Maintenance for the week of May 17:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 17, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• Xbox One: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 17, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®4: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 17, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – May 17, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
We will be performing maintenance for patch 7.0.4 on the PTS on Monday at 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC).
The Blackwood Chapter and Update 30 are now available for testing on the PTS! Read the full patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts/

Got the idea of new changes - game considered too easy.

  • lokulin
    lokulin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hello again,

    After watching this interesting show for some time I've finally get the idea...

    I have to reluctantly agree with much of this. One sees the many "Git Gud" and "It's too easy,;I cleared VMA naked in 28 seconds" posts. A quick and dirty Google search suggests very few have actually completed VMA; posts from a year ago put it under 1/2% on consoles. I'm trying for a second clear (on my main account) knowing I won't even attempt it again once shield nerfs go through.

    I play the game for fun, not to "git gud" at something that doesn't matter or be forced into a high-commitment group activity that will take 2 hours. Someone will say, "MMO." Watching guild chat and player locations suggests that most players fit this mold and most are going through content solo or in PUGs. PvP has to be balanced around top-tier players. The majority of PvE does not. In the end, I vote my wallet. I have yet to purchase a single dungeon DLC and won't unless they release content that is soloable or fun to do casually with PUGS. Maybe the top 5% of players are spending 95% of the money. If not, it's difficult to understand why ZOS is choosing this path.

    Totally agree. Every time I see someone say that the game is too easy I have to wonder what would make them happy. Just wandering around to random world bosses or doing a pug dungeon or trial should show how the vast majority of players don't find a lot of content easy. Sure there has been power creep but these changes will probably once again mean that even people who have sunk hundreds of hours in to their characters will be excluded from contents to that they once ran successfully.
    I've hidden your signature.
  • Malem_Benign
    Malem_Benign
    ✭✭✭
    You guys again and again miss the true intentions of what is happening and drown in the mutual controversity.

    There is nothing but money behind all that stuff. More or less. Nothing more.

    That's the difference between game-as-a-service and the single player game where there is only one intention - to make you satisfied so more ppl will buy same product.

    You have to keep in mind that all the time you try to find the logic in such kind of things.

    This product is intented to force you to constant time and money spending for the ZoS company. No other means are behind all this.

    When you try to discuss different approaches, logically interprete the developers moves and other stuff - you just legirimize all this nonsense that is used to hide the true intentions.

    And the only way to influence all that stuff is to stand ground before these greedy intentions. Like it was with Battlefront.
    You have to decide that the level of dev's greed is enough from your point of view and you have to declare that. To show, that you are the full rights participant of this product and process, because it's you who pay them money.

    Only after that you can discuss with the devs the REAL balance changes, improvements and other stuff. When you are on the same level during that discussion.

    It's like in real life - democracy and dictatorship. All the same.

    Then what's the point?

    ZOS is already catering to what they consider to be their largest demographic. ZOS is already increasing the grind and changing the meta regularly because they've correctly figured that many more players will keep playing longer than are going to leave. If that wasn't what their analysis was indicating, they wouldnt be doing it. ZOS devs and marketers, for all that we complain about them, aren't idiots. We may not like what they do, but its the right move from a profits perspective.

    There is no "stand your ground against greedy intentions" on a community wide level here. Not even at the level of the forums, with our much smaller active population.

    If we have to wait til we are full rights participants to have the balance discussion, then LOL, we'll be waiting a long time.

    Right and not right at the same time.

    First of all we ARE the full rights participants of this product. We ARE the sponsors of this product. That idea must always be kept in mind anytime you do anything. Sure, they can ignore that fact and manipulate, but it's up to you to decide to continue to sponsor or not.

    Second thing is that any company, any team - is not one man. There are many. With very different opinions and visions on what is good and what is bad for the product. Be sure, that inside ZoS team there ARE people with similar thoughts about the game and its future, about respect for players, for community, about toxicity of greed and nerfs.

    And the last one is that in reality any company doesn't know what do customers think until they give feedback. And the attitude, the mood of customers is considered by the feedback received. So if you keep silent - then company won't know about your particular thoughts.

    So the point is to give feedback, attract more people on your side and give more feedbacks. This will show to the company's devs and marketers that such particular idea exists and that many people has it. Also this will help people inside the company with similar opinion to argue about changes and plans. That's the first step.

