Is overland content, post starting zones too easy, for you?

Sweetpea704 · November 2017

Just right.

You want it to be harder? Don't put your champ points in. The starting zones are for people who are STARTING the game. If you have 1000 champ points and are starting your 14th alt, the starting zones are not geared for you. Go level in normal Maelstrom Arena, world boss hop, do harder stuff. Do a different faction's content. You forget wandering around looking for quest givers and all that fun stuff.

crobarXIII · November 2017

Just right.

I think the mix of the regular overland npc, delves & questing & the harder world bosses is just right. If I'm running around farming I want To be able to farm as much as I can as fast as I can without dealing with op regular overland npc's so leave them as is. I also do enjoy the difficulty of soloing world bosses for daily quest, with that said I refuse to attempt soloing creeping hunger again after 20 minutes it was still at 51% health

I wonder what percentage of the players that said it is too easy can solo the unfinished dolmen or looming shadows?

Jawasa · November 2017

@Kamatsu A person playing with one skill and no points spent in attributes is hardly the majority at end game. Non of us can realy make claims of what the majority that play games want. For example vanilla wow content was extremely hard by eso standards and slow but it still had 10 million subs at one point. It's all about marketing and making people think they want something.

BAck to the topic I think it would be great with harder dlc zones maybe at the lvl of hotr/soth dungeons on world bosses. But then the zone also need a normal mode that drop blue items imo. Just like dungeons have normal and vet mode also only give reards to 4 players on a boss so it cant be zerg farmed even make some parts instanced with a 4 player cap.

Linaleah · November 2017

Just right.

MaleAmazon wrote: »

but you shouldn't get anything extra for it, only the added challenge.

Lol at telling other people how the game "should" work

P.S. the fact that even on these forums, with biased poll options and all - we still have 40% of people saying its just right? should tell you all something as well.

You dont know if the poll results are biased, you dont know in which direction if they are.

you know why MMO's are different? because this is where you can lord your superiority over other people. and no, i don't think people like that should get what they want.

So you basically dont want people who pay to play MMOs to get the kind of MMO they want.

no, the fact that you treat GAMING as a job is a problem. getting paid for doing a job is good, its necessary. getting paid for a hobby? if you want to get paid, its no longer a hobby its a JOB. so what you want is to turn this game? into a job. no thanks.

There is a point to thinking that gaming for me is becoming more of a.. I´d say chore rather than a job. I try to be mindful of that and move away from it. But the point is that the *choice* of a higher difficulty is something people want, even when it just provides extra challenge. I´d choose it even without extra in-game rewards, but it makes more sense to add in-game rewards of some sorts, since the entire game works like that - for a reason. Because that. Is. How. People. Work. Psychologically.

Hell, you talk about Iron Man.. I dont know exactly which one you´re talking about, but the WoW one, and also Diablo for example, have external rewards in the form of victor lists and in-game achievements! It isn´t just your own sense of achievement! I have played several games where the creators patched in extra hard modes (Skyrim, Fallout, Diablo...). Adding "extra easy mode"? It happens, but not that frequently...

Anyway this is getting pointless. I have been in pointless internet arguments before, and I have learned to not get tangled up in those. So I am not having *this* argument anymore.

to that first. isn't that exactly what you are doing? telling people how the game should work?

and you know why easy modes are not patched in (except for when they do - in a form of content nerfs/class buffs)? becasue they are baseline. and they are baseline for a REASON

we do agree on one thing though, this argument is pointless.

Jade1986 · November 2017

Far too easy.

idk wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

[/snip]

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

This is not about vet trials or even vet dungeons.

I am fully aware this is not about vet trials. That is extremely clear. However, you conveniently edited out the comments that put what you quoted into context.

I suggest anyone looking at the post I just quoted go back one page and read my full comment he quoted.

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

I understand that Zos' choice on this matter, and really the choice of major MMORPGs is not something you agree with. However, this design is tried and true in todays market. It is proven to be great for revenue and this is a business first and foremost.

As for the balancing you mention, your example is not really accurate. Most of the game is balanced around new and casual players. Those groups make up a huge portion of the player base. You mentioned starter zones when Zos does not have starter zones. All the alliance zones are intended for leveling (and more since we no longer have vet ranks) and it might just be bad business for Zos to cordon off DLCs for more experienced players since limiting sales would put a damper on revenue.

The challenge MMOS put into these games is with instanced content like raids and in the case of ESO, these trials. Well, for some we an toss in the dungeons as well. It is pretty much a standard design to have different content and different difficulty level.

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

God I am sotired of hearing this argument. What about what is good for the game, what is good for the title, what is good for gameplay, what is good for progression? I understand that profits are important, but good god, its called a video game, not a fantasy business investment.

While I understand it is inconvenient, but it is a business first, not for you, but for Zos. It is a video game to you, but not to Zenimax. The Business side of their operations make the decisions on this, every time.

Any player that has interest in increased difficulty is doing the instanced content. They are doing the vet trials their HMs, that is where progression is.

That is why Zos, and other MMORPGs spend the time to build raids.

Case in point, SWTOR lost their strongest players when they stopped building full raids and went to single boss instanced fights. What is good for profits, directly related to the actual game, would seem to be good for the game itself.

Regardless, if Zos thinks your idea on this is worth the effort then they will add it. If not, I guess we will see more of the same. It can be done since it would merely be something to nerf the player and Zos knows how to though it is not a small project so it comes down to value added to the game for the effort.

Swtor TANKED when it did that, absolutely TANKED.

