A reflection on MMORPG difficulty and risk.

UnknownXV

I want to start this post by first listing the previous MMORPGs I have played, as a basis for comparison. Ultima Online, Runescape, City of Heroes, World of Warcraft, EvE Online, Darkfall, SWTOR.

I believe I have a fair amount of experience dealing with all forms of gaming in this spectrum. I want to comment now on how ESO is progression in what I fear is the wrong path, and also draw on other player's opinions in regards to the future of this genre itself.

The reasoning behind making this thread came to me after I saw the recent patch has decreased the difficulty of a well-known Fighter's Guild quest boss named Doshia. While I do not want to linger too long on her specifically, I feel it is important to analyze and speculate as to why this was done.

Is it an appeal by Zenimax to appeal to a broader range of players who otherwise are not accustomed to a game refusing to hold their hand? Or, did they truly believe it was unfair or imbalanced relative to its level? At any rate, I don't think we will get a direct answer from them; so I will follow my own logic and assume that the reason is former. They read of players bitterly reacting on the forums about the difficulty of a boss they assumed would be another effortless event (since the entirety of the game up until this boss is precisely that). The tutorial islands should be a bit more difficult towards the end to mitigate the difference, to prepare players for the challenges that lie ahead. That is the intent of a tutorial, is it not?

That said, I like to think of Doshia as merely another tutorial. Preparing you for what is to come later on. It's a poor idea to reduce her difficulty in such a way. It removes the barrier into the world that is necessary to strengthen one's ability. Without challenge, we do not grow.

Let's talk about General difficulty and risk now. What strikes me as perplexing, in fact, downright puzzling, is the contrast between single player and MMO difficulty. As a prime example and one I was discussing with a friend earlier, take Dark Souls. One of the more challenging experiences a soul can put themselves through. Yet, a lot of people enjoy it. Reminds me of people eating very spicy foods. A challenge, painful in some respects yet people do it. Why?. A lot do. The easiest boss fight in Dark Souls is several orders of magnitude more difficult than Doshia. Now that is quite the disparity is it not? I ask you then this fundamental question that if answered would solve a mystery as strange as Dark Matter >>

Why is extreme difficulty acceptable in a single player title, but is shunned and violently rejected in an MMORPG? The slightest hint of resistance is met with a thermonuclear chain reaction that I have trouble comprehending.

As I mentioned my gaming experience earlier you'll note several titles that appeal to a more hardcore audience. These games are usually less populated. Not always. It depends on how it is hardcore. An example is Runescape. One of my most beloved MMORPGs. Why? The difficulty was evident in quests (higher end quests). There wasn't much hand-holding. More importantly perhaps (at least in retaining my attention) was the length of effort one had to undergo in order to increase their level in the myriad of skills available in the game. If you haven't played it let me give you a quick explanation, the structure was similar to how ESO does it. Specific skills for specific tasks. For instance, blacksmithing was its own skill, mining, cooking, etc. For combat, you had a magic level, prayer, archery, and individual melee skills like strength, stamina, defense, etc.. there was no "global" level. Your combat level was a mixture of these combat oriented stats. (It was also how they restricted gear use). While I loved the design of progressing in specific skills like this, just how long you had to spend to actually level them up was intoxicating.

It took ages, which to me meant one thing, impact. If you managed to stick through it, it meant something. It was not easy. It was not fast.To draw on ESO now, people are reaching the maximum levels in crafting and in general within a week. It feels so shallow to me, when I'm used to this taking literally months, if not years (per skill). Quite a difference indeed isn't it? You might be thinking that is a ridiculous amount of time, and it is; which is precisely why people stuck around for the long-term. It was a game designed exactly around that.

