That's fine, if the changes actually would lead to more subs.

There have been many MMO's that had difficult content that changed it to steamroll mode. I can't recall a single instance where it has helped anything.

You'll see more people running around vet levels for about a month. Then when they solo their way through the content, they'll be on the forums complaining they need end game content and/or a challenge.

You can't win with people. If it were up to me I would've made the content more difficult as punishment for wasting my precious dev time. Then people would've simultaneously heralded me as a hero and the worst game developer of all time. And then a lot of people would play my game because they'd wonder what the fuss is all about. More subs for me.

We'll see if ZOS's strategy works as well. "Yay another MMO that turned their content in hello kitty baby world, where do I sign up?"

Part if the issue is overall difficulty. The other issue is some people simply don't like playing in the other factions whether they want to simply do it on an alt instead or never quest there in general.

Those 3 things in combination are going make the other factions look very barren. Changing the difficulty will only slightly change whats being seen.

If we have to have the VR content the way ZoS decided to include in ESO, then the changes mentioned are towards the correct direction.

Whether we like it or not, "VR content", at least the one included in the 2 factions other than the one you start with, accounts for roughly 2/3s of the whole game (excluding Cyro, Craglorn etc).

Was it really such a bright idea to make 2/3s of the game not very appealing to many people? It wasn't and it never is. Yes, the "usual suspects" already cry a river of tears about "nerfing". They would always do this, in ESO, anywhere.

I have written this before, and I still stand by my opinion: you can not have the bulk of the game content, which is supposedly open to the "general public", being unappealing to the "general public". It is just a fact, and cry and yell as much as you like, but in the end, loosing that "general public" just is no good, for any game.

In my book, the correct way to design things is: having several instances, dungeons, areas, whatever, that can also offer a challenge. Either by having an increased difficulty to begin with, or even setting a scaling difficulty, by adding more modes, like having a solo mode, small party mode, raid mode, "hard mode" and so on. Usually, this works well, and keeps people happy. Those seeking a challenge, even an extreme one, also those who are progressing at a slower pace, but can still get a taste of it. Rewards can vary accordingly, scaling up to "uber" or unique gear / materials / titles / achievements that can be gained in the hardest modes.

However, you just don't go and make most of the game "hard" for most of the players, by default. This kind of game by default narrows its audience. And I don't see ESO as this kind of little "elitist" game. Not when they are aiming out to millions of people and investing many millions in development. Simple facts.

Thus, still hoping these forthcoming changes will be what ESO needs to gradually unlock its huge potential and indeed cater and be truly embraced by those millions of people, and yes, become a historical success rather than an epic failure.

I agree with your point if I am interpreting it correctly.

"Like it or not they have to appeal to the masses and not just the elite. They need to make their money and we need population for this game to gain ground and get to the top of the charts"

It's almost like a growing country. You cannot only have upper class to survive. You need a middle class (casuals) as well ( and I guess a lower class but i don't know what that would represent in an mmo)

jonpaul wrote: »

So after reading over the threads about the changes coming Monday ( which we are still unaware of what they will be). The question has risen in my head that will this be good for the game? I think it may be in my opinion.

I will start by saying that me and my wife just finished Cadwell's Gold and are V10 currently. We have been grouped through every quest we have done and really enjoyed it the whole time. I am DK sword & board and she is destro/ resto templar and it has been hard, but fun!

The reason I think it will be good is that the vet levels are still fairly dead, not completely dead but it is still rare to see boss/ dolmen groups like 1-50. We need population! While it may not be what everyone wants, it is for the good of the game to me. More people means more subs and more longevity for this blossoming, new game. I know we don't all see eye-to-eye but people should realize that if we want a thriving game people need to come and stay.

I'm sure some will not agree with this but it can't be about what "I" want but rather what "we" need to keep this game thriving. I agree it shouldn't be care bear land but if it is toned down some for the sake of population, I for one am fine with it.

Thanks!

sorry but you sound like a carebear and your main points were

1. we need more ppl cause more ppl means more subs..
um... no ***?

2.We should all come together and stay in the game

sorry man but the 70s are over.

As for the game... VR content has to be the worst idea in a MMO ive seen.
Instead of them letting us roam and do what we want at level 50 they are forcing us to play the other factions story line ? You have to be kidding me.. What if i wanted to save that for later "IF" ( and thats a big if) i wanted to make a alt on the other faction and eventually watch their storyline.

