My level 8 friend says ESO is TOO easy
-
AuldWolf✭✭✭✭✭@Nova Sky
Yep.
Whilst some hardcore people may be fed up of hearing the Craglorn/Cadwell argument, it's an incredibly valid one. They were ghost zones, empty, devoid of life. That's because, as I explained in my last post, the hardcore view it as a job. When the job's done they all leave. They don't stick around between content like casuals do, they don't keep pumping money into the game between content drops like casuals do, they just leave until the next bout of 'work' shows up.
Craglorn was an experiment with hardcore overworld content, as was Cadwell's. They failed. They failed because the hardcore just 'work' through content, then leave. Whereas casual players will just hang around doing what casuals do. That's why the zones always look so much more populated. In any online game on the market, any game, the casual zones are always more populated. What happens if you make all zones casual (One Tamriel)? You have population across the board, as opposed to ghost town zones.
And, like I said, it's the difference of perspective that does it: Work vs. Fun. Some want it to be work, they won't support the developer or stick around, though. Some want it to be fun, and they'll be the main financial income for the developer and they'll stick around.
That's the way it's always been.
Edited by AuldWolf on June 16, 2018 6:51AM5 -
AuldWolf✭✭✭✭✭It occurs to me that if ZOS has the data (which I imagine they do), this hypothesis would be fairly easy to test. Cross-reference a sample of those who regularly run veteran dungeons with a sample of those who never do then compare cash shop spending for each group. That's honestly all they'd need to do. Like I said, GW2 is the precedent, here, but ZOS could easily test it to see.
I wouldn't be surprised if they already have, in which case all of this is moot. They are a business. Money is important.
Edited by AuldWolf on June 16, 2018 6:56AM3 -
Kamatsu✭✭✭✭I've seen hardcore people say in many games that they hate cash shops because they believe everything should be earned in game. So where's the money coming from, then? Hardcore players don't ever seem to understand the value of money as a support mechanism to others.
I'd go so far as to say that they can't. Heart of Thorns proves this, as has been mentioned so many times now that it's a broken record. It's also really the only proof you need.
GW2 as a Casual Game: The cash shop is healthy, lots of things are being sold all the time. ANet is stable, yay!
GW2 as a Hardcore Game: The cash shop is dead, nothing is being sold at all. ANet is about to die, oh dear.
I'm not saying that hardcore people are wrong-headed or broken, but what I absolutely am saying is that you cannot make money from them. Ever. In any way. We keep pointing this out and it's something they can't argue against so their arguments tend to veer towards the illogical, specious, or insulting.
I'm not going to tell hardcore players that they're wrong-headed. I believe in personal freedoms. They can do them. What I will say though is that there cannot be money made from the hardcore contingent. Ever. And what happens when a developer appeals to them is that the game dies, since the hardcore contingent expect incoming rewards rather than understanding that they should reward the developer for crafting the game they enjoy.
The hardcore mindset is this: I paid the entry fee. Now I'm going to work my arse off at this job and expect the very best rewards. When the work dries up, I'm leaving.
Done a lot of snipping, but I'd like to point out that Guild Wars 2 can also be used to illustrate the point that "hardcore" players do not pay for content. This can be shown by the way GW2's cash shop works - you buy items on the cash shop with "Gems", these Gems can be bought with either real life money *OR* with in-game gold.
Guess who uses what? It's well known that the hardcore players farm gold to buy gems - they have the time, the knowledge and since they view it as 'work' they have no issue repeating the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again to get gold. So they farm the same events, hit the same material nodes to sell the mats on the Auction House etc and farm up the gold and buy the gems with gold.
Yes the gems aren't made from nothing, they are all bought buy people who want to either buy stuff from the shop or get gold quick to buy stuff off the auction house. Casual's generally aren't good at making gold compared to the farmers, market fanatics, etc and so the easiest way for them to get gold to buy those expensive outfits from the NPC's or auction house is to buy gems with real life $$$ and sell them for gold.
You can see the exact same thing in Eve Online with their Pilot Certificates. You can buy them with both RL $$$ as well as in-game currency. What are they used for?
