My level 8 friend says ESO is TOO easy
-
Asha_11_ESO✭✭✭If your friend is complaining at level 8, I think it's probably that ESO isn't his kind of game.
'It's too easy' might be friend speak for 'This is too slow, boring, and I don't like questing, or story driven content, or exploring, or how long it will take me to get to the 'exciting' stuff.'
5 -
Doctordarkspawn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MLGProPlayer wrote: »The difficulty isn't too bad for a new character. It only gets super easy once you hit the gear cap and enemies start dying from 1-2 light attacks.
Hyperbole.
In fact, due to how scaling works, the game is easier at earlier levels. That's actually more accurate at lower levels.0 -
xericdx✭✭✭We had so maaaaaany posts on the difficulty ...
It is normal and that is why every game has different difficulty levels you can choose from. For obvious reasons this is not possible in a game like ESO.
Thus, I keep saying the same every time.... An item (a Daedric debouff or donno what) that would adjust characters stats to change the difficulty a bit. Instances&others systems have also been proposed although I believe they would be too time-consuming for ZOS.
Maybe one day...
CharactersPrimo Aldouine (MagSorc), AD
Kro'zuc Primo (StamDK), AD
Primo Leyla, MagDK, DC
Primo Salazar (MagPlar), AD
Leyla Softpawn (StamBade), AD
Shaz Primo (MagBlade), AD
Marcus Primo (MagDen), EP
Elonthor Primo (StamDen), AD
The Red, MagNecro, AD
You like housing?! We have the place for you: Tamriel Homes Guild! Contact me for info (in-game ID @xericdx) or visit our website https://tamrielhomes.com/
PC EU0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭RDMyers65b14_ESO wrote: »Level 8, huh? Tell him to get two more levels and then enter Vivec.. He'll appreciate the easier PVE a lot more.
Yeah. For a lot of veterans of the game, myself included, there's an impulse to simply load up on crafted gear we have the resources to spam out there. I mean, it makes sense, we know what we're doing, we know our builds, and we can start working on those from the word go. But, that significantly impacts the way overland content feels when you're playing.0 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
Sounds more like stupidity to me.There isn't anything really complicated about it.0 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭hamsterontherocksb16_ESO wrote: »I think the amount of people thinking that easy = bad is grossly outnumbered by the amount of people who think hard = bad.
People always say they want a challenge and love hard content because they want to be perceived as strong and bold.
But as a matter of fact humans tend to take the easy road. People take the path of lest resistance. People dont like "hard". They think they want a challenge and overcome it but once they have to do something "hard" which is synonymous with inconventient they tend to quit.
Everyone thinks they are hardass heroes that want to beat the biggest and baddest of bosses. But once they wipe 3 times they tend to give up. I personally love that I can blaze through overland stuff, have stuff die within two attacks. If every encounter would take me 30 seconds to complete I´d quit.
There are plenty of threads, especially in the past and sometimes even now, where people with traditionally harder to play classes (say stam NB and stam DK with no decent source of sealfheal) complain about content being too hard because once you have 3+ enemies they fail horribly.
Tell your friend that he should play some more. Its absolutely true that overland is easy but if he wants a challenge he can also go naked or not use buff food or keep his gear 10 level below character level.
Or just consider that the game might just not be for him. There is no shame in not liking something. Btw level 6 is.... 30 minutes into the game? Tell your friend to give it time.
Why is there never a 'medium' in these discussions.?
When someone says they think its too easy, it doesn't necessarily mean they want it to be hard
You are correct in that respect.We want increased difficulty,but that of course doesn't mean we want it at top tier difficulty.0 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.
issue is the that the baseline difficulty= no difficulty.2 -
ADarklore✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.
issue is the that the baseline difficulty= no difficulty.
For YOU maybe... but like I've mentioned earlier... I've SEEN many many many times players dying in open world combat against quest enemies. ESO has to consider them into the equation as well and not just 'end game' or 'experienced' players coming in expecting a challenge. That's what END GAME dungeons and PvP are for... for those who want a challenge... open world is for people who want to enjoy the story and quest without the stress of 'challenge'.Edited by ADarklore on June 15, 2018 1:51AMCP: 2078 ** ESO+ 2025 Content Pass ** ~~ ***** Strictly a solo PvE quester *****
~~Started Playing: May 2015 | Stopped Playing: July 2025~~8 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.
issue is the that the baseline difficulty= no difficulty.