Want to know another utterly mind blowing feature in the game? If you died, everything you were wearing and carrying (save for 3 items) was dropped on your corpse where you died. If other people came around, they could actually take it from you. Such a concept now, is bewildering, absurd, absolutely impossible to convey. I feel a great sorrow at this because try as I might, I seem unable to transmit the benefit of this sort of system. The loss, or potential of it, being so great ... it overwhelms anything I say after. Even now as you're reading this, I'm confident most will be repelled by the very idea. All I ask you to do here is to entertain this notion as I go on. The reason this worked so well, is not because the pain of death was lighter than it sounds. It wasn't. It was harsh. I've lost so much in that game I couldn't list it all. However, through that knowledge that death was meaningful came the most exciting moments I have ever experienced. I have been skydiving in real life, and I am telling you without a hint of exaggeration, there were moments in that game that rivaled the excitement I felt jumping out of a plane from 13,500 feet in the air. I am not sure that is enough to convince anyone, but that's the best I can do.

Of the MMORPGs I know of today, the modern variant it seems is designed around a few points. Mass appeal (far less difficulty and risk), as well as convenience in every form. What do I mean here? Think of this as an example. Imagine there was no ability to instantly travel. (Or it was only possible through very rare scrolls or runes that others had to craft). Imagine the possibilities this might entail for a moment. A player has the option to breed his own horses, and constructs a carriage through a myriad of rare books he found scattered around in the world to learn the knowledge after first spending a long arduous journey to level up the required skill itself (carpentry or woodworking in this instance) Okay, let me put this in your head. That player learns to attach his horses to his carriage, and then offers real players the option to pay him for transportation around the unsafe world. Can you imagine this? The possibilities that are open when a game does not give you convenience? When instead, risk, danger, challenge and inconvenience are the norm? Players rise to the occasion, band together because the world is tough, harsh, the torments that await are only equaled by the boundless thrills. It makes my heart beat faster merely contemplating it...

Hmm, I seem to have written more than I set out to. I should stop for now at least. I feel as if I could go on for ages. If anyone read all of that, have a cookie (chocolate chip of course).

CerbX

#TeamWhiteChocolateMacadamiaNut will not stand for this travesty!

Shimond

UnknownXV wrote: »

I feel it is important to analyze and speculate as to why this was done.

Is it really? I mean unnecessary text aside, this couldn't have been put in one of the other threads about it?

CerbX

Shimond wrote: »

UnknownXV wrote: »

I feel it is important to analyze and speculate as to why this was done.

Is it really? I mean unnecessary text aside, this couldn't have been put in one of the other threads about it?

It is important, yes. The reason it is important is because game development is a very volatile market, and arguably more accessible than ever. You look at how quickly a company can ascend through the ranks or how quickly it can go belly up, then consider that most MMOs in the past decade have either flopped, went to a F2P business model, or discontinued service, and you understand the importance of analyzing decisions.

We as consumers, players, and patrons of Zenimax have a right to criticize or second guess whatever decision they make. I'm sure the dev team and community relations would enjoy the feedback, as it gives them a direction to explore possibilities to make the experience as unique and entertaining as possible. It's hard to get your commentary noticed in a pond of comments in a sea of threads.

Gix

Based on the patch notes, there's a subtle and important difference between "nerfing" and "adjusting".

I'd also argue that Dark Souls isn't really hard unless you count the horrible control scheme that plagued the PC port. It's not even a matter of trial and error. Having played the game myself, I can safely say that what makes the game
hard" is that it omits information such as where it's safe to go for your current level and just lets you go... to die an embarrassing death.

RPGs have this problem where every obstacle can be rendered trivial by simply getting statistically better than your opponent. What's important for RPGs, at least, is to keep the difficulty curve smooth to prevent frustration.

TESO's fine.

Shimond

Ah, well for developer feedback they have a nifty tool in the game client. I'm not so convinced this one issue is going to spell the doom of the game as you seem to be alleging.

CerbX

Shimond wrote: »

Ah, well for developer feedback they have a nifty tool in the game client. I'm not so convinced this one issue is going to spell the doom of the game as you seem to be alleging.

No, this wouldn't be the doom of the game, not at all. The doom of the game would be if the developers didn't listen at all and didn't care. They care, and they listen.