They are used to get a quick influx of in-game money so as to buy ship and/or ship parts that you otherwise couldn't buy, and don't have the time/inclination to farm the money yourself. So you use real life $$$ to buy the pilot's license, sell it in-game for in-game currency...
Meanwhile the hardcore players know where the best mining spots to farm mats are, so they mine and/or salvage for hours and hours to sell the mats they get to get the in-game currency they need to buy pilot's licenses from other players. Why buy them? A Pilot's License when used in-game gives you 30-days subscription.
There are a LOT of Eve Online players who *NEVER* pay CCP a single real life $$$ for their subscription. They make enough in-game currency to just buy subscription via buying Pilot's Licenses. Many of these players would quit the game if they had to pay for subscription themselves (I've seen many say them on their forums & in-game).
Yes CCP does make more money from this overall, but the fact is - the hardcore don't pay CCP anything. They "work" for the in-game currency to buy Pilot's Licenses from the more casual players who don't have the time/inclination to farm for in-game currency.
Only difference between these games and ESO is you can't directly buy Crowns with in-game gold. So if the hardcore actually do want a mount/skin/house/etc from the store they have to fork over real life $$$ themselves.
Unless of course they are willing to do an exchange with someone now that you can "gift" crown store items... ie they pay X in-game gold to someone, that someone "gifts" the items the hardcore wants. And if you think this isn't happening.... I 100% guarantee you that it is. Heck, there's even threads on these forums stating ZOS have said it's perfectly fine to do that.
Edited by Kamatsu on June 16, 2018 10:21AMo_O0 -
Aesthier✭✭✭✭✭I am just going to start using the same reply for the countless threads discussing the same topic.
Simplest Fix:
Implement a hardcore character mode at the character select screen which enabled veterans to create a toon that would suffer a permanent debuff that reduces all stats by a certain percentage on that specific character.
They could still play with their friends while enjoying the increased difficulty of "all" content.
This makes much more sense than creating new servers or implementing some type of toggle for players which lends itself to more breakage.
Hell ZoS could even implement new titles for those who complete certain content using said toons.
Just a simple lifetime debuff that is applied to the character on creation.0 -
Kolache✭✭✭✭Rain_Greyraven wrote: »Dude, I am a casual! That's the hilarious part. You can't be a "hardcore quester" there is no such thing. People are getting labeled as hardcore for saying the game's overland content that they want to focus on is too easy. If they're wanting to focus on overland content... pssst... they're probably not hardcore.
I'm not interested in veteran DLC trial hard mode stuff. I just want to continue to play Skyrim online and kill stuff in a multiplayer environment. Overland is my jam, or at least I wish it was... and it doesn't have to be the end times just because ZOS adjusts scaling or even attempts to ponder creative ways to make more people feel engaged without totally utterly over-dramatically destroying the game for others.
Sorry dude, your justifications and reasoning just doesn't ring true to me, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I will give you that no one is asking for overland group content, but they are asking for the overland content to be much more difficult than it is now without regard of how that will effect many older, lesser skilled and yes disabled gamers...they are basically saying screw those groups as long as they can stroke their egos for their own selfish needs.
You can spin it any way you wish and claim to be part of the effective community all you wish (which is a very old social engineering tactic) but in the end the results are the same.....marginalized groups being left out in the cold despite how much they spend on the game in favor of the self described elite who nine times out of ten pays little to nothing....because you can more often than not link them with the Free and Now cult that plagues these forums.
That's all I have to say on it, though I'm sure there is a metric crap ton of people that will be damned if they sit idly by and let folks who basically spent maybe 20 bucks for their experience to dictate what the difficulty level should be.
We're talking about a video game, not health care or something. It would be a lot easier to agree to disagree if every post wasn't laced with comments about the type of person that I am and what I really want. Am I really pondering talking about how much money I've spent on crown store hats and eyelashes to defend the validity of this point? Hah, no, not anymore--this is ridiculous.
I'm not running for office here--you don't need to assassinate my forum character to invalidate my points.
I just think the overland content is too easy. That's it.Drummerx04 wrote: »I'm getting a little tired of hearing the "Craglorn was a dead zone because it was too hard for people" argument.