For YOU maybe... but like I've mentioned earlier... I've SEEN many many many times players dying in open world combat against quest enemies. ESO has to consider them into the equation as well and not just 'end game' or 'experienced' players coming in expecting a challenge. That's what END GAME dungeons and PvP are for... for those who want a challenge... open world is for people who want to enjoy the story and quest without the stress of 'challenge'.
A single npc does less than 1k per second.probably a bit higher without cp,but the difference can't be too much.If anybody is dying to this sort of *** they are pathetic.ZOS should stop catering to this low.3 -
Sevn✭✭✭✭✭
✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.
issue is the that the baseline difficulty= no difficulty.
For YOU maybe... but like I've mentioned earlier... I've SEEN many many many times players dying in open world combat against quest enemies. ESO has to consider them into the equation as well and not just 'end game' or 'experienced' players coming in expecting a challenge. That's what END GAME dungeons and PvP are for... for those who want a challenge... open world is for people who want to enjoy the story and quest without the stress of 'challenge'.
A single npc does less than 1k per second.probably a bit higher without cp,but the difference can't be too much.If anybody is dying to this sort of *** they are pathetic.ZOS should stop catering to this low.
Insult them all you like, they are exactly who Zos should cater the overworld for and dungeons/trials/pvp for endgame players looking for a challenge.There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man, true nobility is being superior to your former self
-Hemingway5 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.
issue is the that the baseline difficulty= no difficulty.
For YOU maybe... but like I've mentioned earlier... I've SEEN many many many times players dying in open world combat against quest enemies. ESO has to consider them into the equation as well and not just 'end game' or 'experienced' players coming in expecting a challenge. That's what END GAME dungeons and PvP are for... for those who want a challenge... open world is for people who want to enjoy the story and quest without the stress of 'challenge'.
A single npc does less than 1k per second.probably a bit higher without cp,but the difference can't be too much.If anybody is dying to this sort of *** they are pathetic.ZOS should stop catering to this low.
Insult them all you like, they are exactly who Zos should cater the overworld for and dungeons/trials/pvp for endgame players looking for a challenge.
Shouldn't be catering to such a low level that the npcs attack as if they were brain dead.2 -
Rain_Greyraven✭✭✭✭✭Merlin13KAGL wrote: »Just had an epiphany.
Why not let the game set the difficulty (initially) based on a mini-gauntlet the player optionally runs through when first exiting the tutorial.
It could have increasing layers of difficulty, and when you die, your 'base difficulty' for that character is set unless you manually change it?
This would allow players the option of modes relevant to their skill and experience, across the board.
Leaderboard stuff, of course, would have to be Medium (current norm) level difficulty or higher to count.
This would help to identify players that clearly have some background, and even give a little boost to those that have a harder time.
Because all Dungeons and Delves are Public. If there is a higher skilled player in the delve, the lower skilled player would get his ass handed to him, get frustrated, and go play another game which would cost Zenimax money because there is fewer higher skilled players than lower skilled (which Blizzard determined after throwing a ridiculous amount of money into a Customer analysis after TBC) and the whole "GIT good" nonsense ends up putting the bottom line into a tale spin.
I understand that the Current generation is all about Free and now but developers have to pay their bills and this isn't a charity.
Edited by Rain_Greyraven on June 15, 2018 2:48AM"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.”
― Robert E. Howard
So you want to be a game developer? Here is the best way to go about it.3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
This is irrelevant to ESO being a true ES game and really a cop out for anyone actually using it.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
ESO is designed to be mostly open world, not instanced. That is not a simple change which is why it will not happen. Plain and simple.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
Yes, Zos errored huge with the launching a poor developed product. However, that is really irrelevant to how the game is now and while the comment is easy to say you offer nothing to support your comments.And my imaginary friend says that the vocal hardcore minority need to stop being bad losers and flooding the forums with duplicate threads. I mean, seriously, can we stop with the #GamerGate-y tactics? This was polled, repeatedly, and the hardcore lost every single time. No matter how yer doctors of spin try to put a new take on it, it's still the same broken record repeating the same thing ad nauseum.
