Studio Director’s Letter: 2025 & Beyond

BasP

Syldras wrote: »

BasP wrote: »

Besides, I believe that some of the latest "bite sized content" we got - Zerith-Var's questline for example - was received pretty well. I believe some even called that ESO's best story in years (which I can't remember reading about any of the main quests in recent Chapters).

It was well-written and I enjoyed it. But only 4 of such storylines for a whole year (if they include one per season) would be very little. I hope it will be more than that.

Oh, I definitely agree with that. If the only new quest content in a year will be four storylines of that length I'll most likely retract my statement and start asking for a Chapter again. But I'm cautiously optimistic for the time being (and the fact that I'm interested in most other things that were mentioned in the letter helps too, I suppose).

Ingenon

Aldoss wrote: »

It seems like you identified a problem, outlined a cause, but then miss the obvious solution...

Why invest months (years?) of dev time on creating new skills when they could just institute something they had already done for 1 week in the past?

It solved the problems during that week. It can do it again.

The_Meathead wrote: »

Then start by setting very hard limits on Cross-healing and -shielding to diminish the amount of calculations a Ball Group is placing on a small area.

The only time I experience any let alone problematic lag in Cyrodiil personally is when a Ball Group is present, and I've seen the same voiced often enough that I know I'm not alone. It seems TREMENDOUSLY likely that the stacked cluster of 12 people on a single pixel of land hurling 12 Vigors, 12 shields, 12 etc on top of each other non-stop is the source of calculations troubling the server.

Chop those down to a single one of each type on each player at a time and see if that reduces strain.

OK.

ZOS is saying "We need to seriously address Cyrodiil performance. Our (ambitious) goal is to return it to the concurrency levels we supported in 2014. So, we will be experimenting with a Cyrodiil campaign where all classes will have PvP-specific (and more performant) skills that replace the standard player skills with the expectation that we can support more players per campaign"

I am saying that I agree with ZOS saying there needs to be PvP specific skills. I do not get to decide if they achieve these PvP specific skills by replacing the standard player skills, or if they use Battle Spirit to change how existing standard player skills work in Cyrodiil. That choice/decision will be made by ESO developers, not by me.

Soarora

Lugaldu wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I will never understand why anyone would want trash mobs in overland to be more difficult. How is it rewarding to spend 2 minutes on one wolf when you are trying to reach your quest objective, or harvest some mats for crafting? And the story bosses have already gotten so difficult starting with High Isle that many players can no longer defeat them and complete the story.

What baffles me the most is that difficult overland almost killed this game. No one was doing the veteran zones or Craglorn. But a handful of players, most of which haven't even played in years, said they'd come back if overland was made more difficult again. Even though many of us that have been actively playing and subscribed asked to please leave it as it is. But for some reason they are going back to what didn't work before.

The one thing I will say is, there's been a lot of power creep since Craglorn was released. They could increase the difficulty of overland without impacting players ability to clear the content.

Power creep hasn't affected players new to ESO. Or casual players that have no interest in end game. Or players that have physical limitations. These are the players whose game revolves around overland and if that is taken from them what is left? And there are way more of these than end game players.

Besides the fact that not every single content in the game is going to appeal to all play styles. Players should participate in the parts that meet their desires and not take away the parts that don't from those that rely on it.

There are definitely ways to accomplish both without leaning too far to one side or the other. Whether that's how this directive will be accomplished remains to be seen.

A player can be both an endgame content player that ALSO enjoys questing so let's not use the narrative that each player can only fit in a single box. I certainly don't want a single overland wolf to be a bullet sponge. But I would like to quest where I actually have to engage in the content instead of just lighting attack or tossing down a couple AOEs. The newer content that is "invulnerability phases with trash mobs" <> engaging mechanics for story/quest content.

I one shot everything I come across in overland. That's not a skill thing, I run around in zen alkosh most of the time so it's not proc sets either. A quest boss is dead before I complete half a rotation. That's not skill either. That's just overland being laughable.

Also macabre vintage is available to everyone who either has gold road or has gold. It trivializes overland content.

This isn't directed at you, but reactions like this show that some players don't realize that there are also many ESO players who play the game to relax and who just don't want to spend two minutes fighting a wolf because they can't kill everything with one shot. These are perhaps people who already have enough stress in real life and are just looking for peace in the game - yes, maybe just running around picking flowers - and don't care about any sets, builds, etc. Especially if you have to search the Internet first to optimally equip and build your character. Maybe it's a generational thing, I don't know, but I'd like to keep the option of just running around comfortably and only being challenged in fights when I feel like it and then specifically going to the corresponding areas.

I was running around last night in white training heavy armor, don't think I had a mundus, oakensoul, DSA 2h (golded), attributes and CP in correctly, barely any passives (just race and 2h passives), and I still was killing overland enemies very quickly. The only ones that put up a fight were bigger enemies and even then it wasn't very interesting.

I don't think it should just be a difficulty toggle unless there's increased rewards for toggling it on (ex. higher gold drops, mat drops, etc). Maybe zones that are set up more difficult. Someone around here suggested treating zones like base game dungeons and having a 2nd version that takes place in a later time, I think that could be an option.

heaven13

KingNutella wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I will never understand why anyone would want trash mobs in overland to be more difficult. How is it rewarding to spend 2 minutes on one wolf when you are trying to reach your quest objective, or harvest some mats for crafting? And the story bosses have already gotten so difficult starting with High Isle that many players can no longer defeat them and complete the story.

What baffles me the most is that difficult overland almost killed this game. No one was doing the veteran zones or Craglorn. But a handful of players, most of which haven't even played in years, said they'd come back if overland was made more difficult again. Even though many of us that have been actively playing and subscribed asked to please leave it as it is. But for some reason they are going back to what didn't work before.

