Why you should all support accessibility

Mekie

Some players complain about the flashy nature of Arcanist abilities, while others mention experiencing motion sickness due to the whirling balls. These players are calling for changes. However, there are many players, myself included, who have no issues with Arcanist. I personally enjoy the green theme and the skills, and I don't see any problems with the class. So why should Zenimax make these changes?

Some players are unable to use two bars, and as a result, many requesting a nerf in HA. This raises the question of balance.
How can Zenimax balance a game where the majority of players only prioritize their own desires and not the overall gameplay experience?

You don't like Arcanist skills? Go play with any other class. I also paid for DK and Necro, but I don't use them either. I have to play with the only class available to me, which is Sorcerer.

When players engage in gatekeeping for Hard Mode content by blocking others who use HA build, they are not considering accessibility. And now, players want to discuss accessibility by changing skill colors?!

But these changes can happen, yes, if the same top-tier players ask for them!

edit: Sorry for Double post

PrincessOfThieves

Mekie wrote: »

Accessibility will never work in this game. Why?
There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If players can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!
ESO Accessibility = RIP

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.
If you're too proud to play on normal, it's not an accessibility problem.

Also, HA players are pugging the new trial since the first day. So it's still an OP build, nothing had changed.

Mekie

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

Mekie wrote: »

Accessibility will never work in this game. Why?
There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If players can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!
ESO Accessibility = RIP

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.
If you're too proud to play on normal, it's not an accessibility problem.

Also, HA players are pugging the new trial since the first day. So it's still an OP build, nothing had changed.

And this is exactly what I'm talking about. Most players don't care at all about accessibility.


Believe it or not, there are 6 other classes people can use to avoid Arcanist. And if you find a group with someone using that class, move out and queue again or create your own group to support and connect with Arcanist players. The same applies to any other content. So, what's the problem with accessibility ?

Liguar

Mekie wrote: »

You don't like Arcanist skills? Go play with any other class. I also paid for DK and Necro, but I don't use them either. I have to play with the only class available to me, which is Sorcerer.

I also paid for the game, but I effectively can't play it at present. Even if I don't play the class myself, other people's arcanist effects are forced on me.

I don't think anyone actually wants to take the class away from people that enjoy playing it, they want a personal toggle to not see the effects, as a basic functionality. It wouldn't affect the arcanist player in the slightest.

PrincessOfThieves

Mekie wrote: »

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

Mekie wrote: »

Accessibility will never work in this game. Why?
There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If players can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!
ESO Accessibility = RIP

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.
If you're too proud to play on normal, it's not an accessibility problem.

Also, HA players are pugging the new trial since the first day. So it's still an OP build, nothing had changed.

Believe it or not, there are 6 other classes people can use to avoid Arcanist. And if you find a group with someone using that class, move out and queue again or create your own group to support and connect with Arcanist players. The same applies to any other content. So, what's the problem with accessibility ?

People cannot avoid the arcanist effects because it's a multiplayer game. Even if you don't have an arcanist, you will still see a lot of them and for some people it's a legitimate health hazard. However, if ZOS implements a toggle for flashing lights, the problem will be solved without affecting those who enjoy their flashy magicks.

You cannot really do the same when it comes to overpowered builds. Having OP builds in a multiplayer game is always harmful, and the fact that this particular build is easy to play and therefore more common than the OP builds of the past doesn't mean that it shouldn't be toned down. On the contrary, the midgame community is much bigger than the endgame community which means that this balancing problem affects more people.

Mekie

Liguar wrote: »

I also paid for the game, but I effectively can't play it at present. Even if I don't play the class myself, other people's arcanist effects are forced on me.

I don't think anyone actually wants to take the class away from people that enjoy playing it, they want a toggle to not see the effects, as a basic functionality.

Yes, you can!

• Play with other classes.
• Play with friends or pick-up PUGs who don't use the Arcanist class.
• Create your own group.

You can't talk about accessibility when you say:

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.

[snip]
[edited for baiting]

Liguar

Respectfully disagree on the first part, but that second quote is not mine.

ZOS_Icy

Greetings,

We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.

Thank you for your understanding.

thorwyn

There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If we can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!

What kind of argument is this?
There is ONE encounter in the entire game that can not be played with oakensoul. One. That's it. In any other trial and fight, you can wear your clone warrior equipment and nuke away.
Just because oakensoul is the best in slot for HA builds does not mean that everyone is obliged to wear it. Just replace it with something else for that one encounter and you will be fine. That much flexibility should be expected from people who are trying veteran content. Serious 2 bar players are constantly adjusting their gear from encounter to encounter.