Swtor tanked for several reasons

Dumbed down content
Dumbed down combat system
Dumbed down stat system
Hyper fixation on single player story
Galactic Conquest
RNG Crates for in game progress
Complete lack of story based ops
Those bastardized versions of flashpoints

all those things contributed to the slow death of swtor. Which shows us that catering purely to the god mode story only crowd simply does not cut it. The only reason ZoS is holding the game up is because they are still bringing out meaty Dungeons and trials and a regular quarterly xpac of a sort. If the god mode story crowd was the single only important crowd, swtor would be the most popular game on the market atm, but it is not.

MudkipKatana · November 2017

When I first started, I stuggled... Alot. I almost gave up on the game around Lvl 36 on my first toon before some friendly player gave me some advice on a how to build and I came to find the StamSorc master class... But I digress.

This game, for a new player, is not only slow but also unforgiving. There is no information that's readily available "in game" to help you learn mechanics or priority stats or in general have recommended stats for certain setups. It's one of my most glaring issues with this game is the huge learning barrier for new players. Pair that with the pacing of the games progression and I find myself unable to get any of my close family and friends into the game. Even ones that play MMOs. When they start, I give them all the helpful advice they need in order to level quickly or otherwise just enjoy the game but the problem for everyone is always the same. It's too damned slow and hard to get into thanks to progression.

It's not an easy issue to fix but still, I wish something could be done for new players to enhance their experience. Especially for those that aren't all that interested in questing as I was. I always play through the game by doing all the questing first. I got to CP160 by 100%ing all of the Zone Quest and the Main Quest. After that, I bought the DLC and did those. One year later, I'm CP 643.

Kiralyn2000 · November 2017

Just right.

MaleAmazon wrote: »

Well the results of the poll disagree with you.

I don´t know why others play, I play in order to get rewards. By rewards I don´t just mean 'stuff', I mean getting to see new content, fun quests, getting to try out good builds in PvP, beating hard content, etc.

Hmm, based on those various "gamer personality/psychology" articles I've seen, "getting to see new content, fun quests" and "try out good builds in PvP, beating hard content" are two different playstyles or focuses. One is Exploration, the other is Achievement. Of course, a person can be even in both, but they're not a linked thing. (i.e, someone rated high in Exploration but not as high in Achievement would play on a lower difficulty. They want to see the world/lore/story, but they're not into clawing their way through it.)

There is no uniqueness here; were I a gambling man I´d wage people with experience in gaming turned the difficulty up in Skyrim. Despite the fact that if they turned the difficulty down they´d get the exact same missions, environment and story. Why play on expert when you can just turn the difficulty to novice and kill things faster? Hell, people wanted extra extra hard mode which they put in.

Been videogaming since ~1979. Arcade, AppleII, PC, Mac, console... personally, I never turn up the difficulty in games anymore (except games like Diablo/PoE/Grim Dawn, where playing through each difficulty is part of the regular path through the game). And yeah, back when I was playing Dragon Age:Origins, I ended up turning the difficulty down, because the super-tedious combat was getting in the way of enjoying the story. (Of course, it didn't help that I was playing a very non-meta party, no AoE Mages in Dragon Mage:Origins, whee!

)

As for Survival Extra Makework & Tedium mode in Skyrim & Fallout 4.... yeah, avoided the heck out of those.

Yes, overcoming a Big Dramatic Boss fight at the climax of the story can add to that plot resolution.... but having to re-do that 10-20m+ boss fight several times to get there just takes away from the whole story climax and makes it a burden. Boss fights like that, I don't feel "Woohoo! Awesome!"... just "Thank god that's over."

(It might be obvious, but I'm not a competitive gamer. Don't care that someone else had a higher gearscore then me in WoW, don't play PvP/Mobas/Overwatch/whatever, don't care about DPS meters or leaderboards. I'm just here to explore around and have fun.)

tplink3r1 · November 2017

Far too easy.

Sweetpea704 wrote: »

You want it to be harder? Don't put your champ points in. The starting zones are for people who are STARTING the game. If you have 1000 champ points and are starting your 14th alt, the starting zones are not geared for you. Go level in normal Maelstrom Arena, world boss hop, do harder stuff. Do a different faction's content. You forget wandering around looking for quest givers and all that fun stuff.

That will take out progression and the game is still stupid easy without CP and gear.

Chilly-McFreeze · November 2017

Far too easy.

MudkipKatana wrote: »

When I first started, I stuggled... Alot. I almost gave up on the game around Lvl 36 on my first toon before some friendly player gave me some advice on a how to build and I came to find the StamSorc master class... But I digress.

This game, for a new player, is not only slow but also unforgiving. There is no information that's readily available "in game" to help you learn mechanics or priority stats or in general have recommended stats for certain setups. It's one of my most glaring issues with this game is the huge learning barrier for new players. Pair that with the pacing of the games progression and I find myself unable to get any of my close family and friends into the game. Even ones that play MMOs. When they start, I give them all the helpful advice they need in order to level quickly or otherwise just enjoy the game but the problem for everyone is always the same. It's too damned slow and hard to get into thanks to progression.

It's not an easy issue to fix but still, I wish something could be done for new players to enhance their experience. Especially for those that aren't all that interested in questing as I was. I always play through the game by doing all the questing first. I got to CP160 by 100%ing all of the Zone Quest and the Main Quest. After that, I bought the DLC and did those. One year later, I'm CP 643.

Agree on the bolded part. The lack of a real tutorial baffles me, they don't even teach all the basics. Might be some sort of "pop up" tuts during the first encounters of specific topics would be helpful. I didn't knew how tooltip damage was calculated until I stumbled across it here, I was far in the 40s levelwise. To mention that would be really helpful.