To answer your question, as someone who has wanted harder overland for years, I don't think all NPCs need to be "challenging to fight". That is to say, I don't think a wolf should really ever be as strong as a daedra or a story boss, for example. It's silly that they pose the same degree of threat in my opinion. I don't think trash mobs need to be stronger, but I do think other mobs, particularly "boss" NPCs, should be more engaging.

Also, to be fair, they announced plans to increase overland difficulty, but no details. Maybe they don't do it in the same way it was in the past. Anecdotally, though, the incredible ease of the game (especially quest bosses) takes me straight out of the game and I dont engage with overland very often anymore. I know some friends/guildmates who feel the same.

This explains my thoughts on the matter pretty well. Trash mobs can still be trash, that's fine. Doesn't pose more risk to just picking up surveys or doing antiquities.

But that doesn't mean there can't be some harder enemies around that do exist in overland that people can avoid if they want without much trouble. Like you said, a daedra should be more of a challenge than a wolf, which should be more challenge than a skeever. And story bosses, particularly in the earlier zones, could use a bit of a refresh to actually engage the player so the quests for them actually feel impactful. Questing becomes more immersive where you actually have to pay attention to mechanics. And, again, no...boss invulnerability phases where it's just trash that spawns is not the same thing. The current direction of "fill the entire arena with AOE and trash mobs" is boring and a tired design that I look forward to seeing the end of.

VoxAdActa

Soarora wrote: »

I don't think it should just be a difficulty toggle unless there's increased rewards for toggling it on (ex. higher gold drops, mat drops, etc).

So you wouldn't do harder content just for the challenge?

Or you don't think enough other people would to make it worth the dev effort?

Weird, it's almost like lots of people don't want harder content, and even the people who claim to want harder content just want more skill-gated rewards.

Akino

As long as this new seasonal model have the option of pay-to-own just like what we have right now; buying DLC contents in lump-sum with crowns so one can still have access in times when one does not have ESO+ is all that I need.

OtarTheMad

old_scopie1945 wrote: »

I have noticed some gloom and doom about maintenance mode. Though anything is possible, I don't think so. The exact opposite in fact. My reasoning, they are running out of areas on the map they can use. Add to that there may be some sort of temporary embargo on using Hammerfell by Bethesda. They may be planning on rationing the remaining areas. So it could be a sign of long term planning. Add to that some staff may or may not have been siphoned off for the rumoured new project, affecting development for new projects for ESO.

Though I was not overjoyed by the announcement in many respects, the lack of new content didn't set off any alarm bells. The idea that they may/ probably put everything behind a pay wall did.

I mean they are and also aren’t running out of areas. Here is a game map:



So we got most of Hammerfell, most of Black Marsh, one more Cyrodiil area, a good amount of Skyrim, one more Elsweyr, a couple Morrowind, maybe an Orc/Breton, some islands like Solstheim, Roscrea, and about 5 more I don’t know the name of. We also got other planes of existence like Soul Cairn, other Daedric Prince Realms of Oblivion. Plus we have the Sea Elves home and also Sloads. There is even some I am missing so, we’ve taken up a good portion of the map in 10 years but we got a lot more.

Jayne_Doe

A lot of us knew this was coming. It's been coming for some time. When they started giving away the 4th quarter DLC, it felt to me like they were testing the waters to see if they could handle not having a 4th quarter DLC for purchase/ESO+.

Then, they got rid of the 2nd dungeon DLC and went to a bug fix/QoL update for the 3rd quarter, followed by a "tentpole" system for the 4th quarter. Last year, IA was pretty good, and more enjoyable than I expected. Then, we got Golden Pursuits, which is basically just a time-limited event system. Busy work to occupy us between content releases. Oh, yeah, and re-working BGs, if you care about that.

But now, content releases will be whenever they are ready. Which sounds good on paper, but we'll see how it actually works out. At the end of the day, it sounds like we've entered maintenance mode and Crown Store mode. I am looking forward to updates to the base game zones and new content in those zones. Continuing guild quest lines sounds intriguing. I would like to see them finally conclude the stories in the base-game dungeons that they never got around to doing.

I don't like the idea of overland content becoming more difficult. The last thing I want when doing survey/treasure map runs is to have a bunch of protracted/pitched battles along the way. Frankly, I'd rather see them focus on the difficulty in delves. But, as long as it doesn't approach dungeon difficulty, it might be fine, but again, when going for surveys and treasure maps, mobs are just a nuisance, and I'd like to deal with them quickly before getting to what I'm actually doing in the overland zones.

Time will tell whether this new cadence will keep me playing. I suspect they'll be relying on Golden Pursuits in between events for a while - as well as the Crown Store. Without a chapter to generate revenue, ZOS will be relying on new players buying the game and the rest of us buying Crowns. Hopefully some of the content will be part of ESO+, since it now looks like my $15 a month will be for a craft bag and double bank/housing slots. Yeah, I will still have access to the DLC, but aside from the ones that were previously Chapters and all the ones they've given away, there isn't much left that I don't already own.

Meh...it just feels like maintenance/Crown Store mode. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

disky

VoxAdActa wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

I don't think it should just be a difficulty toggle unless there's increased rewards for toggling it on (ex. higher gold drops, mat drops, etc).

So you wouldn't do harder content just for the challenge?

Or you don't think enough other people would to make it worth the dev effort?

Weird, it's almost like lots of people don't want harder content, and even the people who claim to want harder content just want more skill-gated rewards.

I couldn't care a whit about rewards but ZOS knows that most players are reward-driven, and so I assume they are going to implement some kind of reward system for increased difficulty. I've presented the no-reward position in the Overland Content Feedback thread, and eventually I came to the conclusion that if overland is changed, rewards will eventually happen, but in order to mitigate the backlash it might help to implement the system without rewards initially to give people time to acclimate to the idea.