You know what the backbone of a good MMO is? The staff/support.

TESO is fun, and it's enjoyable and it feels refreshing, but I think what UnknownXV is trying to say is that he enjoys the game, he just doesn't want it to be watered down because of the lowest common denominator, or at least that's what he has expressed to me.

CerbX

Gix wrote: »

Based on the patch notes, there's a subtle and important difference between "nerfing" and "adjusting".

I'd also argue that Dark Souls isn't really hard unless you count the horrible control scheme that plagued the PC port. It's not even a matter of trial and error. Having played the game myself, I can safely say that what makes the game
hard" is that it omits information such as where it's safe to go for your current level and just lets you go... to die an embarrassing death.

RPGs have this problem where every obstacle can be rendered trivial by simply getting statistically better than your opponent. What's important for RPGs, at least, is to keep the difficulty curve smooth to prevent frustration.

TESO's fine.

How far did you get in Dark Souls? It's not as much a difficult game as it is an unforgiving one. You're right that the PC port is atrociously done, and I'll agree that if you're new and exploring you're going to get moliwhopped by stuff. The game is doable though at level 1 with absolutely no leveling, but even if you've got high stats if you're not careful, even the basic enemies can kill you. A game where you've gotta stay on your toes, but the biggest threats are the ones you don't see coming because the game likes to throw stuff at green players.

Anyways, I wasn't trying to say you were wrong, you're pretty right. I'd say that once you start fighting bosses later in the game (past Sen's Fortress), the game really will start to test your reflexes and skills, etc.

Definitely agree on the differences between nerfing and adjusting though. I fought Doshia at level 7 as a Nightblade and didn't have any issue, I think I died maybe once before I learned the trick.

UnknownXV

Gix wrote: »

Based on the patch notes, there's a subtle and important difference between "nerfing" and "adjusting".

I'd also argue that Dark Souls isn't really hard unless you count the horrible control scheme that plagued the PC port. It's not even a matter of trial and error. Having played the game myself, I can safely say that what makes the game
hard" is that it omits information such as where it's safe to go for your current level and just lets you go... to die an embarrassing death.

RPGs have this problem where every obstacle can be rendered trivial by simply getting statistically better than your opponent. What's important for RPGs, at least, is to keep the difficulty curve smooth to prevent frustration.

TESO's fine.

The difference is what? Making her less challenging is a nerf. On the other hand, increasing her quest level to be more in-line with the difficulty, that is an adjustment.

Dark souls is hard relative to other games that I know of. I suppose it depends what you consider hard. If you don't think Dark souls is difficult, well, what is? How would you define difficulty in a game?

MMORPGs do have an obsession with global levels that drastically alter your power. That's a shame. In my example of Runescape, there wasn't this problem. Yes, leveling up individual combat skills made you stronger, but not nearly by the same scope as you'd find in a modern day MMO. There is less sand in the box due to this artificial construct since it forces a more linear path. Zone A to zone B to zone C, etc...

Korusus

Doshia's entire difficulty was wrapped up in the fact that she was a trick fight. She stops being difficult when you figure out the trick. The problem is that at that level not everyone is used to the controls or using their best build (and can't respec) at level 8, especially players new to MMOs (or action MMOs) and her trick was a little intense.

In a way you're getting exactly what you're asking for OP. Now instead of Doshia being this huge brick wall for a lot of players, it will instead be a way to be introduced to the idea of trick boss fights (assuming they tune it correctly and still require you to figure out the trick in some way, as from my understanding being that they're simply slowing down the rate that the bubbles spawn)

UnknownXV

I think it falls down to how we define skill and difficulty. As you say, Doshia was not difficult in the sense that she required lightning fast reflexes to beat. It was a simple mechanic that, once learned, turned the fight (regardless of class) trivial. If this is true then, why reduce her strength?