The moderators are likely getting sick of this and might start doling out temporary bans, soon. I mean, I wouldn't blame them. This is, what, the twelfth thread in the past fortnight?
There are other games out there which have what you want, ESO shouldn't commit financial suicide to suit your tastes.
- WildStar tried to appeal to you guys, dead on arrival;
- Guild Wars 2's expansion Heart of Thorns expansion tried to appeal to you guys, almost killed ArenaNet and they had to redesign the campaign to be more casual (along with apologising profusely);
- Champions Online tried to appeal to you guys, it's on life support;
- Battleborn ignored its casual audience and tried to appeal to you guys, it's on life support;
- ESO's Craglorn and Cadwell's Gold/Silver were miserable failures, leading to the current scaling system.
That last one bears repeating: ESO's Craglorn and Cadwell's Gold/Silver were miserable failures. ZOS tried this. They saw the impending doom. They ran away from the impending doom of financial suicide as fast as their legs would carry them. This battle has already been lost in ESO.
Please fight it somewhere else?
Thank you.
I’m not a hardcore player, mainly casual that enjoys doing some endgame content. I did start a new character on the EU server just to get back to basics again and see what it was like starting from scratch. And I will say that once you know the game and how the combat mechanics work, the overland content is too easy, especially now with the One Tamriel combat scaling. I can’t see where anyone should have an objection to adjustable scaling that can be done in the settings. Let people have the choice rather than just running around naked with no armor
Here is the problem... first, can you name another SUCCESSFUL MMO that allows difficulty settings? Second... with the current problems in the game, do you really think ESO can handle the extra millions of per-second processes that it would take to adjust scaling for every single character in the game?!? This would be a MAJOR undertaking and would either require ZOS to implement separate servers for each 'difficulty setting' or require much much faster processors to handle the added calculations. Do people not think of what would be involved in such a massive undertaking?!? They complain because ESO is laggy, crashes, etc... and yet want millions of extra processes added to the game. Imagine a group of players approaching a World Boss and suddenly the game has to calculate damage for every individual player's difficulty setting... I'd say it's impossible and that's probably why ZOS has never even addressed this issue even though it's been brought up far too many times.
all valid points. however, what the game CAN do is scale difficulty of instanced content. its already IN game.
And again, the game is mostly open world with very little instanced content. Most certainly not something Zos will change. Doubtful they will change it going forward because that is not the game they designed.Edited by idk on June 15, 2018 2:58AM0 -
imredneckson✭✭✭✭✭So I finally got my mate to play the game and he's complaining to me that it's too easy, lacks engagement and doesn't require skill. And it makes sense.
When your low level you have these obsurd stats which make it easy, and this combined with easy overland content. It can just be boring.
It's a real issue that all the good and challenging content in ESO is locked behind levels and requires you to be the 'best'. And there's barely anything for the new players to challenge themself (damn you One Tamriel). It's why we get new players but not many of them actually stay.
I mean come on ZOS, now vets AND newbies are complaining about how easy overland content is. Who's this content actually appealing to anymore?
**What do the forums think?**
Bring him to Vivec. He'll have to combat the lag, zergs, and gankers. After hes faced all of them, ask him how easy its been for him
Legions of Mordor Guild Officer
Member of the GvG Community
Dunmer NB - Merser Frey (DC)
Dunmer DK - Akaviri Battlereeve (DC)- http://orig05.deviantart.net/7ecd/f/2016/013/b/f/you_***_kill_by_eso_picture-d9nrz0q.png
Imperial Templar - Knight of the Blood Oath (DC)-
http://orig00.deviantart.net/5ba3/f/2016/115/a/0/jesus_beam_ftw____by_eso_picture-da09ecj.png
High Elf Templar - Aurí-El (AD)
High Elf Templar - Teutonic Honor Guard (EP)0 -
AuldWolf✭✭✭✭✭The problem hardcore players don't seem to wrap their heads around is that ZOS is a business.