Heartrage

I’m for accessibility, and I agree with most of what you wrote. However, it’s not true that making accessibility-oriented choices are always good for everyone. Simplifying gameplay means that people who like complexity have a lesser experience. Making an easy quicker path to a reward means that taking the harder longer path is a dumb decision. Of course, it’s possible that more people would come and enjoy the more accessible game. However, the more hardcore players should also be able to enjoy the kind of games that can’t be accessible.

markulrich1966

game was accessable for me 3 years ago.

I mained sorcerers.
Used crystal blast as spammable (strong AOE, instant cast) and
heavy staff attacks without being forced to level up scrying and getting leads for Oakensoul and grinding dungeons for sergeants mail. Using easy to access sets, Mothers Sorrow and Torugs Pact.

The changes afterwards (removal of crystal blast, reducing HA damage by 50%, now requiring Oakensoul to gain back the former damage) made it LESS accessable for me.

I am not disabled, I'm simply old (57), so can't keep up with a dynamic gameplay like light attack weaving.
As a result, I simply skip lots of content, vet dungeons, trials, meanwhile also soloing some DLC worldboss dailies I did in the past. As a result, I stopped spending money for the game, cancelled eso+, skip chapter like Necrom, don't buy goodies like houses any longer.
As an old player, I could spend a lot of money, and did it in the past, I think I payed more than 1000 Euro.
This is actually why reducing accessability means a loss for companies - those who have the time and money to help to keep the game alive resignate and stop their support.

Ragnarok0130

Mekie wrote: »

When players engage in gatekeeping for Hard Mode content by blocking others who use HA build, they are not considering accessibility. And now, players want to discuss accessibility by changing skill colors?!

But these changes can happen, yes, if the same top-tier players ask for them!

Players don't gatekeep HM content, trial leads create specific requirements for their runs in order to give the group the best chance of clearing veteran or veteran HM content because the time of 11 people shouldn't be wasted because 1 or more people weren't capable enough in their role to pull their own weight in the specified veteran or hard mode content and are being carried. Everyone is harping about the ill defined bogeyman of "accessibility" yet nobody is telling players that if they want to participate in the hardest (and optional) content in the game the onus is on them to practice their role, research their class/role as well as read up or watch videos on the content they want to do so, and farm and improve gear to meet the raid lead's requirements and perform well. If you're not in an established HM progression group it's unlikely that anyone - HA player or 2 bar player - will be randomly picked up for a HM run in Craglorn or even in a guild run until you have a clear to link so once again the onus is on the player to network, find a guild and progression group that they like and that wants them to be part of the team to get the clear before you can volunteer and be accepted for a HM run. The jump in difficulty between veteran and veteran hard mode is about the same jump in difficulty between normal and veteran so just because you cleared the veteran version of the trial doesn't mean you're ready for the hard mode.

Regarding the part of your statement specifically about HA builds, the part very few actually speak aloud regarding HA builds that is making more and more raid leads leave them out of rosters is that by and large unless these HA players were already raiding on a two bar build pre-Oakensoul release they likely don't have a team-centric raider mindset of doing homework, self improvement, and adapting to the trial and raid lead's requirements including gearing changes. Basic raiding courtesy like showing up if you signed up for a run and being on time seems to have a higher incidence of being disregarded among the influx of new Oaken players as well in my observations. Many of the previously non-raiding HA builds in trials nowadays have a very solo play centric mindset as if a raid team is 12 separate players at an overland world boss instead of a cohesive team running for a purpose and more than a few raid leads that I know are beginning to be fed up with people not playing as a team when they were previously neutral or even supportive of Oakensoul for its accessibility when it debuted.

One reason for this in my opinion is that before Oakensoul drastically raised the floor there was a progression for getting into veteran trial content that made someone slowly improve. You figured out which role you wanted, you looked up builds, you run normal dungeons to farm your gear, you ran veteran dungeons to get your monster sets, you found a guild preferably with mentors for your role, if DPS you practiced parsing until you met the trial DPS standards, did normal trials to get your base line trial gear and get feedback on your performance, you parsed some more, then you started vet and later vet HM content all while practicing and improving. Now people are going from overland to vet trials and they no longer have that progression of experience, gaining of PVE group content knowledge such as blocking, LoSing, roll dodging, and acclimatization to raiding culture and etiquette and we're seeing discord as a result. I am pro-oakensoul but Oakensoul needs to be a gateway to further progression and better builds instead of a first and last stop on the trial train.

If one feels one is being "gatekept" there's always the option of forming one's own raid group or guild with as many or few requirements to raid as one wishes. One observation I've noticed with these groups is that eventually they start clearing content and inevitably want to clear harder content and suddenly begin having requirements similar to the groups they previously accused of "gatekeeping".

etchedpixels

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

People cannot avoid the arcanist effects because it's a multiplayer game.

No. This is exactly the problem I have with how this has come up to marr what is otherwise one of the best DLC's they've done in a long time.