    If the first step doesn't bring any success, then it's up to you to decide: to eat it or to spit it.
    But you have to keep in mind, that every time you eat something that you really don't like, especially after you've argued about that - they will ignore you more and more.

    After all I see that community feedbacks do affect ZoS actions. And that's good. That's good that ZoS do listen to community.
    It means that this game has future.
    Edited by Malem_Benign on October 17, 2018 8:04PM
  • Mintaka5
    Mintaka5
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    If they ever made a MMO that had a buff everything policy...
  • Imryll
    Imryll
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.
  • NuarBlack
    NuarBlack
    ✭✭✭
    LiquidPony wrote: »
    Hello again,

    After watching this interesting show for some time I've finally get the idea...

    I have to reluctantly agree with much of this. One sees the many "Git Gud" and "It's too easy,;I cleared VMA naked in 28 seconds" posts. A quick and dirty Google search suggests very few have actually completed VMA; posts from a year ago put it under 1/2% on consoles. I'm trying for a second clear (on my main account) knowing I won't even attempt it again once shield nerfs go through.

    I play the game for fun, not to "git gud" at something that doesn't matter or be forced into a high-commitment group activity that will take 2 hours. Someone will say, "MMO." Watching guild chat and player locations suggests that most players fit this mold and most are going through content solo or in PUGs. PvP has to be balanced around top-tier players. The majority of PvE does not. In the end, I vote my wallet. I have yet to purchase a single dungeon DLC and won't unless they release content that is soloable or fun to do casually with PUGS. Maybe the top 5% of players are spending 95% of the money. If not, it's difficult to understand why ZOS is choosing this path.

    Whatever "percentage of players" have the vMA achievement on console is meaningless. That is a percentage of everyone who has ever installed and started the game. The percentage for vMA completes on PS4 is about 3.5% ... but consider that, using the same source (psnprofiles.com), only 17.66% of players have reached Level 50. Now the math doesn't work precisely because not everyone who ever installed the base game also owns Orsinium (and the percentages are percentages of people who actually own the content) ... but that means, roughly, that of players who have reached level 50 and also own Orsinium, up to 20% have completed vMA. Which is a far cry from the "1/2%" you're citing here.

    And the DLC dungeons are all fun to do casually with PUGs ... on normal difficulty.

    I'd also say that what you see in guild chat or guild roster player locations is just a reflection of the guilds you're in, and that's true for everyone. If I were making judgments about what kind of content people are playing based on the guilds I'm in, I'd say that it seems like most everyone is in a Trial or Maelstrom or DSA or a DLC dungeon 90% of the time.

    And most people who focus on "competitive" PvP or end-game PvE are playing for fun, too. They just have fun doing different things than you do.

    Most content needs to be catered to PUGS just a simple fact. It's why dungeon finders were invented as group creation and coordination is a nightmare. Only rose tinted goggles would tell you the old days of spamming area chat looking for group was good. Even in decent guilds it can be hard to get a group cause not everyone needs or wants the same thing, at the same time.

    Second this is why there is such a dearth of tanks. Cause it doesn't matter how good of a tank you are poor dps make clearing vet dlc dungeons a nightmare. So many including myself dread running my tank because it is such a crap shoot, can even be on dlc normal. Where I know if I'm queing on my dps I at least can guarantee one good dps in the group. So even if you are good your game experience still suffers if a large portion of the game population can't handle the content.
    Edited by NuarBlack on October 18, 2018 7:53AM
  • Feanor
    Feanor
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    @code65536

    Awesome posts!
    Main characters:
    Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 41 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)
    Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)

    Other characters:
    Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial Necromancer
    Fearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)
    Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)
    Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDK
    Valirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBlade
    Turuna - AD Altmer magBlade
    Kheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDK
    Kibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - Stormproof
    Yavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWarden
    Azog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWarden
    Vidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDK
    Marquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - Stormproof
    Rawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWarden
    Tu'waccah - AD Redguard Stamplar

    All chars 50 @ CP 1100+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.
  • FearlessOne_2014
    FearlessOne_2014
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    NuarBlack wrote: »
    LiquidPony wrote: »
    Hello again,

    After watching this interesting show for some time I've finally get the idea...