This harks back to something I was talking about with a friend, recently: The furry community. Some may hate them, but creative people absolutely love them. Why? The furry community understands not only the value of money, but also the value of the movement of money.
"I value X. I wish X to remain a constant. X requires a resource -- money. If I move my money to X, X lasts longer."
And X, in this case, is whatever online game you happen to enjoy. Online games like these actual are quite a cost for the developer. Consider that every new piece of content has to go through as many stages of development of a good, small-sized indie game. There's planning, concept art, designing, the balancing of new gameplay concepts, and we haven't even gotten to the point where we have the art department create the new assets, yet!
The casual community understands this, too. Either the hardcore community has no money, they're so small that their money doesn't matter, or they just don't spend. And frankly? We spend for you guys, you could be more grateful for what you do have. What do I mean by that? We pay for dungeons. We're doing that because we want ZOS to continue to be a success. The urge is to vote with our wallets, but we understand that we have to support them in their endeavours, even their mistakes, because we enjoy their game.
I personally feel creating even one more trial or end-game dungeon is a mistake, but ZOS are creating a good number of them. And I'm supporting that. All casuals are. In fact, not only that, but our cash shop purchases are subsidising your gameplay.
There's something I saw a while back that proved to me that the hardcore don't understand this.
There was a thread where the hardcore contingent were up in arms and making like the squeakiest of wheels over the new factotum polymorph because it was a shinier reskin of the clockwork custodian polymorph that drops from a veteran trial. All I could do was shake my head.
What they were saying was this: "My ability to feel special is more important than ZOS's continued financial stability."
They were saying that over and over and over and over. And you wonder why ZOS doesn't see the hardcore minority as a good source of income? Things like this are why. You have content, right now, that's generous for the size of your demographic. Too generous, in my opinion, but like I said I'm supporting ZOS even with their ongoing mistakes. I know other casuals feel the same way.
It's like... "Oh, look. More content I'll never be able to play. Thanks ZOS. That's a stupid mistake, since you're denigrating your primary (and probably only) source of income, but... I want this game to survive, and you're at least not as stupid about it as other games that died/almost died have been/are being. So you can continue to have my money, despite your mistakes."
Then you have the hardcore: "I'm not going to pay any extra money because I already occasionally pay for a subscription/new content, every now and then, and that's enough! Because of that, all of the content should be tailored to what I want! All of it!"
Do you see a problem, here?
The casual community is putting loads of money into this game and actually subsidising hardcore content. We're not complaining about that other than when you make threads like this. We just deal with it because we know big companies like ZOS will make their mistakes, and they'll continue to make them until they have a good, hard, long look at their data.
The hardcore minority is just... well, being selfish, in every respect. Hardcore players are not only not willing to pay, but they also want to get rid of players who do pay.
That's why Heart of Thorns almost killed ArenaNet.
If ZOS were smart, they'd see if they could bum that data off of ArenaNet. Basically, ANet's cash shop purchases completely dried up when they made their latest expansion hardcore. Why? Hardcore players expect much, but pay little. Inversely, as people who understand the purpose of money and the movement thereof? Casual players pay much, but expect little.
Until you can pay more than the casual community, there's no point in making these demands.
Craglorn was a failure.
Cadwell's Gold/Silver was a failure.
The current amount of hardcore dungeons is too generous considering how much you don't pay versus how much we do pay, along with the sizes of our respective demographics. This is the problem ZOS isn't getting. They're being too generous with you guys. The more they give, the more you demand. They need to give less for a while, just to make a point.4 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭The problem hardcore players don't seem to wrap their heads around is that ZOS is a business.
This harks back to something I was talking about with a friend, recently: The furry community. Some may hate them, but creative people absolutely love them. Why? The furry community understands not only the value of money, but also the value of the movement of money.
"I value X. I wish X to remain a constant. X requires a resource -- money. If I move my money to X, X lasts longer."
And X, in this case, is whatever online game you happen to enjoy. Online games like these actual are quite a cost for the developer. Consider that every new piece of content has to go through as many stages of development of a good, small-sized indie game. There's planning, concept art, designing, the balancing of new gameplay concepts, and we haven't even gotten to the point where we have the art department create the new assets, yet!