The problem is not "because it's a multiplayer game". The problem is that Zenimax failed to realize it would be a problem in the first place (unsurprising given they keep failing to consider visual issues or fix old ones) and this points to a lack of awareness and training. A properly aware design team would have been looking at the Arcanist design and going "We'll need a way to deal with this". The second problem is that Zenimax then failed to act on large numbers of reports of people who were finding it unpleasant or no longer playable during the PTS.

This is the kind of stuff that shouldn't be happening. It's not like the really complex and difficult debate around accessibility , veteran mode and competitive scoreboarding - a debate that's just as complex and difficult in physical sport. It's the kind of bread and butter basic stuff that shouldn't be happening in the first place. It's at the "Gee we forgot about wheelchair ramps" level of accessible design.

So no it's not "because it's a multi-player game", it's because, for whatever reason, people made bad design mistakes and then didn't fix them when they were made obvious.

Braffin

markulrich1966 wrote: »

game was accessable for me 3 years ago.

I mained sorcerers.
Used crystal blast as spammable (strong AOE, instant cast) and
heavy staff attacks without being forced to level up scrying and getting leads for Oakensoul and grinding dungeons for sergeants mail. Using easy to access sets, Mothers Sorrow and Torugs Pact.

The changes afterwards (removal of crystal blast, reducing HA damage by 50%, now requiring Oakensoul to gain back the former damage) made it LESS accessable for me.

I am not disabled, I'm simply old (57), so can't keep up with a dynamic gameplay like light attack weaving.
As a result, I simply skip lots of content, vet dungeons, trials, meanwhile also soloing some DLC worldboss dailies I did in the past. As a result, I stopped spending money for the game, cancelled eso+, skip chapter like Necrom, don't buy goodies like houses any longer.
As an old player, I could spend a lot of money, and did it in the past, I think I payed more than 1000 Euro.
This is actually why reducing accessability means a loss for companies - those who have the time and money to help to keep the game alive resignate and stop their support.

I think you make an important, but mostly not discussed, point here:

The current iteration of easier builds rely almost completely on oakensoul mythic, which can only be obtained by purchasing specific content (or activating eso+ since necrom release). I don't think that's fitting for builds, which are implemented to increase accessibility. There should always be viable options to reach this goal without paying for it.

I want to note, that I'm not talking about the current monetization model in general here, but only about accessibility options. The last thing I wanna see is, that some players, which are already struggling with this game due to disabilities or age, are "gatekept" from content only because they cannot afford the existing solution.

jaws343

Braffin wrote: »

markulrich1966 wrote: »

game was accessable for me 3 years ago.

I mained sorcerers.
Used crystal blast as spammable (strong AOE, instant cast) and
heavy staff attacks without being forced to level up scrying and getting leads for Oakensoul and grinding dungeons for sergeants mail. Using easy to access sets, Mothers Sorrow and Torugs Pact.

The changes afterwards (removal of crystal blast, reducing HA damage by 50%, now requiring Oakensoul to gain back the former damage) made it LESS accessable for me.

I am not disabled, I'm simply old (57), so can't keep up with a dynamic gameplay like light attack weaving.
As a result, I simply skip lots of content, vet dungeons, trials, meanwhile also soloing some DLC worldboss dailies I did in the past. As a result, I stopped spending money for the game, cancelled eso+, skip chapter like Necrom, don't buy goodies like houses any longer.
As an old player, I could spend a lot of money, and did it in the past, I think I payed more than 1000 Euro.
This is actually why reducing accessability means a loss for companies - those who have the time and money to help to keep the game alive resignate and stop their support.

I think you make an important, but mostly not discussed, point here:

The current iteration of easier builds rely almost completely on oakensoul mythic, which can only be obtained by purchasing specific content (or activating eso+ since necrom release). I don't think that's fitting for builds, which are implemented to increase accessibility. There should always be viable options to reach this goal without paying for it.

I want to note, that I'm not talking about the current monetization model in general here, but only about accessibility options. The last thing I wanna see is, that some players, which are already struggling with this game due to disabilities or age, are "gatekept" from content only because they cannot afford the existing solution.

The problem is, too many players are conflating accessibility meanings.

Oakensoul is not an accessibility item for lesser abled player. It is not, and it has never been that.

IT IS an accessibility option for lesser skilled players.

The intent with heavy attack focus, as well as the intent with the changes to the game last year, was to raise the skill floor, and subsequently lower the skill entrance for content. Making that content more approachable for players.

It was never intended for players with actual physical ailments. Game balance should NEVER take that into account, because that is not a reasonable factor when it comes to game and mechanics difficulty. Is there overlap, absolutely there is. But the accessibility that ZOS speaks to when they implement sets and balance changes are solely focused on the skill gap, not on physical accessibility.

markulrich1966

Braffin wrote: »

markulrich1966 wrote: »

game was accessable for me 3 years ago.