We can mostly agree it seems she was not overly powerful (as in how much damage she did nor her attacks in of themselves) but merely the first monster that required some thought to beat. I think it's important to preserve that nature in the game, even as early on as level 8.

jimredtalon

Okay so I this is what I have gotten from the OP. @unknownxv You would like to see a more difficult game once the initial hand holding tutorial is over, maybe once one has left the second zone one plays in. I hope I got that right let me know if I am way off.

If I am right in what you are trying to get at I would then like to add my two cents. I think that the large number of Veteran Rank players I saw today in my first real try at PVP is a sign that the quest are too easy. Too many have just cruised through the quest without any real challenge and that there shows the difficulty needs to be increased. I understand that the reason for the current difficulty is because of so many solo players that would like to be able to play the majority of quests just that way, solo. But there are many others that are running in crews for three or four friends that can hop unto TS3 and just smash through some of the hardest of quests.

I also present the fact that even though it is important not to entirely alienate the solo players. This is none the less a Massive Multi Player Role Play Game. And many given the choice, since lets just say it openly here most gamers are antisocial, will play solo. So it is needed from time to time in subtle ways to pressure player into teaming up thus fulfilling the Massive Multi Player part of this game.

*To sum up my post in the spirit of TLDR.
Game needs higher diff for mid to high level quest to force solo players to either out level the quests by a great deal to compete or join forces with others.

Cry_Wolfe

I understand the concerns, but I still find myself cringing at these threads.

People who play MMO's are no longer males in the 13-26 year old range exclusively. We aren't all super competitive testosterone driven mating rights machines.

I know PLENTY of gamers in the 50+ bracket, and I meet more all the time.
I've also met my fair share of handicapped and disabled players.

You can look at them as outliers, but excluding them from content is still discrimination.

OKAY.. i got that out of my system
I had to think about the fight as i seriously had trouble remembering if i'd done it. I still don't remember it and I guess i'll have to look out for it on an alt. My point here is that if it was a tough fight i'd have remembered it! So yes i hear you on that mark.

Back to my rant though, and I have to say that a game has to be enjoyable, Many of the games you list in the OP had hard modes or group content that required a level of player sophistication not present in the majority of its other content. That to me is good game balance.
I might also point out that SINGLE PLAYER games are balanced against themselves. Dark Souls' popularity is based upon its difficulty, something that could never be said of the Elder Scrolls franchise, whose popularity is based in its massive explorable landscapes and custom player character development.

As someone who grew up with an electronic nanny even way back in the late 70's I am intimate with fading reaction times, older gaming buddies I know tend to love games no less, but their playstyle is based on the knowledge of fallibility, a concept alien to most younger people. It's not all about you

Makkir

You guys remember the early Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies? I played a bounty hunter and I remember the death threats when I got 2 jedi perma-dead for killing them.

BETAOPTICS

True but you also have to keep in mind that games aren't made for you exclusively. I hear people saying that if someone complains, I mean whines obviously, that they are wrong and they should feel bad. This is what I know as gamer entitlement.

No one has more right above others when voicing opinions. The best solution to this problem humanity has come up is to let masses speak and that is what happened. Masses voiced their opinion and changes were made based on those opinions.

Whether or not I would have agreed on that, especially since to me the boss was a walk in the park even under leveled, I will not say if I found a nerf to her was necessary and that there could have been better ways to do it but it happened and I'm fine with it.

How is that possible? Well, I relax and look from someone elses standpoint. If there is a problem, let's say this boss and I did not have any of the so claimed issues they had, does not automatically mean that it isn't an issue.

It means that I had no issues with it for a reason or another. Usually because I have culminated enough MMORPG and gaming experience during my lifetime to already know what is what, but I can not, I should not assume everyone would be where I am and thus, they have hard times.

Should hard games exist? Yes, they should. We have seen that they can be successful, such as Dark Souls series. But can I blame ZoS making this game to wider audience and then listening to their playerbase? No, I can not because there are good reasons for them to do it.

And let's be honest here. Even without the changes, there would have been outrage from the other half of the playerbase or at least some would have complained and as a designer standpoint, it is better to allow all players experience the game than to let only the hardcore basement dwellers experience it.