But once you get a grip of that and the standard mechanics (block, dodge, resources, red circles) it gets easy fast.

However, I don't exactly get what you mean with the part I marked cursive. The progression? You don't get stronger until you reach a certain CP threshold anyway, and that's mostly because it makes no sense to collect sets before CP160. With battleleveling in place you are stat wise good to go if you don't use underleveled gear (my guess here is that most people change gear for higher level pieces anyway when they find them). BL is so strong it even throws over high leveled players when you duel them.

badmojo · November 2017

Far too easy.

Linaleah wrote: »

P.S. the fact that even on these forums, with biased poll options and all - we still have 40% of people saying its just right? should tell you all something as well.

Tells me that 60% of the forum user who responded love this game so much they will continue to play it despite a lack of difficulty.

How many players left the game because of the lack of difficulty? How many players are too busy enjoying the difficulty being easy to come on the forums and read polls?

How do those 40% of voters know they wouldn't enjoy increased difficulty? That doesn't exist, but this version does, and 60% of voters think it's too easy.

Polls only give an small insight into what some people think. We really shouldn't read into them too much. Ask Hillary how great polls are.

elfantasmo · November 2017

Far too easy.

When you can solo any world boss in any region it’s too easy...

Jeremy · November 2017

Far too easy.

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

I understand that Zos' choice on this matter, and really the choice of major MMORPGs is not something you agree with. However, this design is tried and true in todays market. It is proven to be great for revenue and this is a business first and foremost.

As for the balancing you mention, your example is not really accurate. Most of the game is balanced around new and casual players. Those groups make up a huge portion of the player base. You mentioned starter zones when Zos does not have starter zones. All the alliance zones are intended for leveling (and more since we no longer have vet ranks) and it might just be bad business for Zos to cordon off DLCs for more experienced players since limiting sales would put a damper on revenue.

The challenge MMOS put into these games is with instanced content like raids and in the case of ESO, these trials. Well, for some we an toss in the dungeons as well. It is pretty much a standard design to have different content and different difficulty level.

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

This game does have starter zones. They zones you start in are considered starter zones.

I understand the argument. But I think it's silly to say the entire game save a few trials and dungeons should be balanced around new players just starting out. That's just a very flawed theory of game design in my opinion and eventually high level characters are going to lose interest in questing and exploring on a game that chooses to do that. Which - and judging by the frequent posts I see on this board - is already starting to happen.

A lot of us (including many high level players) enjoy questing and exploring and do not want to spend all our time repeating some trial over and over. So expecting high levels just to go run trials if they want to find interesting game play is not an effective solution.

Doctordarkspawn · November 2017

Just right.

nnargun wrote: »

EvilCroc wrote: »

Overland PvE is for nice, atmospheric questing and leveling, not for challenge.

I don't think questing is any fun if it doesn't present any challenge. They might as well just give me a book containing all the quest stories.

Not everyone is like you.

Jeremy · November 2017

Far too easy.

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

MaleAmazon wrote: »

Well the results of the poll disagree with you.

I don´t know why others play, I play in order to get rewards. By rewards I don´t just mean 'stuff', I mean getting to see new content, fun quests, getting to try out good builds in PvP, beating hard content, etc.

Hmm, based on those various "gamer personality/psychology" articles I've seen, "getting to see new content, fun quests" and "try out good builds in PvP, beating hard content" are two different playstyles or focuses. One is Exploration, the other is Achievement. Of course, a person can be even in both, but they're not a linked thing. (i.e, someone rated high in Exploration but not as high in Achievement would play on a lower difficulty. They want to see the world/lore/story, but they're not into clawing their way through it.)

There is no uniqueness here; were I a gambling man I´d wage people with experience in gaming turned the difficulty up in Skyrim. Despite the fact that if they turned the difficulty down they´d get the exact same missions, environment and story. Why play on expert when you can just turn the difficulty to novice and kill things faster? Hell, people wanted extra extra hard mode which they put in.

Been videogaming since ~1979. Arcade, AppleII, PC, Mac, console... personally, I never turn up the difficulty in games anymore (except games like Diablo/PoE/Grim Dawn, where playing through each difficulty is part of the regular path through the game). And yeah, back when I was playing Dragon Age:Origins, I ended up turning the difficulty down, because the super-tedious combat was getting in the way of enjoying the story. (Of course, it didn't help that I was playing a very non-meta party, no AoE Mages in Dragon Mage:Origins, whee! )

As for Survival Extra Makework & Tedium mode in Skyrim & Fallout 4.... yeah, avoided the heck out of those.

Yes, overcoming a Big Dramatic Boss fight at the climax of the story can add to that plot resolution.... but having to re-do that 10-20m+ boss fight several times to get there just takes away from the whole story climax and makes it a burden. Boss fights like that, I don't feel "Woohoo! Awesome!"... just "Thank god that's over."

(It might be obvious, but I'm not a competitive gamer. Don't care that someone else had a higher gearscore then me in WoW, don't play PvP/Mobas/Overwatch/whatever, don't care about DPS meters or leaderboards. I'm just here to explore around and have fun.)

I'm not a competitive gamer either. Not only do I not care about DPS meters but I have contempt for them. And I also play ESO because I enjoy exploring the world and having fun. But it's difficult to have fun when everything (or most everything) you encounter on the landscape is so brain dead easy you can annihilate them in seconds without a second thought.

So I would caution people not to assume that everyone here who is dissatisfied with the current state of this game's challenge when it comes to solo/questing content are one of those competitive or hard core type players. Because I doubt that is the case.

I'm sure there are plenty of casual players who simply enjoy questing and exploring the world of Tamriel who find this game becoming too easy as well.