I mained sorcerers.
Used crystal blast as spammable (strong AOE, instant cast) and
heavy staff attacks without being forced to level up scrying and getting leads for Oakensoul and grinding dungeons for sergeants mail. Using easy to access sets, Mothers Sorrow and Torugs Pact.

The changes afterwards (removal of crystal blast, reducing HA damage by 50%, now requiring Oakensoul to gain back the former damage) made it LESS accessable for me.

I am not disabled, I'm simply old (57), so can't keep up with a dynamic gameplay like light attack weaving.
As a result, I simply skip lots of content, vet dungeons, trials, meanwhile also soloing some DLC worldboss dailies I did in the past. As a result, I stopped spending money for the game, cancelled eso+, skip chapter like Necrom, don't buy goodies like houses any longer.
As an old player, I could spend a lot of money, and did it in the past, I think I payed more than 1000 Euro.
This is actually why reducing accessability means a loss for companies - those who have the time and money to help to keep the game alive resignate and stop their support.

I think you make an important, but mostly not discussed, point here:

The current iteration of easier builds rely almost completely on oakensoul mythic, which can only be obtained by purchasing specific content (or activating eso+ since necrom release). I don't think that's fitting for builds, which are implemented to increase accessibility. There should always be viable options to reach this goal without paying for it.

I want to note, that I'm not talking about the current monetization model in general here, but only about accessibility options. The last thing I wanna see is, that some players, which are already struggling with this game due to disabilities or age, are "gatekept" from content only because they cannot afford the existing solution.

yes, was important for me to point this out.

I now play HA builds without oakensoul, like Mag-DK with sergeants Mail and New Moon Accolyte. They hit pretty hard, and give me an idea of how much stronger they woud hit with the additional buffs from Oakensoul.
Hits harder than my former setup 3 years ago.

BUT:
1.) I don't need THAT much damage, as I skip trials anyway, not my piece of cake
2.) The grind to get these HA attacks working again as before (even if they hit harder now) is a grind, and definately not suited to make the game MORE accessable. It is LESS accessable this way
3.) without this access, you are kept out of lots of content. With the old, easy access setup my best result was doing vet cities of Ash II together with one other player. Not easy, but doable. So I was able to participate in vet dungeons to get monster helmets, something where you will fail after HA was nerfed by 50% and strong skills removed (crystal blast) or nerfed (jabs)

People tend to say, the game got more accessable by Oakensoul, but it only made some very difficult accessible at a high cost.
The "mid difficult" content became LESS accessable meanwhile as I pointed out.

Braffin

jaws343 wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

markulrich1966 wrote: »

game was accessable for me 3 years ago.

I mained sorcerers.
Used crystal blast as spammable (strong AOE, instant cast) and
heavy staff attacks without being forced to level up scrying and getting leads for Oakensoul and grinding dungeons for sergeants mail. Using easy to access sets, Mothers Sorrow and Torugs Pact.

The changes afterwards (removal of crystal blast, reducing HA damage by 50%, now requiring Oakensoul to gain back the former damage) made it LESS accessable for me.

I am not disabled, I'm simply old (57), so can't keep up with a dynamic gameplay like light attack weaving.
As a result, I simply skip lots of content, vet dungeons, trials, meanwhile also soloing some DLC worldboss dailies I did in the past. As a result, I stopped spending money for the game, cancelled eso+, skip chapter like Necrom, don't buy goodies like houses any longer.
As an old player, I could spend a lot of money, and did it in the past, I think I payed more than 1000 Euro.
This is actually why reducing accessability means a loss for companies - those who have the time and money to help to keep the game alive resignate and stop their support.

I think you make an important, but mostly not discussed, point here:

The current iteration of easier builds rely almost completely on oakensoul mythic, which can only be obtained by purchasing specific content (or activating eso+ since necrom release). I don't think that's fitting for builds, which are implemented to increase accessibility. There should always be viable options to reach this goal without paying for it.

I want to note, that I'm not talking about the current monetization model in general here, but only about accessibility options. The last thing I wanna see is, that some players, which are already struggling with this game due to disabilities or age, are "gatekept" from content only because they cannot afford the existing solution.

The problem is, too many players are conflating accessibility meanings.

Oakensoul is not an accessibility item for lesser abled player. It is not, and it has never been that.

IT IS an accessibility option for lesser skilled players.

The intent with heavy attack focus, as well as the intent with the changes to the game last year, was to raise the skill floor, and subsequently lower the skill entrance for content. Making that content more approachable for players.

It was never intended for players with actual physical ailments. Game balance should NEVER take that into account, because that is not a reasonable factor when it comes to game and mechanics difficulty. Is there overlap, absolutely there is. But the accessibility that ZOS speaks to when they implement sets and balance changes are solely focused on the skill gap, not on physical accessibility.

Couldn't said it better. Exactly that's the problem here.