The casual community understands this, too. Either the hardcore community has no money, they're so small that their money doesn't matter, or they just don't spend. And frankly? We spend for you guys, you could be more grateful for what you do have. What do I mean by that? We pay for dungeons. We're doing that because we want ZOS to continue to be a success. The urge is to vote with our wallets, but we understand that we have to support them in their endeavours, even their mistakes, because we enjoy their game.
I personally feel creating even one more trial or end-game dungeon is a mistake, but ZOS are creating a good number of them. And I'm supporting that. All casuals are. In fact, not only that, but our cash shop purchases are subsidising your gameplay.
There's something I saw a while back that proved to me that the hardcore don't understand this.
There was a thread where the hardcore contingent were up in arms and making like the squeakiest of wheels over the new factotum polymorph because it was a shinier reskin of the clockwork custodian polymorph that drops from a veteran trial. All I could do was shake my head.
What they were saying was this: "My ability to feel special is more important than ZOS's continued financial stability."
They were saying that over and over and over and over. And you wonder why ZOS doesn't see the hardcore minority as a good source of income? Things like this are why. You have content, right now, that's generous for the size of your demographic. Too generous, in my opinion, but like I said I'm supporting ZOS even with their ongoing mistakes. I know other casuals feel the same way.
It's like... "Oh, look. More content I'll never be able to play. Thanks ZOS. That's a stupid mistake, since you're denigrating your primary (and probably only) source of income, but... I want this game to survive, and you're at least not as stupid about it as other games that died/almost died have been/are being. So you can continue to have my money, despite your mistakes."
Then you have the hardcore: "I'm not going to pay any extra money because I already occasionally pay for a subscription/new content, every now and then, and that's enough! Because of that, all of the content should be tailored to what I want! All of it!"
Do you see a problem, here?
The casual community is putting loads of money into this game and actually subsidising hardcore content. We're not complaining about that other than when you make threads like this. We just deal with it because we know big companies like ZOS will make their mistakes, and they'll continue to make them until they have a good, hard, long look at their data.
The hardcore minority is just... well, being selfish, in every respect. Hardcore players are not only not willing to pay, but they also want to get rid of players who do pay.
That's why Heart of Thorns almost killed ArenaNet.
If ZOS were smart, they'd see if they could bum that data off of ArenaNet. Basically, ANet's cash shop purchases completely dried up when they made their latest expansion hardcore. Why? Hardcore players expect much, but pay little. Inversely, as people who understand the purpose of money and the movement thereof? Casual players pay much, but expect little.
Until you can pay more than the casual community, there's no point in making these demands.
Craglorn was a failure.
Cadwell's Gold/Silver was a failure.
The current amount of hardcore dungeons is too generous considering how much you don't pay versus how much we do pay, along with the sizes of our respective demographics. This is the problem ZOS isn't getting. They're being too generous with you guys. The more they give, the more you demand. They need to give less for a while, just to make a point.
No they don't.2 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The problem hardcore players don't seem to wrap their heads around is that ZOS is a business.
Sorry but this seems more like a rant.
"Hard core" players could really care less about this thread. They do not look at overland for their challenge. They live in vet HM trials and serious PvP groups.
Not sure who you are upset with since it is certainly not the hard core in the game, but Zos has done wonders catering to the more casual play style of the masses with the state of open world and creating normal dungeons and trials so more can enjoy those content.
Heck, those that have been around for awhile remember there were no normal dungeons scaled to end game nor trials. Two years ago Zos got a clue and changed it. They work to cater to both extremes and the middle.
Heck, those that start these threads wanting more challenging quests will not be getting their way nor are they hard core.Edited by idk on June 15, 2018 4:25AM2 -
Drdeath20✭✭✭✭✭
✭Theres enough pve content that is challenging. Theres even some real challenging content that requires teamwork and coordinating sets.
But i do aggree that the true competitive end game is kinda weak.
Pvp has its moments.
Trials are moderately tough but its more about scoring than it is about just finish it.0 -
Wreuntzylla✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
That's the point we've tried to explain to them with the emphasis on financial suicide and how it affected Guild Wars 2, Battleborn, Wildstar, Champions Online, and so many other games. The truth is is that hardcore players are such a minuscule minority that even if they all subscribed, it wouldn't even touch the huge amount of money thrown out by casual roleplayers.becasue it immediately excludes people for whom easy difficulty is created. and those people? pay money too, AND they tend to be in a majority.