Tandor · November 2017

Just right.

elfantasmo wrote: »

When you can solo any world boss in any region it’s too easy...

No, when most people can solo any world boss in any region it's too easy, when you can do it that simply raises questions about the extent of your knowledge of the game and the degree to which you are skilled and geared as compared to those who cannot do it.

The fact that there is a healthy balance in the poll between those who find it too hard, too easy, and about right suggests that ZOS got the balance pretty well spot on - for a part of the game that is not supposed to be the toughest challenge. Run the same poll about VMA and not only will you get a very different response, but there will be a reason for that - it's where the challenge is supposed to be.

idk · November 2017

Just right.

-

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

[/snip]

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

This is not about vet trials or even vet dungeons.

I am fully aware this is not about vet trials. That is extremely clear. However, you conveniently edited out the comments that put what you quoted into context.

I suggest anyone looking at the post I just quoted go back one page and read my full comment he quoted.

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

I understand that Zos' choice on this matter, and really the choice of major MMORPGs is not something you agree with. However, this design is tried and true in todays market. It is proven to be great for revenue and this is a business first and foremost.

As for the balancing you mention, your example is not really accurate. Most of the game is balanced around new and casual players. Those groups make up a huge portion of the player base. You mentioned starter zones when Zos does not have starter zones. All the alliance zones are intended for leveling (and more since we no longer have vet ranks) and it might just be bad business for Zos to cordon off DLCs for more experienced players since limiting sales would put a damper on revenue.

The challenge MMOS put into these games is with instanced content like raids and in the case of ESO, these trials. Well, for some we an toss in the dungeons as well. It is pretty much a standard design to have different content and different difficulty level.

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

God I am sotired of hearing this argument. What about what is good for the game, what is good for the title, what is good for gameplay, what is good for progression? I understand that profits are important, but good god, its called a video game, not a fantasy business investment.

While I understand it is inconvenient, but it is a business first, not for you, but for Zos. It is a video game to you, but not to Zenimax. The Business side of their operations make the decisions on this, every time.

Any player that has interest in increased difficulty is doing the instanced content. They are doing the vet trials their HMs, that is where progression is.

That is why Zos, and other MMORPGs spend the time to build raids.

Case in point, SWTOR lost their strongest players when they stopped building full raids and went to single boss instanced fights. What is good for profits, directly related to the actual game, would seem to be good for the game itself.

Regardless, if Zos thinks your idea on this is worth the effort then they will add it. If not, I guess we will see more of the same. It can be done since it would merely be something to nerf the player and Zos knows how to though it is not a small project so it comes down to value added to the game for the effort.

Swtor TANKED when it did that, absolutely TANKED.

Swtor tanked for several reasons
Dumbed down content

Dumbed down combat system

Dumbed down stat system

Hyper fixation on single player story

Galactic Conquest

RNG Crates for in game progress

Complete lack of story based ops

Those bastardized versions of flashpoints

all those things contributed to the slow death of swtor. Which shows us that catering purely to the god mode story only crowd simply does not cut it. The only reason ZoS is holding the game up is because they are still bringing out meaty Dungeons and trials and a regular quarterly xpac of a sort. If the god mode story crowd was the single only important crowd, swtor would be the most popular game on the market atm, but it is not.

Some of your points are appropriate in they did over simplify builds. Things like RNG crates really did not affect the serious player in a negative manner. Especially since they could by anything they wanted out of them from the GTN with in game credits.

But yes, you are exactly correct that the ceasing of creating new ops left the players interested in challenging content with nothing really to do except the same ops they had been doing for years already. I did not want to bring it up, but again, yes, the creating of those easy FPs also added, but at least they still did a few more FPs that were worthy.

Those were the two biggest factors that lead to the more serious player leaving SWTOR. Few of the serious players still log in and it is mostly for PvP. Yes, some top players actually still log in for their PvP.

Jeremy · November 2017

Far too easy.

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

MaleAmazon wrote: »

Well the results of the poll disagree with you.

I don´t know why others play, I play in order to get rewards. By rewards I don´t just mean 'stuff', I mean getting to see new content, fun quests, getting to try out good builds in PvP, beating hard content, etc.

Hmm, based on those various "gamer personality/psychology" articles I've seen, "getting to see new content, fun quests" and "try out good builds in PvP, beating hard content" are two different playstyles or focuses. One is Exploration, the other is Achievement. Of course, a person can be even in both, but they're not a linked thing. (i.e, someone rated high in Exploration but not as high in Achievement would play on a lower difficulty. They want to see the world/lore/story, but they're not into clawing their way through it.)

There is no uniqueness here; were I a gambling man I´d wage people with experience in gaming turned the difficulty up in Skyrim. Despite the fact that if they turned the difficulty down they´d get the exact same missions, environment and story. Why play on expert when you can just turn the difficulty to novice and kill things faster? Hell, people wanted extra extra hard mode which they put in.

Been videogaming since ~1979. Arcade, AppleII, PC, Mac, console... personally, I never turn up the difficulty in games anymore (except games like Diablo/PoE/Grim Dawn, where playing through each difficulty is part of the regular path through the game). And yeah, back when I was playing Dragon Age:Origins, I ended up turning the difficulty down, because the super-tedious combat was getting in the way of enjoying the story. (Of course, it didn't help that I was playing a very non-meta party, no AoE Mages in Dragon Mage:Origins, whee! )

As for Survival Extra Makework & Tedium mode in Skyrim & Fallout 4.... yeah, avoided the heck out of those.