While I support any actions to make the game more accessible for the first group, it's also important to point out, that devaluation of content to make it more accessible for lesser skilled players is in the end unhealthy for the game itself. The new trial is already farming content, cooperative playstyles (which is raiding all about) are already drying out.

A better way to achieve a solution would be to grant cosmetic rewards regardless of difficulty level, so nobody is forced to do content one isn't comfortable with to get the desired rewards.

Amottica

Dreaders123 wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Zenimax has created a great design for accessibility.

Amottica wrote: »

The design is well-rounded.

yet...

etchedpixels wrote: »

The reticule doesn't resize, either in game anywhere I can find or follow the Windows accessibility settings. That's incredibly basic stuff. Likewise whilst there is now some screen reading there's still none for quest options, which prevents people like my stepdaughter with severe dyslexia even playing.

We have to stop thinking in terms of hot topics that cause disagreement with other players. Accessibility as a fundamental part of design benefits everyone.

Yet the rest of my comment from the post you quoted spelled out how Zenimax has created simpler builds and simpler group content for those who do face challenges. That has led to a great design for accessibility and editing it out makes my post seem a little disingenuous. However, that does not mean it is perfect and never implied it was.

Twig_Garlicshine

Did not plan on posting in forums again, however:

Add my name, and 5 others from guilds, to the list of people who cannot play due to motion sickness/migraines from - their own arcanists and -> other people's arcanists.
I tried to pvp post necrom drop, nope 5 minutes around other people's arcanists gave me a migraine, it'll be another few days before it goes away, thanks.
The slider for other's spells/effects has zero effect, and it gimps me in pvp.
It also would do nothing if I decided to buy Necrom and make myself an arcanist.
The sole extent of my play has been reduced to do a few craft dailies, and log out.
A shame to see a game's population decrease due to Zos ignoring PTS posts, and doubling down on design choices that cause motion sickness, migraines, and possibly epilepsy problems.

I_killed_Vivec

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

Mekie wrote: »

Accessibility will never work in this game. Why?
There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If players can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!
ESO Accessibility = RIP

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.
If you're too proud to play on normal, it's not an accessibility problem.

Also, HA players are pugging the new trial since the first day. So it's still an OP build, nothing had changed.

I have many mixed emotions about this.

To declare self-interest: I've been playing since beta; I can solo dungeons on normal; I can complete most WBs solo; I've soloed Craglorn, except from Shada's Tear (I know I can do it, but it's such a grind to get to Shada I can't be bothered trying that often); I've killed a few in PvP

I should also say that I'm old, clumsy, and have arthritis in my wrists/hands (but not hips, coz they are now titanium!). I cannot direct my char with WASD, I use a mouse button for go/stop and simply move in the direction I'm facing. This (and my predisposition) has caused me to adopt an "in your face" fighting style... supposedly supported with my choice of StamDK as my main...

I accept my "accessibility" issues, indeed I challenge them... when I get time I will complete the vet dungeons, inspired by Clumsy Guy:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/519975/group-dungeons-solo-by-a-clumsy-guy

But now I see people saying they can do all the vet dungeons "solo". All the WBs "solo". Dragons "solo".

It turns out that they aren't solo, they are using companions. Now I've been told that using companions is no bonus because they are more trouble than they are worth. Others admit they can now do content with a companion that they couldn't without...

Further inspection shows that they are HA Oakensorc pet bulids.

I hear people say that they can use the HA build because it's less stress on their hands. In common with many other arthritic/carpal syndrome suffers I find tapping much less stressful than holding down a button... but each to their own.

And yet I marvel (and yes, I am envious) at what these people can now achieve, and I do not seek to belittle their achievements, but I know I will never match them.

Now I know that it is my choice to not use a companion and not use the HA Oakensorc pet build, but is "accessibility" to be restricted to those that do?

Though ultimately, what's wrong with being, as my children keep telling me, "a rubbish gamer", and being happy with completing content at normal?

With the occasional foray into vet;)

Dreaders123

In a rare display of solidarity with social media I wish I could heart this post

jaws343

I_killed_Vivec wrote: »

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

Mekie wrote: »

Accessibility will never work in this game. Why?
There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If players can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!
ESO Accessibility = RIP

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.
If you're too proud to play on normal, it's not an accessibility problem.

Also, HA players are pugging the new trial since the first day. So it's still an OP build, nothing had changed.

I have many mixed emotions about this.

To declare self-interest: I've been playing since beta; I can solo dungeons on normal; I can complete most WBs solo; I've soloed Craglorn, except from Shada's Tear (I know I can do it, but it's such a grind to get to Shada I can't be bothered trying that often); I've killed a few in PvP

I should also say that I'm old, clumsy, and have arthritis in my wrists/hands (but not hips, coz they are now titanium!). I cannot direct my char with WASD, I use a mouse button for go/stop and simply move in the direction I'm facing. This (and my predisposition) has caused me to adopt an "in your face" fighting style... supposedly supported with my choice of StamDK as my main...