Craglorn was actually dead because:- There was practically no reward for doing the content.
- The sets that were good from crag at release got replaced very quickly
- The actual quests within the zone required other 1-3 other player bodies to actually progress in the quest line even if you could solo the content.
- Daily quests had garbage rewards.
- The Zone was v14 for months after v16 was introduced, so you pretty much couldn't even sell the gear from there.
- The trials didn't get scaled up for well over a year.
Craglorn has been pretty busy since it got scaled up to cp160 AND given good rewards AND you can now complete quests without a mandated 4 man group.
It's all about giving people an actual reason to play the content, not whether or not the content caters to the lowest tier player skill levels.
This is the reason I remember Craglorn-era ESO being hated--especially the quick VR cap increase when everyone was just grinding to hit the caps.
Notice the polls that pop up now and then asking if people want a gear level increase and how they're always like 90% of the people saying "NO!"? Yeah, that happened. I remember lots of people complaining about VRs and grinding on multiple characters but I honestly don't remember anyone complaining about the difficulty of Craglorn. Admittedly, I do remember people complaining about how hard Doshia was
Something being unbalanced in 1v1 does not imply that it is balanced in group play.0 -
Rain_Greyraven✭✭✭✭✭Rain_Greyraven wrote: »Dude, I am a casual! That's the hilarious part. You can't be a "hardcore quester" there is no such thing. People are getting labeled as hardcore for saying the game's overland content that they want to focus on is too easy. If they're wanting to focus on overland content... pssst... they're probably not hardcore.
I'm not interested in veteran DLC trial hard mode stuff. I just want to continue to play Skyrim online and kill stuff in a multiplayer environment. Overland is my jam, or at least I wish it was... and it doesn't have to be the end times just because ZOS adjusts scaling or even attempts to ponder creative ways to make more people feel engaged without totally utterly over-dramatically destroying the game for others.
Sorry dude, your justifications and reasoning just doesn't ring true to me, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I will give you that no one is asking for overland group content, but they are asking for the overland content to be much more difficult than it is now without regard of how that will effect many older, lesser skilled and yes disabled gamers...they are basically saying screw those groups as long as they can stroke their egos for their own selfish needs.
You can spin it any way you wish and claim to be part of the effective community all you wish (which is a very old social engineering tactic) but in the end the results are the same.....marginalized groups being left out in the cold despite how much they spend on the game in favor of the self described elite who nine times out of ten pays little to nothing....because you can more often than not link them with the Free and Now cult that plagues these forums.
That's all I have to say on it, though I'm sure there is a metric crap ton of people that will be damned if they sit idly by and let folks who basically spent maybe 20 bucks for their experience to dictate what the difficulty level should be.
We're talking about a video game, not health care or something. It would be a lot easier to agree to disagree if every post wasn't laced with comments about the type of person that I am and what I really want. Am I really pondering talking about how much money I've spent on crown store hats and eyelashes to defend the validity of this point? Hah, no, not anymore--this is ridiculous.
I'm not running for office here--you don't need to assassinate my forum character to invalidate my points.
I just think the overland content is too easy. That's it.
I do see your points but.....
Character assassination?
Really?
lol
I mean, It's not like I said your mother was a hamster and your father stank of elderberries.
I think your'e stretching that accusation just wee bit thin.Edited by Rain_Greyraven on June 16, 2018 7:40PM"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.1 -
Ragebull✭✭✭✭✭Did Crag always have Nirn? Cause that's the reason I don't bother with any of the content there. As soon as I port to Crag I immediately get the urge to farm, the thought of potent nirn is always in the back of my mind no matter what I'm doing there. kinda ruins it for me0 -
xenowarrior92eb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭@Ravingar tell ur friend to finish vet maelstrom arena naked with just a flat lvl 1 white weapon, then talk about 2 easy.0 -
Datthaw✭✭✭✭✭
✭I wonder... and this it just wondering. What would it take to have a normal and a vet overland. Something where in vet those normal 30k NPC have 100k and more damage, the 100k have like 300k and so on. Would probably be a nightmare to code but one can only wish
Edited by Datthaw on June 16, 2018 8:13PM0 -
Sevn✭✭✭✭✭
✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »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?
i don't think it's the hardcore,but then again I don't t think it's quite all players that want absolutely no resistance either.So middle ground more than like,which still means we should up the difficulty.