Yes, overcoming a Big Dramatic Boss fight at the climax of the story can add to that plot resolution.... but having to re-do that 10-20m+ boss fight several times to get there just takes away from the whole story climax and makes it a burden. Boss fights like that, I don't feel "Woohoo! Awesome!"... just "Thank god that's over."

(It might be obvious, but I'm not a competitive gamer. Don't care that someone else had a higher gearscore then me in WoW, don't play PvP/Mobas/Overwatch/whatever, don't care about DPS meters or leaderboards. I'm just here to explore around and have fun.)

Tandor wrote: »

elfantasmo wrote: »

When you can solo any world boss in any region it’s too easy...

No, when most people can solo any world boss in any region it's too easy, when you can do it that simply raises questions about the extent of your knowledge of the game and the degree to which you are skilled and geared as compared to those who cannot do it.

The fact that there is a healthy balance in the poll between those who find it too hard, too easy, and about right suggests that ZOS got the balance pretty well spot on - for a part of the game that is not supposed to be the toughest challenge. Run the same poll about VMA and not only will you get a very different response, but there will be a reason for that - it's where the challenge is supposed to be.

It doesn't have to be the toughest challenge.

No one here (or at least not anyone I have seen) is asking for the landscape to be turned into VMA. That of course would drive off new players (and me). But it's not a choice between one extreme or the other.

Just increase the challenge to where the enemies actually pose a threat so that fighting them will become interesting.

Also the poll results are flawed as many of the people who voted just right actually admit it is too easy (just read their comments and you will see that). They just for some reason make excuses for it or offer silly solutions like going naked or removing your CP. So a lot of the people who voted just right actually don't believe it's just right.

Jade1986 · November 2017

Far too easy.

idk wrote: »

-

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

[/snip]

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

This is not about vet trials or even vet dungeons.

I am fully aware this is not about vet trials. That is extremely clear. However, you conveniently edited out the comments that put what you quoted into context.

I suggest anyone looking at the post I just quoted go back one page and read my full comment he quoted.

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

I understand that Zos' choice on this matter, and really the choice of major MMORPGs is not something you agree with. However, this design is tried and true in todays market. It is proven to be great for revenue and this is a business first and foremost.

As for the balancing you mention, your example is not really accurate. Most of the game is balanced around new and casual players. Those groups make up a huge portion of the player base. You mentioned starter zones when Zos does not have starter zones. All the alliance zones are intended for leveling (and more since we no longer have vet ranks) and it might just be bad business for Zos to cordon off DLCs for more experienced players since limiting sales would put a damper on revenue.

The challenge MMOS put into these games is with instanced content like raids and in the case of ESO, these trials. Well, for some we an toss in the dungeons as well. It is pretty much a standard design to have different content and different difficulty level.

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

God I am sotired of hearing this argument. What about what is good for the game, what is good for the title, what is good for gameplay, what is good for progression? I understand that profits are important, but good god, its called a video game, not a fantasy business investment.

While I understand it is inconvenient, but it is a business first, not for you, but for Zos. It is a video game to you, but not to Zenimax. The Business side of their operations make the decisions on this, every time.

Any player that has interest in increased difficulty is doing the instanced content. They are doing the vet trials their HMs, that is where progression is.

That is why Zos, and other MMORPGs spend the time to build raids.

Case in point, SWTOR lost their strongest players when they stopped building full raids and went to single boss instanced fights. What is good for profits, directly related to the actual game, would seem to be good for the game itself.

Regardless, if Zos thinks your idea on this is worth the effort then they will add it. If not, I guess we will see more of the same. It can be done since it would merely be something to nerf the player and Zos knows how to though it is not a small project so it comes down to value added to the game for the effort.

Swtor TANKED when it did that, absolutely TANKED.

Swtor tanked for several reasons
Dumbed down content

Dumbed down combat system

Dumbed down stat system

Hyper fixation on single player story

Galactic Conquest

RNG Crates for in game progress

Complete lack of story based ops

Those bastardized versions of flashpoints

all those things contributed to the slow death of swtor. Which shows us that catering purely to the god mode story only crowd simply does not cut it. The only reason ZoS is holding the game up is because they are still bringing out meaty Dungeons and trials and a regular quarterly xpac of a sort. If the god mode story crowd was the single only important crowd, swtor would be the most popular game on the market atm, but it is not.

Some of your points are appropriate in they did over simplify builds. Things like RNG crates really did not affect the serious player in a negative manner. Especially since they could by anything they wanted out of them from the GTN with in game credits.

But yes, you are exactly correct that the ceasing of creating new ops left the players interested in challenging content with nothing really to do except the same ops they had been doing for years already. I did not want to bring it up, but again, yes, the creating of those easy FPs also added, but at least they still did a few more FPs that were worthy.

Those were the two biggest factors that lead to the more serious player leaving SWTOR. Few of the serious players still log in and it is mostly for PvP. Yes, some top players actually still log in for their PvP.

If I had money, I would still pvp too, but I have to choose between ESO and SWTOr atm, and its a clear win for ESO. Even with its problems.

Irfind · November 2017

Just right.

Some WB i can solo some not. I see also from time to time players die in normal quest contend, for me is the quest contend to easy but im not all players.

ToRelax · November 2017

Far too easy.

Irfind wrote: »

Some WB i can solo some not. I see also from time to time players die in normal quest contend, for me is the quest contend to easy but im not all players.

"Is overland content, post starting zones too easy, for you?"
"[...] for me is the quest contend to easy [...]"
Votes "Just right"...

Irfind · November 2017

Just right.

Jup there is no Option between also we have CPs and im sitting on 614 atm. (more cps more easy is all)

Hvzeda · November 2017

Just right.