KerinKor

UnknownXV wrote: »

The reasoning behind making this thread came to me after I saw the recent patch has decreased the difficulty of a well-known Fighter's Guild quest boss named Doshia. While I do not want to linger too long on her specifically, I feel it is important to analyze and speculate as to why this was done.

The analyis I suspect is very simple.

We know are large number of people who completed this did so OVER LEVEL as they found it impossible to do on-level. I have no doubt that this 'nerf' had nothing to do with the achievers' sneering at the 'whiners' who need to L2P, and everything to do with ZOS analysing the logs and realising this fight was OVER-TUNED because a significant number (maybe even a majority) were unable to do it at the level it was designed for.

There's nothing commendable about a core-progression fight that is a c***-block to a majority, or even a significant minority, no matter how much the achievers howl and scream NERF!

Sure, some people will find even the new version too hard and over-leveling is there as an option .. thankfully this isn't FFXI/FFXIV where level caps mean the less skillful will never get past it .. but obviously this fight was originally too hard for many players.

'Hard' content that excludes a majority from taking part is bad per se, but if it simply gates phat lewt then fine, but it shouldn't gate progression.

jimredtalon

KerinKor wrote: »

UnknownXV wrote: »

The reasoning behind making this thread came to me after I saw the recent patch has decreased the difficulty of a well-known Fighter's Guild quest boss named Doshia. While I do not want to linger too long on her specifically, I feel it is important to analyze and speculate as to why this was done.

The analyis I suspect is very simple.

We know are large number of people who completed this did so OVER LEVEL as they found it impossible to do on-level. I have no doubt that this 'nerf' had nothing to do with the achievers' sneering at the 'whiners' who need to L2P, and everything to do with ZOS analysing the logs and realising this fight was OVER-TUNED because a significant number (maybe even a majority) were unable to do it at the level it was designed for.

There's nothing commendable about a core-progression fight that is a c***-block to a majority, or even a significant minority, no matter how much the achievers howl and scream NERF!

Sure, some people will find even the new version too hard and over-leveling is there as an option .. thankfully this isn't FFXI/FFXIV where level caps mean the less skillful will never get past it .. but obviously this fight was originally too hard for many players.

You can at least admit that there is room for fine tuning right? Because I think that is what he is asking for, which I think we would get any way.

Zubba

UnknownXV wrote: »

wrote...

This is the best post I have read on a forum in many years. I fully understand and agree on all points.

The thrill of risk vs reward can be great. As an example in eve online. I remember each players first pvp encounter on voice chat. Anyone could hear their shaky voices those first encounters. People was so full of adrenaline.

Mortelus

Demon Souls was a fantastic game. And when I am bored with this game, I am jumping straight in to Demon Souls II.

I think the majority of MMO players want to feel empowered and magnificent to some degree, compared to those around them. They want to feel they can conquer the world and then tell everyone about it.

In a single player game, you can repeatedly die and think to yourself, it's ok, it's my world, no one here to see it. In an MMO it's a different mentality.

Of course this is just my opinion, and probably way off.

I would love for Zeni to stick by their guns and keep the difficulty higher, but unfortunately that difficulty will turn newer players away, because they will feel underpowered.

nudel

@Mortelus‌ The thing is there's nothing empowering about beating something easily. I don't thrust my hands into the air and yell when I kill a mudcrab for instance. I do want that empowered feeling, but it only comes from beating something difficult. There's nothing shameful about dying to something difficult. I don't get where this concept comes from that death means you failed something completely. This isn't real life. There are respawns.

Tiyamel

i remember the days of FFXI (nostalgic memories here) when getting to 75 was a mission and then had to maybe skill up a bit on your weapon and then off out to earn merit points, loved it, the sense of achievement i had on completing my caps was awesome, and then they added Abyssea......and i left, point is i like the difficulty, if i can't succeed on 3 or 4 attempts i'll try in another level, i like feeling like i earned something when i get to cap and that i worked for it, not followed a storyline with someone holding my hand, i'll play with my kids on the xbox/ps3 if i want to do that.