    I have to reluctantly agree with much of this. One sees the many "Git Gud" and "It's too easy,;I cleared VMA naked in 28 seconds" posts. A quick and dirty Google search suggests very few have actually completed VMA; posts from a year ago put it under 1/2% on consoles. I'm trying for a second clear (on my main account) knowing I won't even attempt it again once shield nerfs go through.

    I play the game for fun, not to "git gud" at something that doesn't matter or be forced into a high-commitment group activity that will take 2 hours. Someone will say, "MMO." Watching guild chat and player locations suggests that most players fit this mold and most are going through content solo or in PUGs. PvP has to be balanced around top-tier players. The majority of PvE does not. In the end, I vote my wallet. I have yet to purchase a single dungeon DLC and won't unless they release content that is soloable or fun to do casually with PUGS. Maybe the top 5% of players are spending 95% of the money. If not, it's difficult to understand why ZOS is choosing this path.

    Whatever "percentage of players" have the vMA achievement on console is meaningless. That is a percentage of everyone who has ever installed and started the game. The percentage for vMA completes on PS4 is about 3.5% ... but consider that, using the same source (psnprofiles.com), only 17.66% of players have reached Level 50. Now the math doesn't work precisely because not everyone who ever installed the base game also owns Orsinium (and the percentages are percentages of people who actually own the content) ... but that means, roughly, that of players who have reached level 50 and also own Orsinium, up to 20% have completed vMA. Which is a far cry from the "1/2%" you're citing here.

    And the DLC dungeons are all fun to do casually with PUGs ... on normal difficulty.

    I'd also say that what you see in guild chat or guild roster player locations is just a reflection of the guilds you're in, and that's true for everyone. If I were making judgments about what kind of content people are playing based on the guilds I'm in, I'd say that it seems like most everyone is in a Trial or Maelstrom or DSA or a DLC dungeon 90% of the time.

    And most people who focus on "competitive" PvP or end-game PvE are playing for fun, too. They just have fun doing different things than you do.

    Most content needs to be catered to PUGS just a simple fact. It's why dungeon finders were invented as group creation and coordination is a nightmare. Only rose tinted goggles would tell you the old days of spamming area chat looking for group was good. Even in decent guilds it can be hard to get a group cause not everyone needs or wants the same thing, at the same time.

    Second this is why there is such a dearth of tanks. Cause it doesn't matter how good of a tank you are poor dps make clearing vet dlc dungeons a nightmare. So many including myself dread running my tank because it is such a crap shoot, can even be on dlc normal. Where I know if I'm queing on my dps I at least can guarantee one good dps in the group. So even if you are good your game experience still suffers if a large portion of the game population can't handle the content.

    ZOS can't even handle their own content! :trollface:
  • NuarBlack
    NuarBlack
    ✭✭✭
    Daus wrote: »
    Daus wrote: »
    This game is way too easy. I enjoyed vMA when it first came out, and the same with vDSA in the very beginning. Hard Mode DLC/Trial content can be fun too.

    Unfortunately these examples are not the majority of the game, and yes difficulty does equal fun. You don't find enjoyment playing a game where you're guaranteed to win. Fun is achieved by overcoming obstacles or fulfilling objectives that aren't easily achieved. The more difficult the content, the more accomplished you feel afterwards. High difficulty requires incentives though because we are lazy creatures, and if we can acquire something an easier/faster way we will; hence magicka.

    The mentality among the PvE community has been we bring stam when you can bring magicka and get it done easier (or in some cases at all). This has led to the drastic changes we've seen in Murkmire, and it's been a long time coming, and obviously a lot of people are upset over the fact that this game is no longer going to be on easy mode for them.

    You contradict yourself.
    If we're lazy then we don't want to put effort into difficult things.

    Fun has never required incentive. I have fun because it is fun.
    I'm sure you don't really know the true reason you play a game, the parts that aren't difficult especially. You still login for holiday events, for example, and I bet you have fun, but do you even know why? You probably never gave it enough thought.

    If difficulty was the only fun and only reason we played games then we wouldn't be playing ESO at all because it supposedly isn't difficult for most of the game until you get to endgame.
    That's what you are saying which contradicts itself.


    Some of the most fun things in games I have ever done have not been difficult at all. Playing with physics engines for example keeps me entertained for very long times. For example, the grenade launches in the original Halo: Combat Evolved were so much fun and absolutely not difficult at all; just have two controllers and co-op mode, gather grenades and pile it up in one spot then drive a vehicle over it and detonate the grenades for awesome fun. The physics made it behave different every time so the entertainment was just finding out which ways it would go by moving things around. It was pure luck, not difficulty, in getting the launch to go anywhere specific.