BlueRaven

kensan62_ESO wrote: »

After reading all of the responses to this letter for the past 10 pages fills me with little to no joy. It amazes me how I can go from loving a game one second to having the steam let out of me to the point I dont even feel like logging in at this point. Why should I put hours and hours into a game where the developers are basically scrapping the existing game and turning into a game unrecognizable. My needs as a player have pretty much stayed the same. I like open world exploration with new areas to enhance that. Dungeons and trials are also cool. By saying they are turning the page on chapters and not doing large areas basically tells me this game will not meet my needs any longer. Wether its from lack of passion from developers, lack of money , or just an overall need to tank the game so they can make something else, its clear that the player base is the LAST thing on their minds. I mean if you reread the letter they are literally throwing out what they've done so they can cheapen the experience. Ive seen this trend with other mmo's and they all end the same way. Maintenance mode. Elder Scrolls has always been about stories, by doing these "bite-sized" content really shows how little they care. Not interested in playing out a new story that lasts 3-4 hours and then have to wait another 3 months for the next bite sized update. All anyone has ever wanted was for them to fix the existing game while bringing out new areas with compelling stories and challenges. The letter is not what I wanted by a long shot. I hope someone comes to their senses soon before there is no longer a player base.

Yeah, what is a bite sized “pay per quest” look like? I am guessing it will be like the prologue quests they (now) used to do.

I am in the same boat”well what is the point” mind set as you. Suddenly nothing seems that important. It almost feel like the game is saying i”t’s time we see other people and move on”.

Khallarion

What makes a game alive, aside the community of course, are those who work behind the scenes in order to make everything running smooth and functional. In such aspect, I personally never experienced anything bad towards the game itself, the company or the developers.

I'm actually happy to see people always working towards the game and community improvement, listening and interacting with us, even though through an indirect way. Watching developers from Twitch, opening up their homes and cooking with us was something that I personally enjoyed.

People often miss it, but the internet allows such interchanges and connections, especially at this time of the year, Christmas for those who are in tune not only with the festivities, but in tune with the values we should always seek to implement in our lives, being us Christians, religious or not.


Bethesda and Zenimax, pretty much like the majority of us, still have much to improve, but this is a natural process. We improve through each interaction, through each experience, and what matters are the core values we share with our community, through the expression of our humanity, being through art or through anything we do.

Mentioning that, the core aspect of Elder Scrolls' games are attached to the lore and all the mystical and esoteric influences we see through the lore. I do believe the game as a narrative, is the modern apex of creativity and art, a book we can dive in, a movie we can be part of.

Understanding that, doesn't actually matter how such content express itself; through chapters, seasons etc. Those are just marketing approaches, important of course, for game's development and revenue, but we can't limit ourselves to those aspects. In other words, the world, Nirn, will adept itself through the ages.


As a competitive player though, what breaks some of my motivation are both the technical issues we have, such as congested serves, to the point the server kick us out from battleground or heavily dense PvP areas, alongside issues towards parce, where the server won't register your actions and delay your skills.

Also, the player toxicity is expected in competitive environments, but it's important for the developers to motivates people to keep civic, or express themselves through a polite way. I often reported countless issues towards behavior, but the feeling I have is that quantity matters over quality.

The community is one of the core aspect of a game, and for a game such as ESO, allowing people to help each other out and compete through a healthy environment must be vital. Activities that put people together, strength their ties and not simply mention inclusion through diversity is key.


The most serious issues we have within game are noticed only if you play the game with other people. If you experience all the drama through guilds and discord. You must play and interact with people in order to understand the reality, something that most companies neglect, imposing deluded lenses upon their costumers and audience.

Each of us have our set of values, expressed through the game. Unfortunately, the world isn't the example of humility, solidarity and support. People will always try to take advantage of anything in order to make profit, and it's always important to not only understand it, but address to such issues.

It's up to companies and the developing team to address such issues and somehow guide their community through a constructive way, not only theoreticaly, but practically. It's not only based on gameplay, but about people and their interaction. It's always important to balance that if we want to succed.

MincMincMinc

Assuming zos isnt going to redesign all of the skills in the game for pvp, I bet they are taking the approach of pvp ruleset changes that people have asked for years. Most of these rules used to exist, most of which were removed for pve reasons.

• Hots, dots, procs should be unique. Meaning you cant stack 12 echoing vigors or regens per second if you run a group.
• Cross healing/buffing where some skills shouldn't heal or buff allies that are outside of your group
• Aoe caps where certain skills wont hit unlimited numbers of players. Think aoe ground dot skills like caltrops not only hitting XX number of players, but also doing that over XX Seconds.
• Skill overwrites - where if I cast regen on 2 players and then recast it, the first 2 players will lose the heal/buff.

MincMincMinc

The real question is whether they conduct an accurate test or not. I think they should force the test for a month for the data. Ideally make a way to incentivize people to play in it without diluting the playerbase with new or pve players.

Maybe have two test campaigns only during the month. One would be locked to pvp players who participated in the last campaign and are above cp500.

Just remaking the no proc campaign again will be a failure that doesnt take off.

Necrotech_Master

my overall thoughts on the letter i think will be pretty positive

i preferred when content was released that was somewhat self contained, and it didnt have to be exactly say may/june to get a big content dump but instead have more throughout the year

if they go back to releasing content like lower craglorn, upper craglorn, thieves guild, dark brotherhood, and orsinium were never part of a yearly chapter schedule, they were released as they were ready

same goes for other initial systems such as housing and one tamriel

on the topic of overland difficulty, i dont see how they can implement a slider, or even just use our vet/normal toggle because the overland is a shared instance, how is it supposed to scale the enemy if its being shared by multiple players who have different settings? well the only other way would be nerfing the player themselves, or limiting the challenge difficulty to specifically the story instanced missions

so i expect that for overland difficulty we might end up seeing a new zone thats similar to OG craglorn (which personally playing during that era, the craglorn overland was tough but it wasnt overbearing if you were geared properly, and the delves were kind of like a mini vet dungeon instance with their own challenges)

nowadays craglorn is almost a shadow of its former self, its not really any much harder than any other zone except that it has larger mob spawns, essentially the difference between a public dungeon and a delve

i understand not everyone liked old craglorn, but i spent a lot of time there back in the day because before one tamriel, it was pointless to play anywhere else because of the level scaling

since the letter is intentionally vague, we dont know how things will look from a user perspective until they start getting put on the PTS, and will have to see how they follow through on what they are planning for this next year

ArchMikem

VixxVexx wrote: »

Anyone else getting maintenance mode vibes from reading this? I read this as restructuring/downsizing.