Ninnghizhidda

Extreme difficulty might have its merits, and appeal. To some. Challenges are acceptable and indeed welcome by the many, if not all.

However, if you are going to design a fantasy world that is huge and one that is going to provide an awesome gaming experience, and you target this project to a very large and diverce audience, you are also faced with primary decisions.

Are you going to make the whole thing an immensely "challenging" experience where people will indeed need years to advance and reach a top level of competence? Are you going to make it so people are literally shaking with fear with every step and action they take, because it could cause them so dearly that they could lose in a moment what they had been working on for a long tme?

You can do all these things. But you will only catter for the very few. Because such a system is "elitistic" by design, and I would even dare to say, bordering on the "masochistic".

If you then want an answer, it is simple. A top rate game that targets millions of people can not be like this. And this is why the top selling titles, and of course ESO among them, are not and will never be.

You can argue about it not being a complete faceroll, and I doubt most mature / adult players would really like that. But I also doubt, that most people really love to come back home after a hard day's work, expect some good time and entertainment for a few hours gaming online and be faced instead with a nightmare worse than the worst hours they already had (ah, and pay for it too).

Speaking for myself, I certainly don't. Just my own personal view though.

jesterstear

I wonder if the Doshia fight is easier on some builds than others? If you're a low dps tank or healer who can't oneshot the cotton wool balls i think it makes things harder... in the end i succeeded, more through luck than anything else, but the fight had been going on half an hour and i was about to just let her kill me so i wouldn't have to bother with it any more.

That said, there's other encounters where being able to turtle up like my char can is a huge advantage. Maybe there should be different versions of the boss to suit different player's capabilities.

One thing i will say about difficulty, the game likes to kill you by making it impossible to run away. Low level mobs have a mixture of snares, crowd control, and range attacks that players are unlikely to have access to at that level.

Then there's that elite you encounter in Vulkhel guard lighthouse as part of the main story quest line. It's not soloable and you can't exit the door in combat.. by the time you realise this is an unbeatable mob it will be too late. Theoretically you can avoid death if you knew in advance what was coming and ran the moment the quest updates.

The reality is, you have to die. Then you respawn in the same room and the mob has buggered off, smug in the satisfaction you are dead and you have no chance of taking revenge because it's not there. nice.

Selstad

A major problem is that MMOs - unlike SP - have to cater to as broad an audience as possible. Dark Souls per example can be hell to play, but it's part of the game's charm.

I do however think that over the recent years, the MMO world has been influenced too heavily by WoW, and there is no denying that WoW has really become overall too easy and too catering. I sure hope that Zenimax doesn't do it that way, and acknowledge that some content will be locked to you if you don't put the effort and time into it. I do however fear that a lot of WoW players would want to make the game as cakewalk as WoW has become, especially in terms of questing. That I hope won't happen at all.

I like TESO for being a bit difficult, I really love that it takes a few tries to get things done and I love the fact that things can be overcome by changing tactics, were full frontal won't work, tactical approach works. So lets hope that Zenimax doesn't buckle inn like Blizzard has. Lets remind ourselves that Blizzard eventually lost 5 million subscribers in their attempt to cater both camps.

Nox_Aeterna

Well , while there is much to be said about how many would enjoy harder/easier games , to me , it is a more fundamental thing.

Single player games/multiplayer game with local servers , i get almost instant reactions and if i fail , i do think it is because i failed.

Multiplayer game like ESO with a server in the US where i get from 200/300 ms. most of my deaths until now , i blame on the freaking system , where i get a "nice" delay , and thus sometimes cant even change my weapon when i want to do it, sometimes enemies blink ...

