Faulgor wrote: »

Bryanonymous wrote: »

This isn’t a discussion. It’s a place for people to rant and ignore logic. I already stated many times that players who want difficulty should take off their gear.

No one has discussed this. They think it’s some sarcastic joke. Or they have no argument against it because it is true. Armor and passives make the game easier. They are not essential. They are optional. They do the same thing as a difficulty slider

Because "taking off your gear" doesn't adress the issue. Nobody wants to make things purposelessly hard for themselves. Difficulty always goes in tandem with appropriate rewards, which is precisely why Craglorn and the old Cadwell zones failed. Not because they were hard, but because there was no reward in doing them.
What people are asking for is challenging and rewarding, in other words fun, overland content. Not wearing equip or not using skills and champion points is not a solution because it fundamentally misunderstands what people want. Light attacking a boss with your bare fists until it keels over is not fun. It's tedious, but not challenging. Likewise, developing powerful builds for challenging content for the mere chance of a rusty bucket is not fun, either.

Concerning the actual topic: All the technology to solve this is already in the game. What you'd want is an optional individual debuff like Battle Spirit in Cyrodiil that doesn't touch anyone else's experience or require different zones or instances. This would be tied to either an increase in drop chance of general items, or adding a new currency with corresponding vendors like Tel Var stones in IC.
Ideally, this could be tied into the world like covenants in Dark Souls, so you'd pledge allegiance to a specific cult or deity and gather reputation when killing things in this debuffed hardmode state. Advancing in reputation could unlock new achievements, titles, costumes, cosmetics, furniture, houses, purchases from specific vendors, etc. There are lots of possibilities once you have such a system in place, and aligning yourself with specific deities is an often requested feature as well.
It's also conceivable that such a hardmode would only be tied to one deity in a reputation system, like Molag Bal, and other cults would be more "casual"-friendly.

So in terms of functionality and technology, this is not complicated at all. The only issue would be how to best monetize such a new system, but I'm sure ZOS can figure that out as well.

bellatrixed wrote: »

I have a memory of playing at launch. There was a quest I absolutely could not complete on my own and I needed to since it was tied to the main faction quest. So a friend graciously agreed to come help, rides all the way out to me only to find he can't help me since he already completed the quest and the zone is instanced. So, I was left unable to finish my quest because it was too hard. I gave up and came back 10 levels later when I could nuke it and moved on.

That ^^^ in no way makes for a better game. It's good how it is now. MMOs are't SUPPOSED to be challenging and intense as you quest. Questing is always supposed to be fairly easy, and then if you want more challenging combat, vet dungeons/raids it is. In any MMO as long as you've kept up with your gear/skills it shouldn't be much harder to quest at max level than it is at level 5. It's sorta MMO 101, it's about the grind, not the challenge.

Anyway I think the people making these threads forget how tough combat can be with no CP or gear. I totally forgot the main story quests aren't a cakewalk til I started leveling on my alt account.

DosPanchos wrote: »

ParaNostram wrote: »

You have an Amen from me OP regarding overland content actually doing something other than putting players to sleep.



Also as we can see here, this is why we cannot have nice things.

Lol! I saw that, but that guy's being sarcastic. He actually agrees that everything's too easy...

Phage wrote: »

LordSemaj wrote: »

Phage wrote: »

It's a waste if you ask me. There are many solutions that would be acceptable, but the best one would probably be a difficulty slider for Overland content that increases rewards (gold,xp,drops,quest rewards) with the difficulty.

The chief reason that overland content in just about every game isn't vet-level is because that would require vet-level rewards. Overland content can be zerged, there is no safe way to hand out vet-level rewards to people and maintain a non-broken system. You're basically inviting dungeons to be meaningless content if players can farm their gear from world content.

Games that do service vet-level rewards from overland content typically do so through world bosses and generally you have to parse the highest to actually get those rewards. This creates a pay to win incentive and it's most popular in Korean games to go about farming open world bosses that actually drop stuff worth a fortune and improves your character tremendously.

You already can farm gear from Overland. Everything that drops apart from jewellery can be upgraded, and even purple jewellery drops from dolmens easily. There is also nothing "pay to win" about giving increased rewards for increased difficulty. This isn't a Korean MMO, there's nothing in this game that is "pay to win", and the increased rewards would be marginal (just a bit of extra gold, extra xp, gear drops purple/blue instead of blue/green, that kind of stuff). Just something to make the effort worth more than just mindlessly plowing through Overland on normal.

What I have in mind would be hardcoded to only allow 4 players to a group. You set your group dungeon difficulty to Veteran, and thereafter all mobs you come across will be scaled up to match your strength, including Bosses. Non-Vet players could still attack and participate, but the mob would be harder for everyone. It would keep from having to instance Veteran, and keep the world more or less as open as it is now.