Jeremy wrote: »

I'm not a competitive gamer either. Not only do I not care about DPS meters but I have contempt for them. And I also play ESO because I enjoy exploring the world and having fun. But it's difficult to have fun when everything (or most everything) you encounter on the landscape is so brain dead easy you can annihilate them in seconds without a second thought.

So I would caution people not to assume that everyone here who is dissatisfied with the current state of this game's challenge when it comes to solo/questing content are one of those competitive or hard core type players. Because I doubt that is the case.

I'm sure there are plenty of casual players who simply enjoy questing and exploring the world of Tamriel who find this game becoming too easy as well.

So in the second paragraph you tell us not to assume but then you go ahead and assume in your third paragraph. If you don't have evidence/fact for the third paragraph, you are assuming.

ADarklore · November 2017

Just right.

elfantasmo wrote: »

When you can solo any world boss in any region it’s too easy...

Funny, I've been playing this game three years, have top gear, max CP, and have never been able to solo a current World Boss! I was able to do so before One Tamriel, but since then, NOPE. As @Tandor stated, "No, when most people can solo any world boss in any region it's too easy, when you can do it that simply raises questions about the extent of your knowledge of the game and the degree to which you are skilled and geared as compared to those who cannot do it."

Furthermore, as @Jade1986 stated, "all those things contributed to the slow death of swtor. Which shows us that catering purely to the god mode story only crowd simply does not cut it. The only reason ZoS is holding the game up is because they are still bringing out meaty Dungeons and trials and a regular quarterly xpac of a sort. If the god mode story crowd was the single only important crowd, swtor would be the most popular game on the market atm, but it is not. "

But you forget, ESO is filled with ES fans who are single player gamers, they're not MMO players. Second, you also seem to forget that ZOS knows who is playing what content, they have the data, this is why the overwhelming majority of the game is soloable quests, not 'end game' content. This is also why Craglorn was a complete fail and why they changed it and canceled their plans for a second group zone. People love to make statements about what keeps the game going, but you can tell by the content they are producing WHO are the ones supporting the game; the ones with the most content available... and it's certainly not PvP or 'end game' content. Third, you also seem to forget that ZOS also has the data on how often people are dying and in what content... which is how they decided upon adjusting content difficulty.

To @badmojo who said, "Tells me that 60% of the forum user who responded love this game so much they will continue to play it despite a lack of difficulty." There are only 267 votes on this poll, other polls have several hundred votes, so no, this certainly is no where near 60% of forum users, it's only 60% of people who have even bothered with this poll. This represents a minuscule fraction of the number of players playing ESO, the overwhelming majority not bothering to come to the forums. So if the overwhelming majority are not coming to the forums to voice objections but are still playing the game, then ZOS is doing quite well with how the game is designed. After all, as stated above, they have the numbers, we don't, and they make decisions based upon the numbers that they're seeing. To come to the forums and make statements about how poorly ESO is doing or how they're losing so many players is just an opinion based on a singular viewpoint, without any actual factual data to support that viewpoint. Sure they may lose 500 players, but they may also gain 1000 new players, and new players tend to generate more revenue than older players. I do know that with One Tamriel, we gained a LOT more new players mainly because they didn't like the VR levels and the zone separation between older players and new players... it was probably one of the more brilliant moves by ZOS. So the downside, easier open world content, the upside, many more players coming to the game and able to play with their friends no matter what level they are at.

idk · November 2017

Just right.

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

-

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

[/snip]

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

This is not about vet trials or even vet dungeons.

I am fully aware this is not about vet trials. That is extremely clear. However, you conveniently edited out the comments that put what you quoted into context.

I suggest anyone looking at the post I just quoted go back one page and read my full comment he quoted.

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

I understand that Zos' choice on this matter, and really the choice of major MMORPGs is not something you agree with. However, this design is tried and true in todays market. It is proven to be great for revenue and this is a business first and foremost.

As for the balancing you mention, your example is not really accurate. Most of the game is balanced around new and casual players. Those groups make up a huge portion of the player base. You mentioned starter zones when Zos does not have starter zones. All the alliance zones are intended for leveling (and more since we no longer have vet ranks) and it might just be bad business for Zos to cordon off DLCs for more experienced players since limiting sales would put a damper on revenue.

The challenge MMOS put into these games is with instanced content like raids and in the case of ESO, these trials. Well, for some we an toss in the dungeons as well. It is pretty much a standard design to have different content and different difficulty level.

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

God I am sotired of hearing this argument. What about what is good for the game, what is good for the title, what is good for gameplay, what is good for progression? I understand that profits are important, but good god, its called a video game, not a fantasy business investment.

While I understand it is inconvenient, but it is a business first, not for you, but for Zos. It is a video game to you, but not to Zenimax. The Business side of their operations make the decisions on this, every time.

Any player that has interest in increased difficulty is doing the instanced content. They are doing the vet trials their HMs, that is where progression is.

That is why Zos, and other MMORPGs spend the time to build raids.

Case in point, SWTOR lost their strongest players when they stopped building full raids and went to single boss instanced fights. What is good for profits, directly related to the actual game, would seem to be good for the game itself.

Regardless, if Zos thinks your idea on this is worth the effort then they will add it. If not, I guess we will see more of the same. It can be done since it would merely be something to nerf the player and Zos knows how to though it is not a small project so it comes down to value added to the game for the effort.

Swtor TANKED when it did that, absolutely TANKED.