Come on, not once did I state or even imply every player wants a faceroll. Difficulty, is subjective. What is seen as hard, middle ground, or easy by one won't be seen as such by another.
All I'm saying is as a BUSINESS a company would be committing financial suicide catering to a minority group and the majority simply don't want resources reallocated from content they will enjoy for MONTHS to a group who won't be satisfied for long anyway and are almost never satisfied.
Despite what a few claim here, the hardcore doesn't spend anywhere near what the "snowflakes/carebears" spend. Not even close. It's just so easy for Zos to verify this I'm not sure why they continue with this claim. If it was even close these threads would not exist as that type of content would be more prevalent. It simply gets old paying for their entertainment.There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man, true nobility is being superior to your former self
-Hemingway1 -
UppGRAYxDD✭✭✭✭✭
✭Bring your lvl 8 buddy to Cryodil...
"Stendarr's mercy be upon you, for the vigil has none to spare."0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Ragebull, no. Upper Craglorn always had Nirn, but the zone was released in two parts. When lower Crag released there was no 9th trait. And, yeah, a lot of people farmed the hell out of upper Crag back in the day for nirn pieces. Myself included.0 -
Simit✭✭Got too completely disagree with the OP
Having just hit 183 cp and still freshly remembering lvling up with none i got to say i found it pretty balanced and sometimes difficult, especially some of the quest bosses, one in particular i remember was when helping the Queen in Auridon, sure it was getting ancestors blessing, an up top i was to basically 1v1 a mage spirit, man i died so many times and that was basically my experience till i got more skills an lvled a few lines etc
I had no guild at the time an knew noone who played so i was also equipped with only quest rewards as i also had not many traits researched but in all honesty the content is more than good/hard enoough on that front for new players
It's a different experience altogether if you add in CP or even just crafted gear an both together does make the content easy but the lvling process cant take that into account4 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭starkerealm wrote: »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!
Well, spelling seems to be a challenge for you. Also, remembering what it was like when you didn't know what you were doing.
The funny thing is, that there still is a difficulty progression from Aurdion, through to Reaper's March. It's just not stat inflation. The enemies you face will be using progressively more complex mechanics. Not, all the time, but new tricks start filtering in. It's really hard to pick up on this as an experienced player because we internalized all of that years ago, and there are places to run across some of those mechanics much earlier.
Truth is, if you can pull north of 10k DPS you can smear everything in overland without paying attention. If you're struggling to pull 2k, then, yeah, there's a challenge to be had.
honestly that's the entire issue.The majority of the content is based around people have *** damage/heals/mitigation.Yes there has to be a place to start simply,but the incline needs to be much steeper.0 -
Linaleah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.
DEAL WITH IT.
this is the difficulty that they have found to work for the most people. this is the difficulty that a lot of us actualy enjoy as is.
and this is what i mean, while there are those who are willing to find compromise in some way, the rest of you do not give a damn about anyone but your own preference, regardless of what it does to the game as a whole. and no, excluding people who are not as good as video games as you are is NOT going to make the game healthier. quite the contrary
How about no?Not to mention the difficulty level is insulting to anyone that has even the slightest amount of skill.
watch out, we have a badass over here /sarcasm
the level of difficulty is meant to be as inclusive as possible. its an equivalent of narrative difficulty in single player and its as it SHOULD be. you wanting overall difficulty to be increased is not only selfish, but its actively BAD for the game. and yes. selfish. because adding optional difficulty selection to instanced quests/delves/public dungeons is the ONLY compromise that adds challenge to more content for those who want it without making the game suddenly unplayable to a large, YES large portion of the games EXISTING customer base.
in other words?
deal
with
it.
dirty worthless casual.