When will devs learn... Making hamsters go through made tubes instead of letting them be free. Cyrodill should have never been instanced, that right there kills all the immersion let a lone no player housing .. no OPEN world PvP which is what a LOT of players wanted since the dawn of MMOs.

The one game that will always be brought up is SWG.

YOU HEAR THAT DEVS? SWG... TAKE NOTES... WRITE IT DOWN.. PUT IT ON YOUR FOREHEADS. PUT IT ON TOILET PAPER SO EVERYTIME YOU TAKE A WIPE THERE IS A SLIGHT TINGLE AND YOU WILL NOTICE WHATS MISSING!

Stop throwing crap at us.

Oh well, the internet wins again and a civil conversation turns to a temper tantrum.

By the way, it was the 60's that were peace and harmony (not that I lived through it thankfully).

What most people don't really get is that half the people in the world have I.Q.'s of less than 100. So if half of the people who play MMOs are the average population, then there are going to have to be changes made if the company wants them to have a good time.

That is not an insult. That is just a statistical fact.

http://iqtest-center.com/iq-scores.php
http://psychology.about.com/od/intelligence/f/average-iq.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_an_average_IQ_for_an_adult

If you play a single player game, there are adjustments like, easy mode, hard mode, etc. In most MMOs that is simply not the case.

That's not to say that all "smart" people are good at video games and "dumb" people are bad at video games. I'm sure there are some really good "dumb" players and some really bad "smart" players.

There is also a base video game skill level for groups as well. MMOs have to accommodate to that average base skill level.

Simply put, there are some players that really suck and some players that are fantastic at MMO gaming. However most players are in the middle somewhere.

If a MMO is to succeed, it has to be created for the average player, skill wise.

There are a ton of other variables, like how competitive a player is, the effort a player wants to put into the game, etc, but even this has to be made to the average player, not the elite super gamer, or a MMO will simply fail.

Have a nice day.

demenzia wrote: »

Ninnghizhidda wrote: »

I have written this before, and I still stand by my opinion: you can not have the bulk of the game content, which is supposedly open to the "general public", being unappealing to the "general public". It is just a fact, and cry and yell as much as you like, but in the end, loosing that "general public" just is no good, for any game.

Sigh. There are so many good musicians, writers, TV shows, video game franchises etc. turned into utter s*** in order to attract bigger audience and earn more money. The list is infinite. I'm ready to pay 10 times more for the subscription if it will help to keep the "general public" away, same public that enjoys Justin Bieber's music and Twilight movies. I'm a realist though, I can cry and yell (and I will), but money will win anyway.

Yes, I'm sure ZOS will do great charging 150 bucks a month and turn the game to super hard mode.

I can't figure out why everyone just doesn't do it your way.

It's a mystery.

Blackwidow wrote: »

demenzia wrote: »

Ninnghizhidda wrote: »

I have written this before, and I still stand by my opinion: you can not have the bulk of the game content, which is supposedly open to the "general public", being unappealing to the "general public". It is just a fact, and cry and yell as much as you like, but in the end, loosing that "general public" just is no good, for any game.

Sigh. There are so many good musicians, writers, TV shows, video game franchises etc. turned into utter s*** in order to attract bigger audience and earn more money. The list is infinite. I'm ready to pay 10 times more for the subscription if it will help to keep the "general public" away, same public that enjoys Justin Bieber's music and Twilight movies. I'm a realist though, I can cry and yell (and I will), but money will win anyway.

Yes, I'm sure ZOS will do great charging 150 bucks a month and turn the game to super hard mode.

I can't figure out why everyone just doesn't do it your way.

It's a mystery.

Cos they are stingy perhaps. Prefer to buy cheap stuff "made is China" and then complain about the bad quality over and over again ^^

Fleymark wrote: »

Topic notwithstanding sounds like a pretty fun and solid duo you are running with your wife, op.

Makes me miss gaming with my ex gf a bit. Having a permanent balanced duo isn't everything in every game but is probably golden in this one, I bet.

It has been very fun so far. It is a nice way to relax after work and dinner for a couple of hours a night. That is why I'm hoping for longevity from this game!