Swtor tanked for several reasons
Dumbed down content

Dumbed down combat system

Dumbed down stat system

Hyper fixation on single player story

Galactic Conquest

RNG Crates for in game progress

Complete lack of story based ops

Those bastardized versions of flashpoints

all those things contributed to the slow death of swtor. Which shows us that catering purely to the god mode story only crowd simply does not cut it. The only reason ZoS is holding the game up is because they are still bringing out meaty Dungeons and trials and a regular quarterly xpac of a sort. If the god mode story crowd was the single only important crowd, swtor would be the most popular game on the market atm, but it is not.

Some of your points are appropriate in they did over simplify builds. Things like RNG crates really did not affect the serious player in a negative manner. Especially since they could by anything they wanted out of them from the GTN with in game credits.

But yes, you are exactly correct that the ceasing of creating new ops left the players interested in challenging content with nothing really to do except the same ops they had been doing for years already. I did not want to bring it up, but again, yes, the creating of those easy FPs also added, but at least they still did a few more FPs that were worthy.

Those were the two biggest factors that lead to the more serious player leaving SWTOR. Few of the serious players still log in and it is mostly for PvP. Yes, some top players actually still log in for their PvP.

If I had money, I would still pvp too, but I have to choose between ESO and SWTOr atm, and its a clear win for ESO. Even with its problems.

Exactly. As long as Zos keeps putting out decent raid content they have my money. vAS does not really count since that is a mini trial.

Jade1986 · November 2017

Far too easy.

idk wrote: »

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

-

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

[/snip]

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

This is not about vet trials or even vet dungeons.

I am fully aware this is not about vet trials. That is extremely clear. However, you conveniently edited out the comments that put what you quoted into context.

I suggest anyone looking at the post I just quoted go back one page and read my full comment he quoted.

Jade1986 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

idk wrote: »

nnargun wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It is not intended to be challenging to most. Have never seen overland in any game be a challenge to a mildly skilled player.

As I said above, I don't think it's intentional. They just don't know how to fix this. It would be awesome if everybody could play at their appropriate difficulty level in the open world of an MMO and I'm sure ZOS agrees with this.

It's likely completely intentional.

As I indicated, the current status quo for MMORPGs is his Zos chose to setup ESO overland difficulty. You can think Zos agrees with you but all indications are they don't. You can think Zos doesn't know how to change it (not fix it cause it ain't broke) when it's merely their choice to not implement a change

In realy isn't that hard for Zos to add a system where we can choose from a few settings to nerf our character, hence increasing the difficulty level. They seem to think the effort is not worth it. They're correct.

No they aren't correct.

What is at least 75% of this game's content including the added DLC content?

It's exploration/questing and overland content.

So if they want high level characters to remain interested in their game and the expansions they expect them to buy it's very important that they make this content challenging enough to where it's interesting to play for them. Frankly I find this idea that most of the game should be balanced around new players just starting out bordering on the absurd.

ZoS can keep the monsters at their current difficulty levels in the starter zones if they are afraid of chasing off newer players. But the other zones and enemies further along in the game should have their health and stats boosted to where they provide a temporary danger to high level characters. Or at least an option to do so needs to be there. Because as another poster pointed out - this game is quickly turning into a hello kitty tea party. Outside of the world bosses, the rest of the landscape enemies really may as well not even be there as they melt if you look at them funny. And I don't even play a DPS character. So I can just imagine those who do. I bet they don't even live a second (and I'm not exaggerating).

The purpose of adding enemies and monsters to a map is to make it seem more alive and dangerous. If they fail at doing that then they are pointless to have.

I understand that Zos' choice on this matter, and really the choice of major MMORPGs is not something you agree with. However, this design is tried and true in todays market. It is proven to be great for revenue and this is a business first and foremost.

As for the balancing you mention, your example is not really accurate. Most of the game is balanced around new and casual players. Those groups make up a huge portion of the player base. You mentioned starter zones when Zos does not have starter zones. All the alliance zones are intended for leveling (and more since we no longer have vet ranks) and it might just be bad business for Zos to cordon off DLCs for more experienced players since limiting sales would put a damper on revenue.

The challenge MMOS put into these games is with instanced content like raids and in the case of ESO, these trials. Well, for some we an toss in the dungeons as well. It is pretty much a standard design to have different content and different difficulty level.

Maybe you should check out the trials, especially vet and HM. Either way, this design works for the business model. As long as it does it will not change since that is what determines what is correct and what is not.

God I am sotired of hearing this argument. What about what is good for the game, what is good for the title, what is good for gameplay, what is good for progression? I understand that profits are important, but good god, its called a video game, not a fantasy business investment.

While I understand it is inconvenient, but it is a business first, not for you, but for Zos. It is a video game to you, but not to Zenimax. The Business side of their operations make the decisions on this, every time.

Any player that has interest in increased difficulty is doing the instanced content. They are doing the vet trials their HMs, that is where progression is.

That is why Zos, and other MMORPGs spend the time to build raids.

Case in point, SWTOR lost their strongest players when they stopped building full raids and went to single boss instanced fights. What is good for profits, directly related to the actual game, would seem to be good for the game itself.

Regardless, if Zos thinks your idea on this is worth the effort then they will add it. If not, I guess we will see more of the same. It can be done since it would merely be something to nerf the player and Zos knows how to though it is not a small project so it comes down to value added to the game for the effort.

Swtor TANKED when it did that, absolutely TANKED.

Swtor tanked for several reasons
Dumbed down content

Dumbed down combat system

Dumbed down stat system

Hyper fixation on single player story

Galactic Conquest

RNG Crates for in game progress

Complete lack of story based ops

Those bastardized versions of flashpoints

all those things contributed to the slow death of swtor. Which shows us that catering purely to the god mode story only crowd simply does not cut it. The only reason ZoS is holding the game up is because they are still bringing out meaty Dungeons and trials and a regular quarterly xpac of a sort. If the god mode story crowd was the single only important crowd, swtor would be the most popular game on the market atm, but it is not.