I accept my "accessibility" issues, indeed I challenge them... when I get time I will complete the vet dungeons, inspired by Clumsy Guy:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/519975/group-dungeons-solo-by-a-clumsy-guy

But now I see people saying they can do all the vet dungeons "solo". All the WBs "solo". Dragons "solo".

It turns out that they aren't solo, they are using companions. Now I've been told that using companions is no bonus because they are more trouble than they are worth. Others admit they can now do content with a companion that they couldn't without...

Further inspection shows that they are HA Oakensorc pet bulids.

I hear people say that they can use the HA build because it's less stress on their hands. In common with many other arthritic/carpal syndrome suffers I find tapping much less stressful than holding down a button... but each to their own.

And yet I marvel (and yes, I am envious) at what these people can now achieve, and I do not seek to belittle their achievements, but I know I will never match them.

Now I know that it is my choice to not use a companion and not use the HA Oakensorc pet build, but is "accessibility" to be restricted to those that do?

Though ultimately, what's wrong with being, as my children keep telling me, "a rubbish gamer", and being happy with completing content at normal?

With the occasional foray into vet;)

I can solo and I can "solo" the same content with a companion. Trust me, my lousy <10K DPS companion who is dying to most encounters isn't making any difference in vet dungeons or world boss fights. If anything, the only benefit is their ability to provide interrupts for some "unsoloable" mechanics.

Dreaders123

[quote="

Though ultimately, what's wrong with being, as my children keep telling me, "a rubbish gamer", and being happy with completing content at normal?

With the occasional foray into vet;)[/quote]

Absolutely nothing

You can be whoever you want to be.

Or, at least, that's the aim.

I_killed_Vivec

Dreaders123 wrote:

Absolutely nothing

You can be whoever you want to be.

Or, at least, that's the aim.

No. I cannot be what I want to be, that's the point.

I have to accept that some people can do what I can't, no matter how much I might wish it otherwise. And to be honest that's the way it should be.

The point is, that's OK. I have my own goals, my own achievements, and most of all my own enjoyment. Not for the first time I quote James Brown "The way I like it, it is the way it is, I got mine n don't worry 'bout his"

markulrich1966

jaws343 wrote: »

I_killed_Vivec wrote: »

PrincessOfThieves wrote: »

Mekie wrote: »

Accessibility will never work in this game. Why?
There's nothing better than HA for those with accessibility needs, and we all know what happens with these players.
If players can't accept the easiest accessibility option we have (HA), and if even ZoS keeps these HA players out of trials like vCR... What do you really expect from ZoS?!
ESO Accessibility = RIP

Believe it or not, but there is a game mode where any kind of build works. It's called normal difficulty. And it is made specifically for people with accessibility needs and more casual players.
If you're too proud to play on normal, it's not an accessibility problem.

Also, HA players are pugging the new trial since the first day. So it's still an OP build, nothing had changed.

I have many mixed emotions about this.

To declare self-interest: I've been playing since beta; I can solo dungeons on normal; I can complete most WBs solo; I've soloed Craglorn, except from Shada's Tear (I know I can do it, but it's such a grind to get to Shada I can't be bothered trying that often); I've killed a few in PvP

I should also say that I'm old, clumsy, and have arthritis in my wrists/hands (but not hips, coz they are now titanium!). I cannot direct my char with WASD, I use a mouse button for go/stop and simply move in the direction I'm facing. This (and my predisposition) has caused me to adopt an "in your face" fighting style... supposedly supported with my choice of StamDK as my main...

I accept my "accessibility" issues, indeed I challenge them... when I get time I will complete the vet dungeons, inspired by Clumsy Guy:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/519975/group-dungeons-solo-by-a-clumsy-guy

But now I see people saying they can do all the vet dungeons "solo". All the WBs "solo". Dragons "solo".

It turns out that they aren't solo, they are using companions. Now I've been told that using companions is no bonus because they are more trouble than they are worth. Others admit they can now do content with a companion that they couldn't without...

Further inspection shows that they are HA Oakensorc pet bulids.

I hear people say that they can use the HA build because it's less stress on their hands. In common with many other arthritic/carpal syndrome suffers I find tapping much less stressful than holding down a button... but each to their own.

And yet I marvel (and yes, I am envious) at what these people can now achieve, and I do not seek to belittle their achievements, but I know I will never match them.

Now I know that it is my choice to not use a companion and not use the HA Oakensorc pet build, but is "accessibility" to be restricted to those that do?

Though ultimately, what's wrong with being, as my children keep telling me, "a rubbish gamer", and being happy with completing content at normal?