Here's a Universal truth we've learned from past games:
- Do hardcore players buy costumes? Nope.
- Do hardcore players buy houses/furniture? Nope.
- Do hardcore players buy personalities/emotes? Nope.
- Do hardcore players buy things to skip grind? Nope.
- Do hardcore players buy cosmetic pets? Nope.
- Do hardcore players even buy mounts, for the most part? Nope, most use in-game money bought horses.
And we know this, statistically, from far too many games. It's what ArenaNet found out when their cash shop purchases just totally dried up in Heart of Thorns. Hardcore players don't use cash shop stuff, for the most part they don't subscribe. They have the time to grind, but they don't have the money to buy things with. So they opt for things accrued via grinding.
You can't found a business based upon people who never spend money on the game.
I know that. ZOS knows that. Every company who's ever made this mistake knows that.
There's no money in the hardcore. That's why games that target them keep dying. Either the hardcore audience just has no money or they simply don't spend it, whichever it is, this is Universally a statistical truth. You could use Heart of Thorns alone to make this point.
So why keep doing this? Play Black Desert or something. I mean, I know that's dying too but you might get something out of it before it goes, neh?
Or is this a parasitic thing where you're hoping that latching onto a game that's shown to be stable will allow you to enjoy your hardcore play for longer? Is that what this is? If so, I ask you: Where do you think that stability is coming from? Yeah.
Edit: And WoW? It's a gambling addiction. You're paying to support a gambling addiction. Why is it viable? You have to buy all of the expansions and pay the subscription to feed your gambling addiction. ESO isn't a gambling game, though. ZOS specifically didn't want to do that. That's why Morrowind comes with the subscription, now. They're not being WoW.
They're sending a pretty specific message with that.
Edit 2: And look at the Summerset Collector's Edition, what do you get?
- A Razum-dar journal;
- A cool daedric prince statue;
- Emotes;
- Personalities;
- Pets.
Nothing about that is hardcore. ZOS knows where their money is coming from. It's from casuals and roleplayers. Can I make this point any more than I am? ZOS already knows.
You must be new here. Add ESO to the list. The game lost half its pop when skeevers were epic bosses.0 -
Sevn✭✭✭✭✭
✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »MehrunesFlagon wrote: »MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Bonzodog01 wrote: »This is a classic example of your average player in ESO, especially on console. Remember, console now accounts for 2/3 of the ESO playerbase.
You can't seriously believe this is an average player. A person that does no effort whatsoever to figure out the mechanics of the game should not be used as a baseline for difficulty. Else you can just as well remove all those mechanics.
And the fact that he made it to 600+ CP playing like this shows the difficulty is ridiculously low...
what it also shows that all those claims how much harder Skyrim is are blatantly false AND exaggerated. becasue this player? that is how they play SKYRIM.
and yes. difficulty like this SHOULD be used as baseline.
Skyrim is a single player game and therefore not comparable for the purpose of saying how an MMO should be.
It is very typical for single player games to have a difficulty setting whereas it is not common in MMORPGs open world content.
I'm aware. but more then ones I have seem people requesting higher difficulty - claim that Skyrim was hard and part of the reason why ESO is not a true ES game, becasue its that much easier.
and becasue ESO IS an MMO, difficulty should be scaled to be as accesible as possible, at least in overworld/quest content. which is why we DO have 3 difficulty settings for dungeon and trial content ALREADY. and I'm totally cool if that sort of difficulty setting is expanded to more instanced content, including solo quests. but baseline difficulty HAS to remain what it is right now.
the so-called good old days of release ESO didn't go so well for ESO, or it wouldn't be changed into what it is right now.
issue is the that the baseline difficulty= no difficulty.
For YOU maybe... but like I've mentioned earlier... I've SEEN many many many times players dying in open world combat against quest enemies. ESO has to consider them into the equation as well and not just 'end game' or 'experienced' players coming in expecting a challenge. That's what END GAME dungeons and PvP are for... for those who want a challenge... open world is for people who want to enjoy the story and quest without the stress of 'challenge'.