And as we all know, if your wife is happy then you will be too and she is happy playing.

Blackwidow wrote: »

ROFLMAO!

I love you, Man.

Old man voice--"Dang companies always wanting to make a friggin profit! I my day companies gave everything away, and we liked it that way!"

Everything is overpriced in modern world, it's market economy and if you want good quality, you should pay for it. Deal with it I don't mind paying more for the quality, but I do mind when companies are only profit oriented and don't give a **** about the quality of their goods and services, just because general public will consume everything if it's CHEAP. When I go to a fine-dining restaurant I don't want to eat burgers and I'm paying for it. When I pay for a video game, I want to play a video game, not watching cartoons and pressing one key from time to time, because pressing 2 or 3 can be too difficult for general public. They should either make subs more expensive, so only those who are interested will play or make it free, so no one will have any rights to complain. End of.

demenzia wrote: »

Sigh. There are so many good musicians, writers, TV shows, video game franchises etc. turned into utter s*** in order to attract bigger audience and earn more money. The list is infinite. I'm ready to pay 10 times more for the subscription if it will help to keep the "general public" away, same public that enjoys Justin Bieber's music and Twilight movies. I'm a realist though, I can cry and yell (and I will), but money will win anyway.

While this is certainly true in how music and movie industries generally function, there is indeed a slight difference. A "bad" movie is bad, and "bad" music is just bad, and no matter what, if it isn't to your taste you will never be able to swallow it.

A game has more freedom though. It can have many different elements and a clever design, so that it can accommodate different kinds of people all at once. And while you do need the "general public", because hey, after all it is business and you need to sell as much as you can to make high profits, you can also keep the "special" players happy too.

In my eyes it is called smart design and development, to have a solid backbone with all the key features, and also offer all those extra "special" features to reach out to those who need that extra content or "challenge".

And, yes, a "small scale" game project can be awesome, one that caters to the "special" audience, but it will never become a top selling product. Sure, there are several of those games out there, if you wish to dig them up. Smaller projects created with love and care by small teams of enthusiasts made for like minded enthusiasts. Unfortunately, a worldwide selling top ranked AAA title like ESO can not fit into that category.

Thus the necessary compromises. Which doesn't mean the game can not be appealing to everyone (or almost everyone). Just takes more effort, and a proper understanding of what a MMO really is.

yes, I like the upcoming changes. now, they should destroy class system and free skill lines.

Blackwidow wrote: »

WARNING: Do NOT laugh at this joke in front of wife.

this is why arranged marriages are far better. no problems coming from this widely spread mental illness known as 'love'.

For VR content, I would really like to assume the role of a general of my alliance and take the fight to the zones of the enemy. Not just Cyrodiil. As a Daggerfall general, burn Elden Root to the ground, for example.

Etharian wrote: »

The one game that will always be brought up is SWG.

YOU HEAR THAT DEVS? SWG... TAKE NOTES... WRITE IT DOWN.. PUT IT ON YOUR FOREHEADS. PUT IT ON TOILET PAPER SO EVERYTIME YOU TAKE A WIPE THERE IS A SLIGHT TINGLE AND YOU WILL NOTICE WHATS MISSING!

Stop throwing crap at us.

ahhh everytime i hear SWG it takes me back...anyways...

while, i do agree with @Etharian and his assessment, i don't share that same vehemence lol. i would like to see them add new "optional" zones (solo capable but not group required) where the difficulty is at least as hard as previous VR content (if not harder) and we can grind vanity pets, items with rare "vanity" effects (im sure yall have read smthn similiar before), all that stuff that I worked so hard in other games to get but didn't necessarily put me at an advantage in PvE/PvP (im sure yall have read smthn similiar before). It just gave me a way to show off my accomplishments. I remember seeing toons running around in various other MMOs with a piece of gear, pet, or an awesome aura/effect on their armor and immediately hopping onto google to try and track down exactly where to find this awesome thing and how to get it. Then working, grinding and praying to get that elusive "thing". in SWG it was my mutated rancor, grinding ancient krayts for pearls, or getting my Ace piloting. lol sry, anyways, ZOSjessica mentioned a middle ground with the new balancing but I feel any who have already enjoyed VR content as it is, are kind of getting left out a little bit and it would be nice to see some measure of balance to those who excel at ESO.