The game is getting "old", yes, but it's still a successful title and it's not healthy to take a change in development cadence as doom and gloom. Several of the points/ideas mentioned here actually has me intrigued and wanting to see more details. Not once did I feel this is ESO going into Maintenance.

Combat visual refresh and Base Game Zone updates are HUGE moves alone!

disky

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

on the topic of overland difficulty, i dont see how they can implement a slider, or even just use our vet/normal toggle because the overland is a shared instance, how is it supposed to scale the enemy if its being shared by multiple players who have different settings? well the only other way would be nerfing the player themselves, or limiting the challenge difficulty to specifically the story instanced missions

Just as you suggest, it would probably come in the form of player debuffs. I don't think that's a bad thing if it provides the desired effect and everyone can still play together. Your experience is what matters to you, after all. Or, that's how it should be, I think. Not everyone seems to agree.

I really hope their idea doesn't come in the form of the Craglorn-like zone they discussed. If that's what they're doing then they will have missed the whole point of the discussion once again.

Necrotech_Master

disky wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

on the topic of overland difficulty, i dont see how they can implement a slider, or even just use our vet/normal toggle because the overland is a shared instance, how is it supposed to scale the enemy if its being shared by multiple players who have different settings? well the only other way would be nerfing the player themselves, or limiting the challenge difficulty to specifically the story instanced missions

Just as you suggest, it would probably come in the form of player debuffs. I don't think that's a bad thing if it provides the desired effect and everyone can still play together. Your experience is what matters to you, after all. Or, that's how it should be, I think. Not everyone seems to agree.

I really hope their idea doesn't come in the form of the Craglorn-like zone they discussed. If that's what they're doing then they will have missed the whole point of the discussion once again.

if the only "difficulty" option is self nerfs, i dont think that would make anyone happy either, i know i would never use it

something like that wouldnt affect rewards either, it would literally be just for your own gratification, which i doubt many would bother using

"whats that you say? make myself LESS powerful for NO additional benefits? forget that ill just do a vet dungeon"

theres like what, 30 zones in the game right now that all feel somewhat homogenous because everything is scaled the same (and yes im including craglorn, it is NOT any more difficult than other zones right now)

having 1 new zone thats even slightly more challenging than that wont hurt anything, especially if the experience is rewarding

theres 2 parts of difficulty, one is the actual challenge, and one is feeling rewarded for the extra effort (i mean theres already a lot of complaints that even just doing random vet dungeons isnt worth the reward because it gives exactly the same as normal)

using an implementation of a self nerf wouldnt influence enemy drops or other rewards, scaling enemies wouldnt work for shared instances if players want to have different difficulty experiences, so difficulty would either only work for instances (for individual difficulty), or apply to everyone (via overland, e.g. old craglorn)

so as said, we will have to see how the devs decide or plan to implement these changes, but my educated guess is basically something akin to old craglorn for at least one zone

Mik195

Is "associated gear chase" a good thing for most people? For me that looks like "your playtime is now jumping through our hoops, enjoy."

Destai

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

First, a few notes about 2024. I probably say this every year, but 2024’s ESO content was among my favorite. I loved the vibe and story of Gold Road, and now that Home Tours is allowing me to see so many other people’s homes, I’m seriously considering making Merryvine Estate my main house – although it will take a lot to unseat me from Mournoth Keep… 2024 showed that we are still creating wonderful content for all our players. We ended the year with two new Companions – I am currently adventuring with Zerith-var, although I’m early in my journey with him – as well some fun tweaks to Battlegrounds, and much more. I look back on 2024’s content and updates, and am very satisfied with our story, content, and systems updates.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. There were some good moments, for sure. Aside from the intense orange glow of Gold Road during sunrise/sunset, I really enjoyed the vibe of the new zone. There was a nice whimsy to it. The art assets were great, as always. I only wish there less locked doors! I'm also warming up to Scribing as a system, especially with my healers and tanks. Definitely fills in the gaps on some builds.

As for the new companions, disappointed they weren't in the Chapter as in previous years. While I don't see myself going through Tanlorin's, Zerith-var seems very compelling and I'm enjoying their story at the moment.

That aside, I don't really understand how we're getting a victory lap here. It's been a rough year. It really has. And not acknowledging the many issues we faced this year, which probably played in a part in needing to change direction so radically, makes me worried.

Let's do a quick recap:

1. The first few events had major issues. Crafter celebration chief among them.
2. We had the PTS debacle. Again, player accounts got frozen. This probably scared some people off from ever using PTS. I know I won't.
3. Anniversary event with a style page grind. The drop rate was called out as an issue on the PTS. That didn't make it to live. People got burned out.
4. We've had the ongoing performance thread. We finally got an update 7 months into the issue. Despite hearing months of "no information" from the CMs, it turns out, there was in fact a lot of information. Rich was thankfully able to provide it, but I feel like the communication pipeline could be strengthened.
5. We had the PVP stream where the matchmaking had issues and some other concerns amply discussed already.
6. The cancellation of the 10 year NA event.
7. The Gold Road chapter. While it had its strengths and charms, there were some big issues and concerns. So many locked doors, the story and character models needed some work, the zone had less content like quests and incursions, companions sold separately.
8. The environmental changes. No one asked for these. Menus are harder to look at now.