A single npc does less than 1k per second.probably a bit higher without cp,but the difference can't be too much.If anybody is dying to this sort of *** they are pathetic.ZOS should stop catering to this low.
Insult them all you like, they are exactly who Zos should cater the overworld for and dungeons/trials/pvp for endgame players looking for a challenge.
Shouldn't be catering to such a low level that the npcs attack as if they were brain dead.
Ok, serious question. Just who do you think is the vast majority in this player base, casuals who play videogames for laid back entertainment or the hardcore who play videogames for some type of challenging experience?There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man, true nobility is being superior to your former self
-Hemingway2 -
Rokkar8✭✭Yeah, tell him to level up and do vMA, I think it is the hardest pve content I have ever done in any game the first time. And I usually play all my games on max difficulty.
And as any stam char but sorc 0 -
TheInfernalRage✭✭✭✭✭LOL Level 8. 'Nuff said.
Edit: This reminds me when I was playing Marvel Heroes Omega. New players at level 8 - 10 announcing how easy the game was and how overpowered their characters were. Endgame came, reality struck like Mjolnir, then said players complain that the nicer game content was gated by a trial, which was no way near as difficult as VMA, or that veteran players were elitists because they're biased to those who pass the trial during raid.
LOL Level 8. LMAO. Just brings back memories.Edited by TheInfernalRage on June 15, 2018 7:41AM0 -
aaisoaho✭✭✭✭✭The problem? Measuring the player's skill in an open world game.
Difficulty is a huge design issue in an open world games. You can't gradually increase the difficulty in open world behind harder and harder content, because the game is laid out in an open concept. If this game were more of a streamlined and "tube"-like, the designers could sort the levels by difficulty and throw them at the player starting from the easiest level. They could also teach the players in easier levels and later demand the skills learned from the previous encounters.
In open world, you do not know what the player has learned and what the player has done previously in game, so you can't measure the player's skill. And because you do not know the skill level, you can't throw difficult content at the player. Too hard = anxiety. Because of this nature, you should throw easier content constantly, so the player wouldn't experience the anxiety, which leads to boredom.
How about locking the content behind requirements of accomplishment? It would be a mess trying to lock content behind requirements, because people expect to be able to do the content they buy. (DLCs) It would be annoying, if I purchase a DLC and tried to play it, only to see "you need to beat this first!"-message. And adding these locks would destroy the sense of open world, and it'd be like before one tamriel all over again.
How about game telling me where to go next? It'd feel like the game is helding my hand and treating me as a stupid player. Not good. The less the game directly tells me, the better. You can silently direct a player in a chosen direction, so the player would feel like he/she figured it out by him-/herself. For example in Skyrim: when you escaped Helgen, you'd first follow the road without thinking about it or without someone telling you to. You'd end up in the village where the next part of the story would begin.
Dynamic difficulty adjustment could be great from this perspective, but there are some major issues. Instance the playerbase by their skill level? You'd have almost empty instances and those players in the empty instances would feel like the game is dying. Boost/handicap the players by their skill level? Other players would steamroll while you're struggling, because they found out how to cheat the DDA, or because others have easier time than you.4 -
Raudgrani✭✭✭✭✭
✭Level 8? How long does it take to get to level 8? 25 minutes? How the **** can someone who played for less than half an hour have an idea about the difficulty of the game? Nothing to see here. Next...0 -
mocap✭✭✭✭✭
✭again - the problem is that too many content is easy. Example to illustrate it:
- Khenarthi's roost is easy, ok. Start location, big tutorial;
- Auridon is easy, well ok. First big location, soft start;
- Grahtwood is easy. Hmm, well, ok, many other locations ahead;
- Greenshade is easy. What the hell?
- Malabal tor is easy. WTF?
- Reapers march is easy. WAAAAAT?
- another 10 big locations are easy. *sigh*
- all DLC content is easy..
<after 400+ hours of play>
Whoa! 15 danjens and some trials are not easy!3 -
Matei✭✭I suggest the person finds a game he or she enjoys playing, then it doesnt matter if its easy or difficult.3
This discussion has been closed.