Example: You and your Vet group in Overland roll up on a World Boss and initiate a fight. The Boss's HP, resistances and other stats are scale up to meet your challenge. While you're fighting, 3 or 4 more people show up to join in the fight. They are not on Vet, but they are able to participate and fight the stronger Boss. You fell the Boss together, and your group gets Veteran level rewards (extra gold, extra xp, purple gear) from the boss, while the people who showed up get their normal rewards. Everyone leaves happy.

Magdalina wrote: »

Craglorn was such zone. And to everyone bringing up the "look how unpopular it was" argument...do you really think it was because of the difficulty?

casparian wrote: »

Let's not put words in one another's mouths. Most of us who think the overland content is too easy aren't asking for ESO: Dark Souls Unlimited. What we're asking for is that our choices be made to matter in overland content. Because right now, it doesn't matter what gear I wear, how I allocate my CP, what abilities I slot or which morphs I select -- nothing in this game's quest content is going to kill me and nothing is going to be difficult to kill.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

casparian wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

casparian wrote: »

Let's not put words in one another's mouths. Most of us who think the overland content is too easy aren't asking for ESO: Dark Souls Unlimited. What we're asking for is that our choices be made to matter in overland content. Because right now, it doesn't matter what gear I wear, how I allocate my CP, what abilities I slot or which morphs I select -- nothing in this game's quest content is going to kill me and nothing is going to be difficult to kill. What this means is that when it comes to combat, ESO is an RPG in which your choices are insignificant. To many of us, that's greatly disappointing.

Everyone who says that we should just unequip our gear and unassign champion points in order to be challenged, do you hear what you're saying? You're telling us that the way for us to enjoy an RPG is to refrain from participating in that RPG's system of character progression. That is not how good game design works, friends.

We're not asking for the next DLC to be Bloodborne in Summerset. We're not saying that random mobs in Eastmarch need to be made as difficult as vMA. But for many of us, a significant part of the immersiveness of an RPG is that enemies who are reputed to be threatening -- whether Daedra, cultists, undead, or fabricants -- actually feel like threats to us. Instead, ESO talks up a bunch of villains as frightening and dangerous, when in fact they're nothing of the sort. That's a problem for me not because I'm a "tryhard" or some elite gamer, but because this is an RPG and that's unimmersive. What are TES games
about if not their immersiveness?

For many of us, combat in RPGs is a chance for the character-building choices we've made to be tested. We want combat to be a time when our choices matter, not a time to lazily farm away while letting our minds go on autopilot. With its oversimplified, farming-friendly overland content, ESO is unfortunately much closer to BDO than other TES games. In asking for more difficult overland content, we're not asking for ESO to become more like Dark Souls -- we're asking for it become more like a TES game.

"That's now how good design works friends"

...Well nobody said this game was well designed. In fact, some of us have been screaming it for the past god knows how long, and when we do, we get told to eat ***. So there's your answer.

As for TES games being difficult...heeeeeh. HEEEEEH. Yeah no that arguement dont work very well either. Because the ES series has lazy difficulty or has a very hard to access title lime morrowind.

I advise you just find another game. We have been trying to change the game to the point where we could get the support you want on a design level, but the designers are systematically opposed to lisening to they're audience. And even if we do, it'll change for the overland period, no modes, no anything. Because ZOS, when it does act, likes wide, hamfisted changes that have no nuance to them.

That's why I'm opposing this as strongly as I am. If we get the change, it'll get changed period.

I think this game is pretty well designed, for the most part. It seems my opinion of the game and its designers is much higher than yours. By my lights, it's straightforwardly false that ZOS' solutions are always wide and hamfisted with no nuance. While many of their decisions unfortunately do fit that bill, many do not. The recent proc set nerfs, for instance, were targeted, precise, and careful. ZOS is more than capable of nuance, and are far better at their jobs than jaded players like you give them credit for. Given the enormous number of changes they've made in response to player feedback, I can't imagine how you can say in good faith that they're "systematically opposed" to listening to it. That simply isn't true.

I agree with you that asking for ESO's story content to be made as hard as other TES games is a pretty low bar, at least as compared to games like Dark Souls or even HZD. But that's my point -- Morrowind or Oblivion or Skyrim aren't paragons of difficulty that only people who have gotten the gud can master, but they're still hard enough (at least on higher difficulties) that the character-building choices you make matter. A random bandit chief in Skyrim on Master or even Expert difficulty will kill you much, much faster than any single villain in ESO's quest content is designed to do, and differently built characters (e.g. a sneak archer vs. a spellsword vs. a berseker) will have to approach fights very differently -- in complete contrast to ESO, where virtually any build can light attack their way through almost every solo fight in the game.

I am in fact taking a break from this game, but I care about the topic of this thread because ESO has tremendous potential that the devs aren't allowing to come to fruition for reasons I don't understand.