    Seriously, if we played games for difficulty then we would love our difficult jobs and love driving in heavy traffic with people weaving through traffic and almost wrecking our car with us in it. The only thing about difficulty that anybody ever enjoys is when it is over, but if it takes longer than tolerable to get over then people don't like it.

    It's funny....so many people cite that "everyone just wants instant gratification" and yet they also say "people want difficult and challenge" which are polar opposites. You can't have "instant gratification" with a "difficult challenge in the way".

    There's no contradiction in stating that I want difficult content with incentives, because challenging content is enjoyable. Not that difficult to discern.

    As far as why I play the game? PvP. It's the only content with longevity. New challenging PvE content is fun, but hand fed victory isn't. For instance, I've managed to do the new DLC dungeons on hard mode, but I have yet to beat the main story for either clockwork city or Summerset. The PvE is too easy to the point where it's a chore for me to even play it.

    The issue is that once you've beaten this PvE content there's little reason to do it again because there's nothing random about the fight.

    There is nothing random about vMa either. It's why I still consider it *** content. It's just a slog and for those that it isn't it's cause they have it memorized to where they are attacking spawn points before the enemies even spawn so definitely not random. Vma is the perfect example of difficulty not equalling interesting and fun, especially since half the difficulty is about CC and snares and unavoidable damage output. If you want to see what fun difficulty is go play a fromsoft game. Especially DS3 or Bloodborne(The Lady Maria fight is a masterpiece that I sometimes intentionally lose so I can keep playing it) They are difficult but still have a flow to them that you can appreciate the fights instead of staring at UI ques.

    I agree on pvp and that it gives the best form of longevity if it is balanced. Problem is that ESO requires pve to gear up for pvp despite ZOS claiming pvp gained sets will be better. Monster sets and weapon sets still come from pve and the meta builds usually still require one pve set sometimes both sets. And most pvpers like me don't last long in pve guilds since most pve GMs are little megolomaniacs that think guild members are their little peons and don't care that you want to use your limited play time to pvp that day or even that week for those of us that have real jobs and lives. So we are stuck fighting the PUG life dealing with people who constantly fail one shot mechanics, interrupts, burn phases, etc. Ive had to kill the final boss on tempest vet by myself multiple times cause it's a waste of time to rez teammates that refuse to listen or learn the mechs of that fight. So if you want dfficulty go ahead and pug vets with a bunch of sub 300cp scrubs and you will find it. And if you want difficulty for high octane premades then ZoS needs to make a high end mode for that, that isn't required to gear up that only offers cosmetics or maybe even just have gear drop in gold but not be mandatory to be competitive in pvp. They are getting better. Most recent trial sets are that way but so long as weapon sets and monster sets are gated behind pve then there has to be some give.
    Edited by NuarBlack on October 18, 2018 2:14PM
  • bpmachete
    bpmachete
    ✭✭✭
    From a Pvp guys point of view, they should work on the AI of the game. Enemies are very easy because they don't react to what we do like they should.

    I remember even bck with Halo they made a system where the enemies would take cover or adapt to what was happening, if Zos can make this leap, the Pve side would be so much better, and in fact harder and more satisfying.
  • kind_hero
    kind_hero
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    To those saying the game is to easy:

    If you are a new player without CP, it is of normal-medium difficulty. You have to figure out crafting, how to play magicka or stamina, which abilities are worthwhile and which are not, making gold, etc.

    If you are a veteran player then yes, the game tends to be easy. But do not forget how Elder Scrolls games are: you start as a prisoner in rags, unarmed or wielding a rusty weapon, and with time and effort you become stronger and stronger, to the point you could slaughter a town or take on dragons, etc. This game is similar in that direction.

    The problem is with people who always want to be challenged, or with people from pvp which can't handle losing to certain classes/play styles. So they cry for revenge-nerfs of classes or play styles, instead of finding ways to compensate. I am quite disappointed of the upcoming nerfs, because they are not limited to the pvp world, where most of them matter.
    [PC/EU] Tamriel Hero, Stormproof
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.
  • Malem_Benign
    Malem_Benign
    ✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.
    Edited by Malem_Benign on October 19, 2018 1:13PM
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.
  • FearlessOne_2014
    FearlessOne_2014
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.