Some of your points are appropriate in they did over simplify builds. Things like RNG crates really did not affect the serious player in a negative manner. Especially since they could by anything they wanted out of them from the GTN with in game credits.

But yes, you are exactly correct that the ceasing of creating new ops left the players interested in challenging content with nothing really to do except the same ops they had been doing for years already. I did not want to bring it up, but again, yes, the creating of those easy FPs also added, but at least they still did a few more FPs that were worthy.

Those were the two biggest factors that lead to the more serious player leaving SWTOR. Few of the serious players still log in and it is mostly for PvP. Yes, some top players actually still log in for their PvP.

If I had money, I would still pvp too, but I have to choose between ESO and SWTOr atm, and its a clear win for ESO. Even with its problems.

Exactly. As long as Zos keeps putting out decent raid content they have my money. vAS does not really count since that is a mini trial.

I still have nightmares from that hurl you in the air mechanic. xD

MaleAmazon · November 2017

Far too easy.

(It might be obvious, but I'm not a competitive gamer. Don't care that someone else had a higher gearscore then me in WoW, don't play PvP/Mobas/Overwatch/whatever, don't care about DPS meters or leaderboards. I'm just here to explore around and have fun.)

I honestly dont know what difficulty the average gamer plays at. I´ve been playing videogames since late 80´s and I prefer slightly harder than normal, usually, only turning the difficulty all the way up to see if I can manage that challenge. Most people in forums play on harder difficulties in my experience, but that might be a skewed view. Still...

ESO is a bit of a special case since as you play your characters inevitably get stronger unless you deliberately try to make them inefficient, but the world remains the same. For me, the first hour or so when levelling an alt is an entirely different (and more engaging) experience than after that. I actually have to worry about dying.. but I am now lvl 16 a few hours later, and can chop up mammoths like salad in a blender. I think many people are so used to it they don´t even think about it anymore. I don´t go into public dungeons solo to get a challenge, I do it since massacring the monsters there gets me loot faster when I need it. It is a bit strange.

With some kind of optional veteran overland mode you could make the game more difficult again, without it affecting anyone else the slightest. I don´t see any real downside to this solution. I would have liked to have explored Morrowind with some sense of danger. Making the monsters themselves stronger would be a bad solution, I agree.

As for Survival Extra Makework & Tedium mode in Skyrim & Fallout 4.... yeah, avoided the heck out of those.

Didnt do it in Skyrim (and probably wont) since it wasnt out then. But Fallout 4´s transformed the game. It was far from perfect and the total restriction on fast travel could be infuriating, but - it made it feel like true immersion and role-playing for me, for a long time. Planning a trip, choosing what weapons I could afford to bring, sorting out the supplies I needed, weight being a concern... planning a short detour to a settlement along the way to resupply.. and travelling across the landscape, constantly on the lookout for danger, finding adventure along the way... worring about finding a bed to save and sleep...

It was great and I hope they keep that for future titles. I´d like to see something similar for ESO but I doubt that it will come. But it could. However, I´d really like a separate difficulty that makes Tamriel dangerous again.

Jade1986 · November 2017

Far too easy.

MaleAmazon wrote: »

(It might be obvious, but I'm not a competitive gamer. Don't care that someone else had a higher gearscore then me in WoW, don't play PvP/Mobas/Overwatch/whatever, don't care about DPS meters or leaderboards. I'm just here to explore around and have fun.)

I honestly dont know what difficulty the average gamer plays at. I´ve been playing videogames since late 80´s and I prefer slightly harder than normal, usually, only turning the difficulty all the way up to see if I can manage that challenge. Most people in forums play on harder difficulties in my experience, but that might be a skewed view. Still...

ESO is a bit of a special case since as you play your characters inevitably get stronger unless you deliberately try to make them inefficient, but the world remains the same. For me, the first hour or so when levelling an alt is an entirely different (and more engaging) experience than after that. I actually have to worry about dying.. but I am now lvl 16 a few hours later, and can chop up mammoths like salad in a blender. I think many people are so used to it they don´t even think about it anymore. I don´t go into public dungeons solo to get a challenge, I do it since massacring the monsters there gets me loot faster when I need it. It is a bit strange.

With some kind of optional veteran overland mode you could make the game more difficult again, without it affecting anyone else the slightest. I don´t see any real downside to this solution. I would have liked to have explored Morrowind with some sense of danger. Making the monsters themselves stronger would be a bad solution, I agree.

Did you play oblivion? If you did, did you ever set the difficulty bar to max? Its just hilariously difficult. xD

Lirkin · November 2017

Just right.

not easy with no CP.

If you want it harder play it with no cp and use drops like a new player.

WuffyCerulei · November 2017

Just right.

It becomes too easy when you're an experienced person in the game, especially a bloody trial-grade DPS. However, overland has a reasonable level of difficulty for newer players and older players who aren't turbo DPS.

MaleAmazon · November 2017

Far too easy.

Did you play oblivion? If you did, did you ever set the difficulty bar to max? Its just hilariously difficult. xD

What I remember about Oblivion was its mindbogglingly bungled levelling system. Admittedly I did always make characters with high starting endurance, making up some justification. And the fact that if you used your major skills the game became unplayably hard, and if you used your minor skills it was a... totally different experience...

And the non-levelling unique artifacts...

And the highwaymen in Daedric...

:'(