Lois McMaster Bujold "A Civil Campaign"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the ***5 -
BRCOURTN✭✭✭✭✭Got too completely disagree with the OP
Having just hit 183 cp and still freshly remembering lvling up with none i got to say i found it pretty balanced and sometimes difficult, especially some of the quest bosses, one in particular i remember was when helping the Queen in Auridon, sure it was getting ancestors blessing, an up top i was to basically 1v1 a mage spirit, man i died so many times and that was basically my experience till i got more skills an lvled a few lines etc
I had no guild at the time an knew noone who played so i was also equipped with only quest rewards as i also had not many traits researched but in all honesty the content is more than good/hard enoough on that front for new players
It's a different experience altogether if you add in CP or even just crafted gear an both together does make the content easy but the lvling process cant take that into account
Exactly, I remember starting out, and it wasn’t too bad really until every armor piece you were wearing broke as you tried the same simple boss over and over again... restarted on pc recently and had this problem.2 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭MehrunesFlagon wrote: »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?
i don't think it's the hardcore,but then again I don't t think it's quite all players that want absolutely no resistance either.So middle ground more than like,which still means we should up the difficulty.
Come on, not once did I state or even imply every player wants a faceroll. Difficulty, is subjective. What is seen as hard, middle ground, or easy by one won't be seen as such by another.
All I'm saying is as a BUSINESS a company would be committing financial suicide catering to a minority group and the majority simply don't want resources reallocated from content they will enjoy for MONTHS to a group who won't be satisfied for long anyway and are almost never satisfied.
Despite what a few claim here, the hardcore doesn't spend anywhere near what the "snowflakes/carebears" spend. Not even close. It's just so easy for Zos to verify this I'm not sure why they continue with this claim. If it was even close these threads would not exist as that type of content would be more prevalent. It simply gets old paying for their entertainment.
Point of what I was saying is that likely the majority of the population is average.So making the content average difficulty would not be financial suicide.People act like we want to turn overland into vMOL,and that is simply not the case.0 -
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.
DEAL WITH IT.
this is the difficulty that they have found to work for the most people. this is the difficulty that a lot of us actualy enjoy as is.
and this is what i mean, while there are those who are willing to find compromise in some way, the rest of you do not give a damn about anyone but your own preference, regardless of what it does to the game as a whole. and no, excluding people who are not as good as video games as you are is NOT going to make the game healthier. quite the contrary
How about no?Not to mention the difficulty level is insulting to anyone that has even the slightest amount of skill.
watch out, we have a badass over here /sarcasm
the level of difficulty is meant to be as inclusive as possible. its an equivalent of narrative difficulty in single player and its as it SHOULD be. you wanting overall difficulty to be increased is not only selfish, but its actively BAD for the game. and yes. selfish. because adding optional difficulty selection to instanced quests/delves/public dungeons is the ONLY compromise that adds challenge to more content for those who want it without making the game suddenly unplayable to a large, YES large portion of the games EXISTING customer base.
in other words?
deal
with
it.
Let's see.We have even suggested increased level/vet instances,but some even seem to be against that.I won't deal with it due to fact that there is such a simple solution.0 -
AuldWolf✭✭✭✭✭If you're not willing to pay for something, don't ask for it.
Hardcore players want everything, but never want to pay their way. If I wanted hardcore zones, I'd buy them from the crown store. As it is, hardcore players expect casuals to subsidise them. They expect us to pay their way. How is that okay?
I hope ZOS takes notice of this. Hardcore players aren't hardcore payers. Funnily enough, casual players are the hardcore payers.
If you want something, be willing to put your money where your mouth is.
(Edited to take the #latest tag off the URL. Accidental addition.)
Edited by AuldWolf on June 17, 2018 5:31AM3 -
AuldWolf✭✭✭✭✭
It takes development and you aren't willing to pay for it. You expect us to pay your way. That's not okay. You're entitled, selfish, you want everything your way, and you're not willing to pay a penny.MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Let's see.We have even suggested increased level/vet instances,but some even seem to be against that.I won't deal with it due to fact that there is such a simple solution.
Evidence.