    After trying this changes on the PTS. I have decided to take a very long break from ESO. The likes I may not return from after 4 years of playing.

    Completely destroying my playstyle that I found fun. Does not make me want to play the game nor spend any more money on it. It makes me want to do something else. And spend money elsewhere that supports my playstyle.
  • Malem_Benign
    Malem_Benign
    ✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.

    Yes, but there is an "IF" in this formulae - if people will agree to play hockey.
    There are a lot of games nowadays where devs didn't compromised themselfs with disrespect to players yet and where people can invest their money.
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.

    Yes, but there is an "IF" in this formulae - if people will agree to play hockey.
    There are a lot of games nowadays where devs didn't compromised themselfs with disrespect to players yet and where people can invest their money.

    Yep. And if enough players go to those games, we might see a change in ESO. If not, we probably won't.
  • Malem_Benign
    Malem_Benign
    ✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.

    Yes, but there is an "IF" in this formulae - if people will agree to play hockey.
    There are a lot of games nowadays where devs didn't compromised themselfs with disrespect to players yet and where people can invest their money.

    Yep. And if enough players go to those games, we might see a change in ESO. If not, we probably won't.

    I like this game much, so I hope devs can make the right choice and avoid useless damage.
  • Malem_Benign
    Malem_Benign
    ✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.

    Yes, but there is an "IF" in this formulae - if people will agree to play hockey.
    There are a lot of games nowadays where devs didn't compromised themselfs with disrespect to players yet and where people can invest their money.

    Yep. And if enough players go to those games, we might see a change in ESO. If not, we probably won't.

    I like this game much, so I hope devs can make the right choice and avoid useless damage.

    Unfortunately I was wrong. They didn't.
  • ProbablePaul
    ProbablePaul
    ✭✭✭✭
    SirMewser wrote: »
    Dr.NRG wrote: »
    Hello again,

    After watching this interesting show for some time I've finally get the idea.

    ...

    The idea is clear - the game considered too easy and comfotable for players and this affects in a bad way ZoS financial plans. That would be fixed.

    Some of this might have a hint of truth most of it does not. However, the way you are putting this I wonder why you are still here? You obviously seem to really dislike the game so whats the point really?

    I got the opposite impression by him posting here, but it does seem like he is ready to just drop it.

    This is a really lazy position to take in regards to an argument. Use your brain, please. He wants to improve his gameplay experience, and doesn't want ZOS to put the game in a bad position to the point the game is unsatisfying. For him to leave the game would defeat that purpose entirely; it's obvious he enjoys the game.
    Edited by ProbablePaul on October 24, 2018 9:49PM
    "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself." - George Bernard Shaw

    Retired until performance issues are addressed. Performance issues addressed, Thank you for the new load times ZoS! Love them! Derp.
  • Trinity_Is_My_Name
    Trinity_Is_My_Name
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ocelot9x wrote: »
    The game is really easy tbh. Speaking about pve you can face roll basically every dungeon even naked, trials are ez too if you got the dedication to spend few hours progressing with your group. And after the few weeks of pvp you can build a tanky char,find a group of 15 ppl and do fine without l2p.

    There is always more righteous way to fix this out: bring new harder content. Or.. make npcs harder instead of nerfing players chars.

    Agree. With One Tamriel they turned ESO into a Theme Park. Everything became super easy. I hated it then and I hate it now. Craglorn turned into just another zone to farm in once One Tamriel dropped. All those Veteran characters we had were leveled INDIVIDUALLY. That meant we worked our tails off to improve each one. I had three characters at Veteran 16 before One Tamriel and the rest were V 8 to V 15. Now? OMG. Super easy. Can go anywhere at level 1 and destroy so much.
  • Malem_Benign
    Malem_Benign
    ✭✭✭
    Imryll wrote: »
    Yes, PVE nerfs happen when PVEers find the game too easy.

    And yes, by the devs' standards, PVEers are finding vet end-game content too easy. We've seen the high DPS bragging, the complaints about healers being useless compared to a 3rd damage dealer, and that damage shields make things simple. As for overland, well, that's been easy since One Tamriel.

    This isnt even the first time this happened. The Great Sustain Nerfs of Morrowind were another situation where PVE end game content was becoming too easy for players, so ZOS nerfed sustain.