There's a lot to be proud of, but there's also lot to improve on.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

And now it is time to look forward, which will comprise most of this end of year message. Change is a constant, especially in gaming. The gaming industry changes, player habits change, other games come and go. In fact, change has been constant since ESO launched in
2022. We have been able to keep up with the times, make hard decisions and big changes when it was time to make them. Looking back on all the changes that have gotten us here, it is pretty clear that we have generally made the right decisions at the right times for our game. And now, we are looking forward to 2025 and how we can change ESO to keep it relevant, awesome, and compelling. 

Given the vague feel of this paragraph, I'm going to assume that you mean studio level decisions. Financially, sure, you guys have done something right that the game's thankfully lived this long. It sounds like you guys are being influenced by other studios and their pricing and release approaches. I'd invite you to look at Destiny, Runescape, and New World to see how similar changes fared. And really ask yourselves, "will this make the game more fun?".

As for "generally making the right decision", we'll have to disagree there. I don't think we'd see this letter if that were the case. If anything, it seems like there's been a rocky history of controversial decisions, where the community management didn't kick in until there was a full blown fiasco, if at all. It seems like the "right decisions" are made when things truly become an issue, rather than before.

There's been so many decisions - like U35, permaglow changes, the environmental changes, the grind required for the anniversary weapon styles - where there was ample feedback well ahead of time and you guys stayed the course. With little to no explanation or engagement.

These things really stick with people. You guys really created a watershed moment when you cancelled that U35 Q&A. Honoring commitments is really important. And how that was handled, along with such a controversial patch, really damaged ZOS's image. A lot of guilds and community fell apart. I don't think the game's fully recovered from that.

I hope with this new approach you can take the lessons learned from those moments and grow from them.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Turning the Page on Chapters 
We have been incredibly successful with our strong annual Chapter releases: starting with Morrowind in 2017 up through Gold Road just six months ago. Zone design and quest/content is at the core of every Elder Scrolls game, as our annual Chapter release model highlighted. We will still do lots of story content, but now, looking into 2025, we need to concentrate on different types of content to support all types of ESO players. So, we are putting Chapters aside and will be focusing on new types of content, and a new release philosophy. More on that below.

As 2025 will be a transition year for new content, we are going to have new zone-based content launch in 2025 - but you'll have to wait until April to hear the specifics about how it is different. Stay tuned!

I will definitely miss the big yearly releases. I'm definitely old school in that regard. But, I can also see where the content dries up for a lot of folks and they move onto until the next big release.

So, I think you guys have to be careful here. Zone design is great, for the most part. It's the core reason I play, along with fashion and cooperative play like dungeons. I've largely rushed through each story for the last few years. My point is, story alone isn't enough for me. I'm about incentivized exploration and teamwork. But that's just my tastes.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Introducing Seasons  
Over the course of 2025 we will be moving more towards a seasonal content model and away from launching massive content updates once a year, as we did with Chapters. We will be talking much more about this in the future, but in 2025 expect to see named Seasons of three or six months duration with a mix of themed story content, events, store items, dungeons and more.  
2025 will be a mix of old and new as we move the dev team towards creating smaller bite-sized pieces of content. We will still have some larger items that we've been working on for over a year, which you'll see launch as well.

Please don't leave the game a patchwork of quests like we had with prologues. Before you guys even embark on this road, please brainstorm a way to make the system scalable so zones don't become a sonic boom of "YOU THERE!!!!" NPCs again. Do a writ board or something. I dunno. I just hope whatever you do isn't intrusive.

As for crown store items, this is my biggest concern here. There's already so much fatigue expressed about events, store FOMO, lack of in-game rewards, and spliced up content. I'm really concerned that we're going to see an even more pronounced a al carte approach to content. We're seeing it now with companions and skill styles. A lack of earnable content is one of the key reasons people peace out right after a chapter's done. Maybe that’s how we got here. Even with Golden Pursuits, sure I did them, but the rewards there are so much lighter compared to store content and especially crates. Focus on increasing attractive rewards and the money will follow.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Freeing up the dev team from needing to adhere to a strict annual cycle means we will be able to have teams launch content when it is ready throughout the year and not work to a date in June – this will let us focus on a greater variety of content spread over the year. This supports the new Seasons model, and will enable us to release content, updates, fixes, and systems in a more efficient manner.

This sounds great in theory. I'd love to see more releases throughout the year. And I do hope that fixes are released quicker - but - you guys said this with the last change to yearly releases. I'd have to dig through patch notes, but I feel like we had more QoL in previous years than we did in the last year which was supposed to have a QoL-focused quarter.

I hope you guys can pull this off, but the feedback loops between devs and player need to be strengthened. And ultimately, if player don't like a feature, don't do it. It doesn't sound like the game is in a place where it can really take another U35-like event.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

A new focus on change and experimentation  
We have been hearing from you, the community, that we need to experiment more, to shake things up and not be so predictable. The game needs new and different types of content, and for long-standing feedback to be addressed. We have already started on some ideas that will be tested in 2025. These systems and ideas will be clearly marked as "experiments" in patch notes and are ideas that may or may not be fleshed out into full game systems. With our new focus on breaking up content into seasons and away from years, it gives us time to do these experiments and changes.

I'll take this at face value. Absolutely you should experiment more. With chapters, we more-or-less knew what was coming. That's good and bad, but definitely felt predictable and lessened the content's value as years went on.

However, seeing experiments as releases really makes me nervous. How will experiments be managed? If something's an experiment - will it be retooled and released in a complete fashion if the experiment succeeds? Are we going to have issues where experiments are pulled and content's broken. More information is definitely needed on that. I want you guys to try new things, I just don't want the live server to be a graveyard of ideas.