Okay lemme stop you right there at that first line. That is likely why you think this is still -possible-.

As someone either in this thread, or another ongoing thread about difficulty said, "It's either a sense of progression, or meaningfull difficulty. Pick one." The system cannot support both.

Also, no, the proc set nerfs were not targeted and carefull. All proc sets were nerfed. Reguardless of whether they were well used or not. The sustain changes, in the same manner, targeted sustain, and all forms of it.

ZOS is not capable of nuance, or if they are, they've not demonstraighted it up to this point.

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

casparian wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

casparian wrote: »

Let's not put words in one another's mouths. Most of us who think the overland content is too easy aren't asking for ESO: Dark Souls Unlimited. What we're asking for is that our choices be made to matter in overland content. Because right now, it doesn't matter what gear I wear, how I allocate my CP, what abilities I slot or which morphs I select -- nothing in this game's quest content is going to kill me and nothing is going to be difficult to kill. What this means is that when it comes to combat, ESO is an RPG in which your choices are insignificant. To many of us, that's greatly disappointing.

Everyone who says that we should just unequip our gear and unassign champion points in order to be challenged, do you hear what you're saying? You're telling us that the way for us to enjoy an RPG is to refrain from participating in that RPG's system of character progression. That is not how good game design works, friends.

We're not asking for the next DLC to be Bloodborne in Summerset. We're not saying that random mobs in Eastmarch need to be made as difficult as vMA. But for many of us, a significant part of the immersiveness of an RPG is that enemies who are reputed to be threatening -- whether Daedra, cultists, undead, or fabricants -- actually feel like threats to us. Instead, ESO talks up a bunch of villains as frightening and dangerous, when in fact they're nothing of the sort. That's a problem for me not because I'm a "tryhard" or some elite gamer, but because this is an RPG and that's unimmersive. What are TES games
about if not their immersiveness?

For many of us, combat in RPGs is a chance for the character-building choices we've made to be tested. We want combat to be a time when our choices matter, not a time to lazily farm away while letting our minds go on autopilot. With its oversimplified, farming-friendly overland content, ESO is unfortunately much closer to BDO than other TES games. In asking for more difficult overland content, we're not asking for ESO to become more like Dark Souls -- we're asking for it become more like a TES game.

"That's now how good design works friends"

...Well nobody said this game was well designed. In fact, some of us have been screaming it for the past god knows how long, and when we do, we get told to eat ***. So there's your answer.

As for TES games being difficult...heeeeeh. HEEEEEH. Yeah no that arguement dont work very well either. Because the ES series has lazy difficulty or has a very hard to access title lime morrowind.

I advise you just find another game. We have been trying to change the game to the point where we could get the support you want on a design level, but the designers are systematically opposed to lisening to they're audience. And even if we do, it'll change for the overland period, no modes, no anything. Because ZOS, when it does act, likes wide, hamfisted changes that have no nuance to them.

That's why I'm opposing this as strongly as I am. If we get the change, it'll get changed period.

I think this game is pretty well designed, for the most part. It seems my opinion of the game and its designers is much higher than yours. By my lights, it's straightforwardly false that ZOS' solutions are always wide and hamfisted with no nuance. While many of their decisions unfortunately do fit that bill, many do not. The recent proc set nerfs, for instance, were targeted, precise, and careful. ZOS is more than capable of nuance, and are far better at their jobs than jaded players like you give them credit for. Given the enormous number of changes they've made in response to player feedback, I can't imagine how you can say in good faith that they're "systematically opposed" to listening to it. That simply isn't true.

I agree with you that asking for ESO's story content to be made as hard as other TES games is a pretty low bar, at least as compared to games like Dark Souls or even HZD. But that's my point -- Morrowind or Oblivion or Skyrim aren't paragons of difficulty that only people who have gotten the gud can master, but they're still hard enough (at least on higher difficulties) that the character-building choices you make matter. A random bandit chief in Skyrim on Master or even Expert difficulty will kill you much, much faster than any single villain in ESO's quest content is designed to do, and differently built characters (e.g. a sneak archer vs. a spellsword vs. a berseker) will have to approach fights very differently -- in complete contrast to ESO, where virtually any build can light attack their way through almost every solo fight in the game.

I am in fact taking a break from this game, but I care about the topic of this thread because ESO has tremendous potential that the devs aren't allowing to come to fruition for reasons I don't understand.

Okay lemme stop you right there at that first line. That is likely why you think this is still -possible-.

As someone either in this thread, or another ongoing thread about difficulty said, "It's either a sense of progression, or meaningfull difficulty. Pick one." The system cannot support both.

Also, no, the proc set nerfs were not targeted and carefull. All proc sets were nerfed. Reguardless of whether they were well used or not. The sustain changes, in the same manner, targeted sustain, and all forms of it.

ZOS is not capable of nuance, or if they are, they've not demonstraighted it up to this point.