    Are the nerfs a good thing? The nerfs are a good thing for the Developers. Now, they dont have to design super hard new content for top tier end game players that nobody else can touch.

    Think about vAS and vCR. Now consider what ZOS would have to do to design harder content for higher DPS. There's a reason the devs nerf players.

    Now, mind you, the devs also nerf the meta on a regular basis to encourage players who care about chasing the meta to grind. That's constantly happening since One Tamriel and is a different type of nerf than this across the board nerf to survivability to reset the difficulty of end-game content.

    If some players want more challenge, apply the nerfs when folks enter vet content, and let folks who don't find the game too easy play their way.

    In the case I'm discussing in that comment, the Murkmire and Morrowind nerfs, those actually weren't a case of most players wanting more challenge. Most players are happy to rip through the game's hardest content because that makes them feel very powerful.

    The Devs, on the other hand, are very unhappy with that because players that rip through the game's hardest content will quickly grow bored and leave the game for greener pastures. Therefore, nerfs. And if those nerfs make it harder on everyone else, well, those players will grind so they can get better too.

    Constant death, K.O.s, 100% impossibility to "rip through" some challenges like Arenas after such nerfs - will make players happy and less bored? When you already spent a lot of time and efforts to build your toon, devs just say: "Nah, we think you're bored because it's too easy for ya, we will put your efforts into trash. Start from all over again or change your play area".

    It's like if you play football, and your team starts to win. But in the middle of the game someone comes and say: "Rules are changed now, to make the game more interesting. Your particular team now will play with hands tied. Hooray." Or better. Your team plays football, but in the middle of the match someone comes and say: "Ok, this is too boring. Now you will play hockey".

    Don't mix up balance changes, enrichement and deception.

    Nerfs are always the indication of someones incompetence and desire to fix complicated problem the most rough and easy way.

    Uh, I'm saying that the Devs are deliberately nerfing the playerbase so that a large number of players will have to regrind in order to be as good at the content. Players regrinding to be good = more players playing the game longer = more profits.

    There's some actual balancing benefits, but most of it is the devs making sure players dont feel satisfied, get bored, and move onto other games. The only way to keep players chasing the carrot of the meta is to change the meta periodically - sometimes in ways that are needed for actual game balance and other times just for the sake of making players chase the meta.

    So yes, as long as enough players stay and regrind rather than just quitting, the Devs will continue to change the meta and make you play hockey or make you play with one hand behind your back. Because overall, they make more money from getting players to grind the game than they do if they focus on player enjoyment, people feel satisfied, get bored, and leave.

    Yes, but there is an "IF" in this formulae - if people will agree to play hockey.
    There are a lot of games nowadays where devs didn't compromised themselfs with disrespect to players yet and where people can invest their money.

    Yep. And if enough players go to those games, we might see a change in ESO. If not, we probably won't.

    I like this game much, so I hope devs can make the right choice and avoid useless damage.

    Unfortunately I was wrong. They didn't.
    Ocelot9x wrote: »
    The game is really easy tbh. Speaking about pve you can face roll basically every dungeon even naked, trials are ez too if you got the dedication to spend few hours progressing with your group. And after the few weeks of pvp you can build a tanky char,find a group of 15 ppl and do fine without l2p.

    There is always more righteous way to fix this out: bring new harder content. Or.. make npcs harder instead of nerfing players chars.

    Agree. With One Tamriel they turned ESO into a Theme Park. Everything became super easy. I hated it then and I hate it now. Craglorn turned into just another zone to farm in once One Tamriel dropped. All those Veteran characters we had were leveled INDIVIDUALLY. That meant we worked our tails off to improve each one. I had three characters at Veteran 16 before One Tamriel and the rest were V 8 to V 15. Now? OMG. Super easy. Can go anywhere at level 1 and destroy so much.

    Unfortunately it's not the time to discuss the enrichment and changes for good, cuz after Great Bug Nerfmire the game is broken, both from the balance and from the bug sides.

    Really, it was a few weeks ago, that I planned to upgrade my monthly Plus subscription to 6 months plan. I liked this game much, it was better than anything around since Ultima Online.
    But now it's history. Plus is canceled. The last thing that kicked me out is these damn broken pets, that ZOS agreed as bug and still not fixed...
    I don't know what to say. Last patch is the epic fail from my point of view.
Sign In or Register to comment.