Edited by AuldWolf on June 17, 2018 5:33AM5 -
volkeswagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭doesn't make sense. He just said it was easy so he would sound like a big shot. tell him to try doing trials and stop killing crabs.Edited by volkeswagon on June 17, 2018 5:34AM0 -
AuldWolf✭✭✭✭✭
The problem is is that it sets a precedent.MehrunesFlagon wrote: »So making the content average difficulty would not be financial suicide.
We give you more stuff for free, more stuff your way? You demand more, and more. Look how entitled you're behaving now. Look at how you're not willing to pay anything. That evidence, again. If we give you an inch, you'll demand a mile.
You'll ruin this game and run it into the ground like you've done with so many other games I've loved. You're demanding that they make things for you -- non-paying customers -- when they could be making things for paying customers. You're also demanding that they make things that paying customers wouldn't want. We don't want this. You do. You're not willing to pay. That's financial suicide, yes.
It's financial suicide because new players aren't comfortable with the level of difficulty you want. Casual players aren't comfortable with the level of difficulty you want. Casual players pay, you don't.
Why should you have this? Why should ZOS sacrifice their profits to serve you?
So entitled.
Edited by AuldWolf on June 17, 2018 5:39AM4 -
Rain_Greyraven✭✭✭✭✭
It takes development and you aren't willing to pay for it. You expect us to pay your way. That's not okay. You're entitled, selfish, you want everything your way, and you're not willing to pay a penny.MehrunesFlagon wrote: »Let's see.We have even suggested increased level/vet instances,but some even seem to be against that.I won't deal with it due to fact that there is such a simple solution.
Evidence.
Got to agree with this......
It appears that the biggest whiners on this forums are those that paid as little as 8 bucks for the base game and that's it. Seriously talk to the average PVPer or the super hard core rush to max level then raid player.....they mostly spend Jack and Sh**, but oh how they cry!
"I have a 3 G connection, I play wireless on Console and the game lags!!!" (*Gasp* Really?!!! It has to be the crappy game then!)
" ZoS has abandoned PVPers!!! (Never mind that myself and all my friends act like Griefing Aholes to everyone we play with and their's no more victims left)
"Why Can't everything be free NOW!!!!" (Forget that devlopers like to pay their mortgages and their electric bill)
On and on.....and those of us who have put a lot of time and money (Some of my guild mates regularly spend 50-60 bucks a month on average) into this game are frankly sick of it. You hate the game we got it, as Rich once said.....
"You know you don't have to be here right?"
Seriously, there are tons of f2p options, I don't get why crying on a forum is so much more preferable than finding a MMO you actually like.
Edited by Rain_Greyraven on June 17, 2018 6:04AM"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.6 -
Linaleah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.
DEAL WITH IT.
this is the difficulty that they have found to work for the most people. this is the difficulty that a lot of us actualy enjoy as is.
and this is what i mean, while there are those who are willing to find compromise in some way, the rest of you do not give a damn about anyone but your own preference, regardless of what it does to the game as a whole. and no, excluding people who are not as good as video games as you are is NOT going to make the game healthier. quite the contrary
How about no?Not to mention the difficulty level is insulting to anyone that has even the slightest amount of skill.
watch out, we have a badass over here /sarcasm
the level of difficulty is meant to be as inclusive as possible. its an equivalent of narrative difficulty in single player and its as it SHOULD be. you wanting overall difficulty to be increased is not only selfish, but its actively BAD for the game. and yes. selfish. because adding optional difficulty selection to instanced quests/delves/public dungeons is the ONLY compromise that adds challenge to more content for those who want it without making the game suddenly unplayable to a large, YES large portion of the games EXISTING customer base.
in other words?
deal
with
it.
Let's see.We have even suggested increased level/vet instances,but some even seem to be against that.I won't deal with it due to fact that there is such a simple solution.
most of us are NOT against optional difficulty selection for INSTANCES, I even mention aforementioned optional difficulty in the very post you QUOTED. but apparently, a few that are against it = lets just make the whole game harder by your "logic"
NO.dirty worthless casual.
Lois McMaster Bujold "A Civil Campaign"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the ***1 -
Linaleah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
The problem is is that it sets a precedent.MehrunesFlagon wrote: »So making the content average difficulty would not be financial suicide.