As for longstanding feedback being addressed, I really hope you guys amp up and sustain your community management. We've had 10 years of the current style, and I think there needs to be some honest reflection on its impact. It's part of the reason we're seeing this change. It sounds like after the livestream, some lessons were learned. If you're truly addressing feedback, the feedback loops need to be stronger. There needs to be two-way communication. Renew the class rep program, get devs here on the PTS forums, just do something different. Experiment. There should be ample ideas here, provided the posts are still here.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Here are some of the ideas that we are working on, some of which you may see on the live servers as tests in 2025 and beyond. Some of these will be tests and some will be improvements based on player feedback: 

• We need to seriously address Cyrodiil performance. Our (ambitious) goal is to return it to the concurrency levels we supported in 2014. So, we will be experimenting with a Cyrodiil campaign where all classes will have PvP-specific (and more performant) skills that replace the standard player skills with the expectation that we can support more players per campaign. It's not just Cyrodiil, I'm sorry. But anyways, this sounds great in theory. I really like the idea of PVP balance being separate from PVE. If you guys can pull that off, by all means, do it. Whatever you do, please, please treat the PVP community with respect and transparency. Treat them with kit gloves. There's been too many debacles and I'd like to see that all go smoother. I say that as a PVE'er.

•  Increasing the difficulty of standard overworld combat. Be careful here, please. The ask is for a difficultly slider. Just coming in and making all of overland harder will push people away. Yes, there are some who want it, so you need to figure out a way to give them that option.

• Improving the overall feel of combat with animation, FX, and potentially audio work. No argument there!

• Experimenting with more zones like Craglorn (although not as large in area or scope), created exclusively for high-end group and soft-group content with associated gear chase. I love Craglorn, so I think that's a good idea. However, you need to balance this all against the gear set bloat that we have now. There needs to be more reward for this - apex quality content to chase after. Set balance is too fragile for that really to be the focus here. Overall though, this sounds fantastic. Cautiously optimistic on this.

• Adding and refining tools to make guild recruitment, interaction, and management easier and more logical. On console especially, it's very difficult to manage guilds. I inherited a guild from a friend and I wanted to change just the Guild and rank names and can't even do that. Having spruced up basic functionality and tools for raffles and dues will be great.

• We have many more ideas here, and of course we are listening to you and will be coming up with new ideas based on your feedback. Can we address treasure maps and surveys already? Relieving inventory pressure is something you guys should stay focused on. Keep that up!

See my comments above in bold.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Concentrating on new and returning user experience 
It is long past time that we address ESO's new and returning user experience. The game is so large at this point that we need to refine the new user experience. Our goal is to shield new players from being overwhelmed by dozens of content options presented to them on entering the world, and instead give them the essential guidance they need to enjoy the game before opening it up to all possibilities.

I think getting back to basics is really called for here. Teach basic mechanics first, then get them into the world. Shielding players from decision paralysis and being overwhelmed is really important. Having a sense of direction, balanced against freedom of choice, is really needed for new players.

Both new, current, and returning players can be overwhelmed by the content. It's in how it's delivered. To be frank, there's some content delivery that's quite intrusive. Just look at Leramil in Gold Road - pops up in a million places. There's cities with prologue NPCs that have nothing to do with the zone. Base game is full of NPCs that follow me and bear witness to my every action. Quest NPCs need to consolidated. I shouldn't see the same NPC 20 feet down the road.

For story content, you guys really should leverage the Stories menu a lot more. Right now, it feels l'm reading a book with other books falling into it. We need to get to a point where I pick the books off the shelf. Having prologues solely available in the Stories menu like DLCs and Dungeon stories will cut down on a lot of noise. I think the same should go for guild questlines.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Additionally, we have many millions of players who return to the game every year after taking months to years off – and it is often confusing to them what they should be doing. We need to address this by making sure that the game’s map and other quest/informational UI areas clearly show the user where they were when they left, what has been added since then, and where they will find content they will love. 

With the map idea, be careful not to add one more thing to click through. Progress isn't focused solely on the map. It could be more focused on builds, what dungeons was someone running, what house was I building, etc. I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve there, but I don't know that the map is the panacea there.

Now, if anything, I'd like to see things like Skyshards and lorebooks added as optional icons for the overall map. They can be cumbersome to chase after, lorebooks especially, and many guilds help new players/character get them as activities. Seeing them on the map itself would facilitate that.

In general, be cognizant that whatever you add can become noise for some people.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Continuing to tell great stories
With the changes to our content release model, please be assured that we are not abandoning new quest content – but we will do it in different ways than we previously have. As our focus will not be on adding giant new landmasses – although we will do that from time to time – instead, we will use existing zones and areas to tell new stories. Some of these are:

• Continuing the stories in existing zones and storylines and bringing back familiar characters 
• New stories focused on hallmark Elder Scrolls organizations like Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, Fighters Guild, and Mages Guild
• Splitting a large zone across multiple updates

As long as each of these activities are rewarding, this should be wonderful to see. I really like the idea of having more Mages and Fighters Guild activities.

I do have concerns about the larger zone comment though. I think back to the frequent criticism of the YLS-era stories. Even though stories aren't my focus, I do want to enjoy them. The YLS type breaking up of stories got in the way of that. I also worry about the pricing of new zones, where each feature could be sold separately. I'd rather zone take longer and be feature complete. I don't want us to get to a point where content that would've been in a chapter is broken up and sold separately.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

You have already heard the news that we will not be doing a 2025 North American community event as we originally planned. This was a difficult decision, but as shown by all the planning and development changes listed here, we need to focus on the game itself for a while this year. That said, we will still see you at local community events in many territories, so stay tuned for announcements and details on those. 

I really wish you'd go into more detail why. The questions have definitely been asked.

Tandor

sarahthes wrote: »

I one shot everything I come across in overland.

Good for you. Most players can't.

old_scopie1945

OtarTheMad wrote:- "So we got most of Hammerfell, most of Black Marsh, one more Cyrodiil area, a good amount of Skyrim, one more Elsweyr, a couple Morrowind, maybe an Orc/Breton, some islands like Solstheim, Roscrea, and about 5 more I don’t know the name of. We also got other planes of existence like Soul Cairn, other Daedric Prince Realms of Oblivion. Plus we have the Sea Elves home and also Sloads. There is even some I am missing so, we’ve taken up a good portion of the map in 10 years but we got a lot more."

