then again, the Palace of Kings also has some nice, even stone brick walls, so, shrug?!

Another thing is the depiction of Kyne; while it is indeed a recurring motif in nordic architecture, the way she's depicted in Windhelm is completely unique, afaik. Same goes for decorative draconic pillars. Not seen anywhere else.

Now, does any of this mean anything, or was it just Bethesda playing fast 'n loose with architectural styles, going with rule-of-cool, instead of making sure Windhelm's architecture matches it's purported age?

Or maybe Windhelm was just a one-in-a-million building, that they never managed to replicate ever again.

I cannot say for certain, but I def think that Windhelm's immaculate walls are pretty sus.

((My pessimist side says it was just Bethesda being negligent, tbh))

ZoS was clearly in-touch with Bethesda main during development and cared enough to follow their blueprint for the province, as clearly shown by the fact that Eastmarch and the Rift are otherwise fairly accurate. Hell, even the city's general layout is the same.
Ancient nordic architecture was part of the base game, so they could have definitely used it for Windhelm if they wanted to.
And pretty sure that Bethesda main had veto power, allowing them to force ZoS to comply with their vision AND lend them their models, should ZoS require them.

+ZoS did go out of their way to create completely unique, one-off buildings, like the Tribunal temple.

In the end, I just don't really think that Windhelm's depiction is the biggest sin of ESO's launch.

Supreme_Atromancer

phantasmalD wrote: »

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

I think anything else is an unnecessary contrivance in defence of what we know wasn't designed with accuracy to the PGE1 or unique character in mind,

Coming up with unnecessary contrivances to defend inaccurate design decisions is part of the TES experience. See: levitation ban, CHIM, dragon breaks, furstock, etc.

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

Kind of unfair to compare these two shots to each other, as they don't both depict the exact same place. Second pic should be showing Candlehearth Hall.
Like this.

Although your pic did actually made me think.

You know, something that I think is quite interesting and worth noting is that Windhelm in general doesn't actually match the architecture of contemporary nordic cities.
Like look at this this.



Bromjunaar, or as colloquially known, the Labyrinthian.
A merethic era nordic city. Notice the overuse of stairs, the gigantic triangular archways; the uneven, worn, rounded stone.
The standalone, decorative menhirs.
The super-wide main entrance that goes from a triangle to a perfect circle.
The narrow pathways leading to precarious stone watchtowers, the round walls decorated with rudimentary trilithons.
The general lack of above ground housings.

Based on the ruins depicted in the game, ancient nords seem to have mainly built underground, utilizing pre-existing caves for their cities?!
With the occasional exception of tall, imposing towers.

As another example one could look at Skuldafn.



Or just any other nordic ruin.

Compared to this, Windhelm and it's main gate just looks too pristine. Like it's brand new, or freshly renovated. Little wear or tear.
I guess keeping your walls and main gate in shape is not a crime. Some would even say that it's the duty of a ruler.
But it's worth noting that the city also has these.

Commemorative plaques for ancient kings, nordic cultural heritage that's left to rot, 0 renovation done to make sure they remain readable.

Firstly, that's some good exploration work, and I've often wondered about these sorts of things myself.

But, I don't think there's any evidence that the entire 1st era Skyrim, some 3 thousand years and hundreds of kilometres across must have had the exact same architecture at every point. And also if you're rebutting my observation by saying that Bethesda is happy to handwave details, can your own argument really stand entirely on details?

Windhelm is described as a 1st era city. It has the giant ancient Nordic/Atmoran-style giant hawk/eagle heads, and looks and feels like a place of great age, with time-buckled roads and brooding stone everywhere. Bethesda clearly wanted to depict an ancient Nordic city.

I'm not saying its depiction in base game ESO is "launch's biggest sin", I'm saying that it seems FAR more probable its an example of game/resource limitations they had at launch, which a base game refresh would have an opportunity to remedy.

TES5's Windhelm was an enigmatic and iconic city, full of character and story. **If** a refresh of old zones WERE to happen, which is the main idea behind the thread, cleaving to its current depiction based on some open questions about details would be a massive shame, imv. I intend to stick to the OP's idea going forward so as not to derail the thread on a tangent, but I think it would be a great topic for the lore channel.

Amottica

Unfortunatly the old zones do not drive revenue since a subscription is not required. The best that will happen is Zenimax releases a DLC associated with some of the older zones so that it is part of ESO+ but those who purchased the original DLC would still need to purchase the new DLC for the new content.