Now , make this a game hard like dark souls , and you can bet im not playing it.

nudel

@jesterstear‌ It's not impossible to run away. Those cc and snare abilities are dodgeable. Double tap in any direction, but probably left or right if you're trying to dodge. It can also be bound to any key you desire. Yes low level players have access to cc and snare and ranged abilities. They may not choose to put their first points in them, but they are there. However, if you are running away and dying while fleeing, it's more likely that you waited a little too long to decide that you needed to run away. As the loading screen tip says 'Fleeing is a valid tactic'. But judging when to flee is a learned skill.

EDIT: Fleeing into water is useful as NPC enemies will only follow you if they can walk to reach you. Jumping up/down/over things is also a good tactic when fleeing. NPCs in ESO have better AI/ pathing than Skyrim so don't expect to be king of the rock shooting everything while they growl at you helplessly. But it does put needed distance between you, buying more time. Dodge or interrupt their cc/snare abilities and then hit the floor running if you know you're in over your head.

2nd Edit: NPCs do have a rather limited range. They will keep chasing you past this range. Once past this range, they will deaggro if attacked. However, they will continue to attack you until they deaggro. So you either need to run exceedingly far to get them to go away or do yourself a favor and turn around while fleeing. Shoot any white damage ranged wep or ranged skill at them and they will deaggro and go away.

jesterstear

You won't be fleeing unless fighting three mobs and I don't think you can get away at less than 15. You're likely to blunder into more if you try.

Seriously, the DOTs with snares are ordinary attacks, they are not like the ones which put a cone on the ground, or have an induction. You need stamina to sprint, stamina to roll, there isn't enough for both. If you're running you aren't blocking, interrupting or dodging (can't see the attack coming if an archer is building up to something far behind you).

Below level 15 you just don't have enough stamina or health to make it, even if you run straightaway. That was on my Templar tank... the sorcerer alt dies even more, but that's to be expected.

Most low level players won't have the CC and ranged abilities the mobs they are fighting have. Hypothetically it would be much easier to escape from a group of clones of yourself than a group of mobs.

Ygge

Ninnghizhidda wrote: »

Are you going to make the whole thing an immensely "challenging" experience where people will indeed need years to advance and reach a top level of competence? Are you going to make it so people are literally shaking with fear with every step and action they take, because it could cause them so dearly that they could lose in a moment what they had been working on for a long tme?

You can do all these things. But you will only catter for the very few. Because such a system is "elitistic" by design, and I would even dare to say, bordering on the "masochistic".

If you then want an answer, it is simple. A top rate game that targets millions of people can not be like this. And this is why the top selling titles, and of course ESO among them, are not and will never be.

You can argue about it not being a complete faceroll, and I doubt most mature / adult players would really like that. But I also doubt, that most people really love to come back home after a hard day's work, expect some good time and entertainment for a few hours gaming online and be faced instead with a nightmare worse than the worst hours they already had (ah, and pay for it too).

Literally shaking with fear, are we not exaggerating a bit?

I will use EVE as a example in my argumentation since it's the only other such MMO that I have played.

The principle in games where death means loss of items is that one never equips more than one can afford to loose. It's a personal risk assessment of what you are facing and what kind of skills there are. In EVE this is simple, just make sure the damage output of a mission will not go over the tanking capabilities of a ship and you can use as fancy gear as you wish since you won't be killed. This ensures relaxed game-play. In ESO, which has a combat system that can be labeled as more fast-paced and risky, I do not believe this death system would work as well as in EVE. Modern MMO's like ESO never really rewards planning in the same manner as EVE does. Even if you plan everything correct there is still a risk of dying.

The hi-light of playing with the loose everything-system in EVE is the PVP. As stated it gets adrenalin going, I also believe it's engaging and gives positive non-stress excitement. There are many campaigns and it would certainly be nice to test something like the EVE-system in one of them. I think it would be nice playing against other players with minimal or little gear advantage. Would be even nicer if squad-based pvp got more important too, not just the almighty blob I usually end up in. Right now there is just no risk in anything really. Nice story but little excitement.