I suspect such major expansions was even in their play book. I also suspect their plan was only ever to be Tamriel. I don't even know if the system could even handle anything more than Tamriel. After all it is over ten years old. As of now they could stretch what is left on the map for another ten years at least.

Soarora

VoxAdActa wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

I don't think it should just be a difficulty toggle unless there's increased rewards for toggling it on (ex. higher gold drops, mat drops, etc).

So you wouldn't do harder content just for the challenge?

Or you don't think enough other people would to make it worth the dev effort?

Weird, it's almost like lots of people don't want harder content, and even the people who claim to want harder content just want more skill-gated rewards.

Well, don’t base what you think other peoples opinions are on what I say, I’m the type in Skyrim to sneak archer enemies because I don’t want to do combat. So no, I wouldn’t do a harder difficulty level personally unless there was a good reason, and what I suggested as increased drops isn’t skill gated if you’re getting 50 gold instead of 3 from an enemy or purple gear instead of green. I’m a hoarder, so if I get more rewards for doing a harder difficulty level then I will.

jaws343

Mik195 wrote: »

Is "associated gear chase" a good thing for most people? For me that looks like "your playtime is now jumping through our hoops, enjoy."

That appeared to just be a nod to the update by update new gear we get now. The gear chase is farming the new overland, pvp, dungeon, or trial gear that they release multiple times throughout the year. Meaning, they will continue to add new gear for us to acquire and use.

Gerwulf67

Hmmm ... I've been thinking about this since I read the letter yesterday, and I'm still not sure how I feel about it. I suppose I'll just wait and see how things are revealed. I've just returned from taking about a year off from the game, but I've played since is came out on PS5, then quickly changed over to PC.

I will say I am one of those who doesn't understand the requests for harder overland content. For me, overland content has always been about storytelling and there is no game on the market that does it better than TESO! If the game goes to more difficult overland content, I hope the rewards are consummate with the increase in difficulty. Making something harder for harder's sake seems foolish to me.

To be honest, nothing in the letter bothers me except the mention of Seasons, so this is what I will be taking a wait an see attitude about. But regardless, this game will aways be my comfort game! I love the lore and the people I've met while playing! It took five plus years of playing way too much every day to make me take a pause and after my time off, I'm glad to back in the lands my spirit truly calls home!

Sakiri

Soarora wrote: »

Lugaldu wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

heaven13 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

sarahthes wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I will never understand why anyone would want trash mobs in overland to be more difficult. How is it rewarding to spend 2 minutes on one wolf when you are trying to reach your quest objective, or harvest some mats for crafting? And the story bosses have already gotten so difficult starting with High Isle that many players can no longer defeat them and complete the story.

What baffles me the most is that difficult overland almost killed this game. No one was doing the veteran zones or Craglorn. But a handful of players, most of which haven't even played in years, said they'd come back if overland was made more difficult again. Even though many of us that have been actively playing and subscribed asked to please leave it as it is. But for some reason they are going back to what didn't work before.

The one thing I will say is, there's been a lot of power creep since Craglorn was released. They could increase the difficulty of overland without impacting players ability to clear the content.

Power creep hasn't affected players new to ESO. Or casual players that have no interest in end game. Or players that have physical limitations. These are the players whose game revolves around overland and if that is taken from them what is left? And there are way more of these than end game players.

Besides the fact that not every single content in the game is going to appeal to all play styles. Players should participate in the parts that meet their desires and not take away the parts that don't from those that rely on it.

There are definitely ways to accomplish both without leaning too far to one side or the other. Whether that's how this directive will be accomplished remains to be seen.

A player can be both an endgame content player that ALSO enjoys questing so let's not use the narrative that each player can only fit in a single box. I certainly don't want a single overland wolf to be a bullet sponge. But I would like to quest where I actually have to engage in the content instead of just lighting attack or tossing down a couple AOEs. The newer content that is "invulnerability phases with trash mobs" <> engaging mechanics for story/quest content.

I one shot everything I come across in overland. That's not a skill thing, I run around in zen alkosh most of the time so it's not proc sets either. A quest boss is dead before I complete half a rotation. That's not skill either. That's just overland being laughable.

Also macabre vintage is available to everyone who either has gold road or has gold. It trivializes overland content.

This isn't directed at you, but reactions like this show that some players don't realize that there are also many ESO players who play the game to relax and who just don't want to spend two minutes fighting a wolf because they can't kill everything with one shot. These are perhaps people who already have enough stress in real life and are just looking for peace in the game - yes, maybe just running around picking flowers - and don't care about any sets, builds, etc. Especially if you have to search the Internet first to optimally equip and build your character. Maybe it's a generational thing, I don't know, but I'd like to keep the option of just running around comfortably and only being challenged in fights when I feel like it and then specifically going to the corresponding areas.

I was running around last night in white training heavy armor, don't think I had a mundus, oakensoul, DSA 2h (golded), attributes and CP in correctly, barely any passives (just race and 2h passives), and I still was killing overland enemies very quickly. The only ones that put up a fight were bigger enemies and even then it wasn't very interesting.

I don't think it should just be a difficulty toggle unless there's increased rewards for toggling it on (ex. higher gold drops, mat drops, etc). Maybe zones that are set up more difficult. Someone around here suggested treating zones like base game dungeons and having a 2nd version that takes place in a later time, I think that could be an option.

NO.

NO REWARDS FOR TURNING IT ON.

Your reward is the challenge you want. Leave the rest of them alone.

WoW does this with it's precious war mode(pvp mode) and all I hear is incessant whinging from people that feel obligated to turn it on for the extra incentives, which don't really pan out because of all the dying and camping done by people to them.