The problem with that is, well, people complain and it is easier to deal with threads like this than people complaining that they already bought the DLC.

Hurbster

phantasmalD wrote: »

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

I think anything else is an unnecessary contrivance in defence of what we know wasn't designed with accuracy to the PGE1 or unique character in mind,

Coming up with unnecessary contrivances to defend inaccurate design decisions is part of the TES experience. See: levitation ban, CHIM, dragon breaks, furstock, etc.

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

Kind of unfair to compare these two shots to each other, as they don't both depict the exact same place. Second pic should be showing Candlehearth Hall.
Like this.

Although your pic did actually made me think.

You know, something that I think is quite interesting and worth noting is that Windhelm in general doesn't actually match the architecture of contemporary nordic cities.
Like look at this this.



Bromjunaar, or as colloquially known, the Labyrinthian.
A merethic era nordic city. Notice the overuse of stairs, the gigantic triangular archways; the uneven, worn, rounded stone.
The standalone, decorative menhirs.
The super-wide main entrance that goes from a triangle to a perfect circle.
The narrow pathways leading to precarious stone watchtowers, the round walls decorated with rudimentary trilithons.
The general lack of above ground housings.

Based on the ruins depicted in the game, ancient nords seem to have mainly built underground, utilizing pre-existing caves for their cities?!
With the occasional exception of tall, imposing towers.

As another example one could look at Skuldafn.



Or just any other nordic ruin.

Compared to this, Windhelm and it's main gate just looks too pristine. Like it's brand new, or freshly renovated. Little wear or tear.
I guess keeping your walls and main gate in shape is not a crime. Some would even say that it's the duty of a ruler.
But it's worth noting that the city also has these.

Commemorative plaques for ancient kings, nordic cultural heritage that's left to rot, 0 renovation done to make sure they remain readable.

There's also Whiterun, with it's super worn down walls. Although that might says a lot more about Whiterun than it does about Windhelm. Still, how come Whiterun is falling apart in a much milder environment, while Windhelm has walls that look like they were freshly chiseled to a 90°angle.


Hmmm, like look at those walls next to the gate.

See how small, even and regular those stone bricks are? Really doesn't look like something that was built in the same era or by the same people as Skuldafn, Bromjunaar or Saarthal.

Then again, the Palace of Kings also has some nice, even stone brick walls, so, shrug?!

Another thing is the depiction of Kyne; while it is indeed a recurring motif in nordic architecture, the way she's depicted in Windhelm is completely unique, afaik. Same goes for decorative draconic pillars. Not seen anywhere else.

Now, does any of this mean anything, or was it just Bethesda playing fast 'n loose with architectural styles, going with rule-of-cool, instead of making sure Windhelm's architecture matches it's purported age?

Or maybe Windhelm was just a one-in-a-million building, that they never managed to replicate ever again.

I cannot say for certain, but I def think that Windhelm's immaculate walls are pretty sus.

((My pessimist side says it was just Bethesda being negligent, tbh))

ZoS was clearly in-touch with Bethesda main during development and cared enough to follow their blueprint for the province, as clearly shown by the fact that Eastmarch and the Rift are otherwise fairly accurate. Hell, even the city's general layout is the same.
Ancient nordic architecture was part of the base game, so they could have definitely used it for Windhelm if they wanted to.
And pretty sure that Bethesda main had veto power, allowing them to force ZoS to comply with their vision AND lend them their models, should ZoS require them.

+ZoS did go out of their way to create completely unique, one-off buildings, like the Tribunal temple.

In the end, I just don't really think that Windhelm's depiction is the biggest sin of ESO's launch.

That could be it's location.

NettleCarrier

The solution can be quite simple too without any major overhauls - just give zones purposeful loot that makes people want to spend time there. I don't enjoy Vvardenfell that much, but I spend a lot of time there because of the rather unique loot tables - and the idea that I can maybe hit a jackpot item. I can't do that with Gold Coast, heck - you can't even find Ayleid patterns there despite the area being filled with Ayleid architecture.

everseeing_njpreub18_ESO

Updating just to do it wont help much, if there's no reason to return to a zone, altering shrine locations, etc. wont really help.

Its been said before and i agree, maybe some future DLC's could be placed throughout the world we currently have instead of a new zone, changing areas, filling those more empty places, etc. Give us a "reason" to go back to those zones, and that's when fixing them up would make a difference.

shadyjane62

Yes because that's where I spend my time. Didn't like Western Skyrim or B;lackwood and didn't buy HI or Necrom.

Narvuntien

New content pays the bills.