Also, I agree with the original poster that it would be more rewarding with some sort of longer character progression. As it looks now I am already leveled more than halfway with all armor types, one hand and shield, restoration staff and 2-handed. Crafting goes a bit slower as I only deconstruct green and above items. Provisioning is maxed though, that went way too fast. I am just about to leave Rivenspire, the level 23-30 something area of Daggerfall Covenent. I might have missed something though, does skill progression end at 50 or are there veteran ranks of skill-trees too?

jimredtalon

Ygge wrote: »

Ninnghizhidda wrote: »

Are you going to make the whole thing an immensely "challenging" experience where people will indeed need years to advance and reach a top level of competence? Are you going to make it so people are literally shaking with fear with every step and action they take, because it could cause them so dearly that they could lose in a moment what they had been working on for a long tme?

You can do all these things. But you will only catter for the very few. Because such a system is "elitistic" by design, and I would even dare to say, bordering on the "masochistic".

If you then want an answer, it is simple. A top rate game that targets millions of people can not be like this. And this is why the top selling titles, and of course ESO among them, are not and will never be.

You can argue about it not being a complete faceroll, and I doubt most mature / adult players would really like that. But I also doubt, that most people really love to come back home after a hard day's work, expect some good time and entertainment for a few hours gaming online and be faced instead with a nightmare worse than the worst hours they already had (ah, and pay for it too).

Literally shaking with fear, are we not exaggerating a bit?

I will use EVE as a example in my argumentation since it's the only other such MMO that I have played.

The principle in games where death means loss of items is that one never equips more than one can afford to loose. It's a personal risk assessment of what you are facing and what kind of skills there are. In EVE this is simple, just make sure the damage output of a mission will not go over the tanking capabilities of a ship and you can use as fancy gear as you wish since you won't be killed. This ensures relaxed game-play. In ESO, which has a combat system that can be labeled as more fast-paced and risky, I do not believe this death system would work as well as in EVE. Modern MMO's like ESO never really rewards planning in the same manner as EVE does. Even if you plan everything correct there is still a risk of dying.

The hi-light of playing with the loose everything-system in EVE is the PVP. As stated it gets adrenalin going, I also believe it's engaging and gives positive non-stress excitement. There are many campaigns and it would certainly be nice to test something like the EVE-system in one of them. I think it would be nice playing against other players with minimal or little gear advantage. Would be even nicer if squad-based pvp got more important too, not just the almighty blob I usually end up in. Right now there is just no risk in anything really. Nice story but little excitement.

Also, I agree with the original poster that it would be more rewarding with some sort of longer character progression. As it looks now I am already leveled more than halfway with all armor types, one hand and shield, restoration staff and 2-handed. Crafting goes a bit slower as I only deconstruct green and above items. Provisioning is maxed though, that went way too fast. I am just about to leave Rivenspire, the level 23-30 something area of Daggerfall Covenent. I might have missed something though, does skill progression end at 50 or are there veteran ranks of skill-trees too?

Okay so next time you die feel free to give me all your stuff.
but seriously as a big mil-sim fan I love the idea of perma death and full inventory loss or even partial inventory loss, but (and it's a big but) I don't think that would work for the style of pvp this game has now cultivated.

In other words its too late to make any big play style changes to pvp. But its nice to dream.

Malvokian

If I can't win every fight then you discriminate against me Zenimax!

Damn, if you can't beat a fight then go level up and come back. Don't cry and whine about it.

Ygge

jimredtalon wrote: »

Okay so next time you die feel free to give me all your stuff.
but seriously as a big mil-sim fan I love the idea of perma death and full inventory loss or even partial inventory loss, but (and it's a big but) I don't think that would work for the style of pvp this game has now cultivated.

In other words its too late to make any big play style changes to pvp. But its nice to dream.

Sure, if such a playstyle is tested one should at most equip green items in order not to loose to much when dying. Perhaps even white regular trash if one joins a horde of players in pvp. Never equip what you can't afford to loose.

You're right of course. Nice to dream indeed!