If you can't do it without some sort of incentive, then maybe it doesn't need to be done.

disky

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

if the only "difficulty" option is self nerfs, i dont think that would make anyone happy either, i know i would never use it

Why not? The effect is that overland is more challenging no matter how it's implemented. I only care about the game being fun and satisfying. Who cares if it affects everyone or just you?

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

something like that wouldnt affect rewards either, it would literally be just for your own gratification, which i doubt many would bother using

"whats that you say? make myself LESS powerful for NO additional benefits? forget that ill just do a vet dungeon"

I don't care about rewards, I just want to actually have a satisfying game to play, but there's no reason it couldn't affect rewards. If you enable the mode the rewards could come with it. It seems trivial to implement alongside the rest of the code and make no mistake, ZOS knows that most people think like you. I don't think they'd do something like this without also incentivizing it in some way, either directly or laterally.

old_scopie1945

See this link from Jakeclips:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ7E_X_byD4

It has some info in the first section on overland which might please all.

Jaraal

VoxAdActa wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

I don't think it should just be a difficulty toggle unless there's increased rewards for toggling it on (ex. higher gold drops, mat drops, etc).

So you wouldn't do harder content just for the challenge?

Or you don't think enough other people would to make it worth the dev effort?

Weird, it's almost like lots of people don't want harder content, and even the people who claim to want harder content just want more skill-gated rewards.

So what is the alternative? Are there really people who are looking forward to spending twice as much time fighting the same mobs who now have twice as much HP so they can loot the same Alkahest and a five gold rune? Well I can assure you that I'm not one of those people. In fact, I don't even know any of those people.

Increasing risk (and/or time invested) without increasing the reward is not a formula for success.

AzuraFan

disky wrote: »

I don't care about rewards, I just want to actually have a satisfying game to play, but there's no reason it couldn't affect rewards. If you enable the mode the rewards could come with it. It seems trivial to implement alongside the rest of the code and make no mistake, ZOS knows that most people think like you. I don't think they'd do something like this without also incentivizing it in some way, either directly or laterally.

Why would they need to incentivize it? Apparently there are hoards of players begging for a more challenging overland so they can enjoy the game again. They've posted that overland will be wonderful again if it's more difficult. If ZOS would only do that, they'd return to the game (if they've left), or they'd spend more time in overland. So why is an incentive required? If these people are now saying they should get rewards for turning on a hard mode, then they don't really want challenge. They just want more rewards. If they really want challenge, they'll do the content without expecting anything extra.

Having said that, yeah, it's an MMO, so they'll incentivize it because they have to keep those little hamster wheels spinning, but it just exposes the hypocrisy of *some* poster asking for this. As another poster said, few of these players try to solo dragons. Few are soloing lava vents, mirror incursions, and other more difficult overland content. I run dungeons a lot now and whenever there's a player just running through the mobs, I always wonder why when it's actually faster to take the mobs down than to run through them (and often we have to eventually take them down anyway). But most players loathe combat. They actively avoid combat in delves, public dungeons, dungeons, and overland, but I'm supposed to believe that if the mobs are made more difficult, they'll be happy to spend hours in combat in Grahtwood? Uh-huh.

I'm hoping it'll just be a revamp to the storyline bosses and delve bosses, because I agree that they can be anti-climactic (though not for new players). However, given ZOS's tendency to use a sledgehammer (I'm looking at you, AwA), I'm not sure how this will work out. Unfortunately if they get it wrong, they'll lose a lot of people. So hopefully they'll give it a lot of thought. A lot.

Necrotech_Master

disky wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

if the only "difficulty" option is self nerfs, i dont think that would make anyone happy either, i know i would never use it

Why not? The effect is that overland is more challenging no matter how it's implemented. I only care about the game being fun and satisfying. Who cares if it affects everyone or just you?

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

something like that wouldnt affect rewards either, it would literally be just for your own gratification, which i doubt many would bother using

"whats that you say? make myself LESS powerful for NO additional benefits? forget that ill just do a vet dungeon"

I don't care about rewards, I just want to actually have a satisfying game to play, but there's no reason it couldn't affect rewards. If you enable the mode the rewards could come with it. It seems trivial to implement alongside the rest of the code and make no mistake, ZOS knows that most people think like you. I don't think they'd do something like this without also incentivizing it in some way, either directly or laterally.

part of game progression is feeling more powerful, at least in my opinion, not making yourself weaker

nerfing yourself doesnt really make weak enemies stronger, it just makes them take longer to die, i mean there are already people in this game who run naked in overland with no weapon and in some cases no skills just to prove how easy it is

thats not difficulty thats just boring cause it takes longer, but its not really that much more challenging

i mean it, you could "nerf yourself" now by equipping velothi amulet and then saying im gonna kill this WB with a heavy attack that does like 120-150 dmg per hit, does it change the overall difficulty of the fight? no it just makes it take longer, but the fight is still the same

i think this is where you get down to implementation + what someone considers a challenge

scaled up enemies is the ideal challenge because you can actually build for it, nerfing yourself by unequipping gear and skills is like the worst suggestion ive ever heard for making the game challenging and enjoyable

to reference content in game, old craglorn was a challenge, but it wasnt that much of a challenge, it could be overcome, some of the delves did require having a team to do, i remember that content much better than i remember almost any random delve from any chapter over the last 7 years

another example is IC, the pve content there is actually slightly more challenging because you have to do it while under the effect of battle spirit, so you get -healing and shielding even when fighting PVE enemies (the -dmg only applies against players), and even thats enough to make it difficult for some people to stay alive when fighting say a banner boss

i been fighting them since 2015, and because of experience + power creep/build options, its far easier to solo them now, in fact i hardly even feel they are that threatening anymore, i was even able to solo one on a lvl 14 arcanist with random dropped gear, no sets and some underleveled gear (players are the only real thread in IC for me at this point)