With the occasional foray into vet;)

I can solo and I can "solo" the same content with a companion. Trust me, my lousy <10K DPS companion who is dying to most encounters isn't making any difference in vet dungeons or world boss fights. If anything, the only benefit is their ability to provide interrupts for some "unsoloable" mechanics.

heavy armor (blue), resto staff (purple), 3 blue jewelry. 3-4 traits for faster ultimates, the rest damage reduction or increased health.
Skills all shields/heal, only 1 for damage, the one that does most of it (e.g. Ember has 1 for 20k magic damage as execute, great for bosses).
Mirri is best choice as she has a skill that heals her and makes her invisible, but works too on Ember and Isobel.

With this setup, they rarely die in worldboss fights, take some aggro, give you some shields and heal.
Mirri was able to solo the dreugh king queen in the center of stormhaven this way, took 15 minutes. I pass passive, just blocking when Mirri turned invisible. This is an easy boss, nevertheless impressive. My companions are helpfull like this for bosses in Blackwood, Summerset and Elsweyr, just doing blackwood and rarely must rez my Ember.

Ph1p

Dreaders123 wrote: »

Accessibility is largely covering two fronts. One is the specific area that people with restrictions (including disability) are able to achieve a similar result in a digital product, with a similar amount of time and effort as those without restrictions. Accessibility needs can be permanent or temporary, can be disability based, or some other factor such as age.

The second front is that Accessibility is about the user experience of a digital product for all users including those with specific accessibility needs. This is a newer interpretation with traction due to the links between focusing on accessibility and the improvements seen across a wider spectrum of measures for all users.

This is the problem with the whole debate: Accessibility is defined way beyond its original purpose of making a product usable for people who have disabilities, which is a concept I fully agree with and support. But if accessibility can be anything related to "user experience [...] for all users", then this definition becomes meaningless and unhelpful.

In fact, I think practically everybody supports accessibility features that help people with disabilities experience the game as much or close to as everyone else. I have never met anyone who objects to the ability to change AOE hues for the color-blind or to subtitles for the hearing impaired, for example. It only gets contentious, when accessibility features impact game difficulty. For single-player, a story or assist mode is great to allow people to experience the game in spite of physical or cognitive impairments. But in an MMO with competitive elements, this can quickly turn into a balancing issue.

Take the Empower and Oakensoul changes: Nobody is complaining about the player with cerebral palsy, who managed to clear their first vet trial with those builds, or someone with arthritis who can enjoy the game with less pain now. It's awesome that the floor has been lifted for them and others, allowing them to partake in more parts of the game. At the same time, it also massively benefited perfectly able players. Not being able to clear certain content (yet) because you still lack experience/skill is not a disability and doesn't deserve the same level of attention with regards to accessibility.

Now, you might argue that this is a price worth paying to help people overcome disabilities and I would mostly agree. But we also need to see the nuance between providing a wheelchair and building a ramp versus giving able-bodied people a go-kart to compete in the 100m dash. We need to discuss the line between accommodating as many people as practicable and individuals accepting that not every game element can be tailored to them. That's where the balancing comes in and that's where most of the debate is and should be. It's not about accessibility per se.

You're also not doing your argument any favors by accusing people of seeing "accessibility as the enemy", just generally being "shameful", and calling your side "liars and lazy". The words of a few loudmouths don't represent everyone on the other side of the debate and it's worthwhile to assume more positive intent. You will find that far fewer people actually oppose accessibility than you make it seem.

I_killed_Vivec

Ph1p wrote: »

Not being able to clear certain content (yet) because you still lack experience/skill is not a disability and doesn't deserve the same level of attention with regards to accessibility.

Now, you might argue that this is a price worth paying to help people overcome disabilities and I would mostly agree. But we also need to see the nuance between providing a wheelchair and building a ramp versus giving able-bodied people a go-kart to compete in the 100m dash.

Quoted to upvote the compassionate and nuanced content of the post.

Dreaders123

Ph1p wrote: »

You're also not doing your argument any favors by accusing people of seeing "accessibility as the enemy", just generally being "shameful", and calling your side "liars and lazy". The words of a few loudmouths don't represent everyone on the other side of the debate and it's worthwhile to assume more positive intent. You will find that far fewer people actually oppose accessibility than you make it seem.

I agree and I apologize for it coming across that way but this is part of the trap. Those accusations get removed (thankfully) but I was pushed on my motivations so I listed them, then it looks like I'm calling out 'everyone' when I'm not. I hope to encourage everyone and to point out that this shouldn't be a polarising issue.

I agree with the go-kart analogy but again, I'm trying to steer towards the bigger issue that's causing these symptoms. If the only options are a terrible ramp or a super go kart that's going to be a problem. Solutions don't have to bypass challenge, but they can provide different styles of challenge aside from dexterity. And this variety and level of though is what many players (not even thinking about the accessibility angle) crave.

I do though respectfully disagree with disliking the evolving definition. The benefits link the communities, and the older definitions is why it's normally an after-thought.