We give you more stuff for free, more stuff your way? You demand more, and more. Look how entitled you're behaving now. Look at how you're not willing to pay anything. That evidence, again. If we give you an inch, you'll demand a mile.
You'll ruin this game and run it into the ground like you've done with so many other games I've loved. You're demanding that they make things for you -- non-paying customers -- when they could be making things for paying customers. You're also demanding that they make things that paying customers wouldn't want. We don't want this. You do. You're not willing to pay. That's financial suicide, yes.
It's financial suicide because new players aren't comfortable with the level of difficulty you want. Casual players aren't comfortable with the level of difficulty you want. Casual players pay, you don't.
Why should you have this? Why should ZOS sacrifice their profits to serve you?
So entitled.
compromise. selective difficulty for instanced content - only available with subscription. give it a trial run with the next story dlc, see how much it even gets used and if there is a demand and people ARE willing to pay for it? then it makes sense to add it to the rest of the content.
I do think that its not a bad idea to create more variety of challenge in content - as long as its optional, becasue all kinds of people at all kinds of skill levels - do in fact pay. ZoS wouldn't be making difficult hardmodes for dungeons if it wasn't financially viable.
as long as baseline difficulty remains as is - its not going to hurt those of us who prefer it. options are a good thing. so... DLC trial run. I'm sure ZoS has means to track how many people run what content at what difficulty. if they can implement crafting bag toggle built into the subscriber vs non subscriber accounts...I don't think it would be all that much more difficult to implement difficulty toggle. same code as what we get when zoning into group dungeons. activated on ESO plus enabled on account.
and then... we shall see.dirty worthless casual.
Lois McMaster Bujold "A Civil Campaign"Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the ***1 -
MehrunesFlagon✭✭✭✭✭
✭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.
DEAL WITH IT.
this is the difficulty that they have found to work for the most people. this is the difficulty that a lot of us actualy enjoy as is.
and this is what i mean, while there are those who are willing to find compromise in some way, the rest of you do not give a damn about anyone but your own preference, regardless of what it does to the game as a whole. and no, excluding people who are not as good as video games as you are is NOT going to make the game healthier. quite the contrary
How about no?Not to mention the difficulty level is insulting to anyone that has even the slightest amount of skill.
watch out, we have a badass over here /sarcasm
the level of difficulty is meant to be as inclusive as possible. its an equivalent of narrative difficulty in single player and its as it SHOULD be. you wanting overall difficulty to be increased is not only selfish, but its actively BAD for the game. and yes. selfish. because adding optional difficulty selection to instanced quests/delves/public dungeons is the ONLY compromise that adds challenge to more content for those who want it without making the game suddenly unplayable to a large, YES large portion of the games EXISTING customer base.
in other words?
deal
with
it.
Let's see.We have even suggested increased level/vet instances,but some even seem to be against that.I won't deal with it due to fact that there is such a simple solution.
most of us are NOT against optional difficulty selection for INSTANCES, I even mention aforementioned optional difficulty in the very post you QUOTED. but apparently, a few that are against it = lets just make the whole game harder by your "logic"
NO.
Which is why I mentioned it in the first place,but I thought it should be said that some have still stated they are even against that.0 -
Franieck✭✭✭✭Overland is a joke regardless of the level you are in. I've done the main quest about 15 times to unlock coldharbor ash black on the pts with level 0 characters.... you still blast through everything fairly quickly and its almost impossible to die. Exploration becomes meaningless if there is no challenge, sadly. Overland should definitely be buffed imo. I remember before One Tamriel where as you advanced, the game did become more challenging and it was awesome! Granted, the pain point was outleveling areas which ended up becoming meaningless... However, I feel like overland is meaningless as it is now.0 -
Soella✭✭✭✭All games are now catering for casuals because it is where most of money are. High difficulty of initial ESO was not experiment, it was attempt to buy some time to develop end game content, and a lot of players left due to too high difficulty. I would say ZOS should introduce story line option for DLC dungeons and all trials so casuals could solo/duo them without rush (obviously, no loot or achievements) instead of increasing difficulty of overland.0
This discussion has been closed.