It's a painful thing to debate, so I'm sorry if anything appears holier-than-thou, the opposite is intended. There are attacks, personal in nature, and attempts to gas-light and shift the debate with what-about-ism and the like. I'm asked to provide definitions and motivations and they can be challenged (in good ways and bad). I'm told I don't provide any evidence, and when I do it's ignored or I'm accused of using ChatGPT. So thank you for your well articulated post - I actually very strongly feel that we are almost identical in outlook - and I suspect that the majority of the playerbase are closer in thought on this topic than anyone realises. And I guess that's what I was hoping to highlight in my clumsy way.

But I'm also trying to highlight this to ZoS - the lack of clear strategy and comms isn't great. Which is why I did a fake 'media' post, to try and highlight 'what would this look like all the time we don't have a clear strategy and answers?' If you don't set a narrative, one gets provided for you and nine times out of ten you won't like it.

jbrianj

Okay, I might get a lot of hate for this. [snip]

Making the game too easy is a big way to get the biggest audience to leave, and ZOS does not want that, and neither does anyone in a healthy MMO.

As long as HA is viable -but not the best- you are already appeasing the need for accessibility, because you can play all content just fine with it.

[edited for baiting]

LunaFlora

Ph1p wrote: »

Dreaders123 wrote: »

Accessibility is largely covering two fronts. One is the specific area that people with restrictions (including disability) are able to achieve a similar result in a digital product, with a similar amount of time and effort as those without restrictions. Accessibility needs can be permanent or temporary, can be disability based, or some other factor such as age.

The second front is that Accessibility is about the user experience of a digital product for all users including those with specific accessibility needs. This is a newer interpretation with traction due to the links between focusing on accessibility and the improvements seen across a wider spectrum of measures for all users.

This is the problem with the whole debate: Accessibility is defined way beyond its original purpose of making a product usable for people who have disabilities, which is a concept I fully agree with and support. But if accessibility can be anything related to "user experience [...] for all users", then this definition becomes meaningless and unhelpful.

In fact, I think practically everybody supports accessibility features that help people with disabilities experience the game as much or close to as everyone else. I have never met anyone who objects to the ability to change AOE hues for the color-blind or to subtitles for the hearing impaired, for example. It only gets contentious, when accessibility features impact game difficulty. For single-player, a story or assist mode is great to allow people to experience the game in spite of physical or cognitive impairments. But in an MMO with competitive elements, this can quickly turn into a balancing issue.

Take the Empower and Oakensoul changes: Nobody is complaining about the player with cerebral palsy, who managed to clear their first vet trial with those builds, or someone with arthritis who can enjoy the game with less pain now. It's awesome that the floor has been lifted for them and others, allowing them to partake in more parts of the game. At the same time, it also massively benefited perfectly able players. Not being able to clear certain content (yet) because you still lack experience/skill is not a disability and doesn't deserve the same level of attention with regards to accessibility.

Now, you might argue that this is a price worth paying to help people overcome disabilities and I would mostly agree. But we also need to see the nuance between providing a wheelchair and building a ramp versus giving able-bodied people a go-kart to compete in the 100m dash. We need to discuss the line between accommodating as many people as practicable and individuals accepting that not every game element can be tailored to them. That's where the balancing comes in and that's where most of the debate is and should be. It's not about accessibility per se.

You're also not doing your argument any favors by accusing people of seeing "accessibility as the enemy", just generally being "shameful", and calling your side "liars and lazy". The words of a few loudmouths don't represent everyone on the other side of the debate and it's worthwhile to assume more positive intent. You will find that far fewer people actually oppose accessibility than you make it seem.

many people do oppose accessibility.
a few loudmouths? i guess if a few means hundreds of people sure. or thousands.
but a few is like thirty which is not the case sadly.
as many abled people don't care about accessibility even though they can also benefit from it.
many abled people do call disabled people liars and lazy and many is not like 30 people.

positive intent is hard to "see" when people oppose accessibility because being on as you say the other side of the debate is opposition. if the debate is about accessibility then one side supports it and the other does not. it is pretty simple.

if abled people use oakensoul and heavy attacks, good for them. they're allowed to.
being angry about empower and oakensoul because of abled people using it doesn't help us. there's nothing wrong with them using it.

oakensoul isn't in limited supply, abled people using it doesn't take anything away from disabled people. if it helps anyone do more and have more fun in the game there's no need to be against it.

everyone is allowed to use accessibility options in videogames and should if they want to. an abled person isn't cheating by using aim assist or subtitles.

a go kart in a 100m dash? elder scrolls isn't a sport. that is pretty strange to add.

take the ramp that's in front of a building's entrance, anyone can use it. you don't need a wheelchair to use a ramp.
it doesn't give you an advantage over people using the stairs.

support more accessibility and stop believing that being against something that helps disabled people is okay just because abled people also use it.