Rich Lambert's stance on perfected master and maelstrom weapons

Zephiran23 · May 2020

There is a lack of communication issue here, which we have seen in relation to a number of changes recently (both proposed and actual). ZOS have previously stated that they don't like changing things that are already in the game as that tends to upset people - that was in relation to the appearance of some motifs.

This is a much bigger change which affects something far more than just cosmetics. Time sinks are always going to be part of any game that expects to retain players over the long term. If done well, then complaints are going to be kept to a minimum e.g. drop rates on the New Moon and Senchal motifs. Sure there's a bunch of annoying duplicates, but it's pretty easy to see you are making progress towards completion.

Making people go back to content that that felt they had already completed (even with the ability to transmute) is not a recipe for contented players. Especially not when a new system, Antiquities, is being introduced that looks like it will also take up a lot of players in game time.

spartaxoxo · May 2020

Twilanthe wrote: »

So his attitude as the creative director leaves much to be desired. But at the same time I don't think the point of his argument is wrong.

It is like any other MMO. You spend countless hours getting the shiny BIS staff. A new update drops and suddenly it isn't BIS anymore, there is a new one you need to get, and the one you have is not only outdated, but easily obtainable by the masses. That is how MMOs work, its the carrot on the stick that keeps people playing. It only feels different because the way ESO does endgame is a little different.

I have never played a game that downgraded my achievement by giving out in the easier mode of the dungeon. They might make adjustments to make the version of the dungeon I ran easier, nerfing certain mobs for example, but they aren't directly giving my weapon to people who didn't earn it.

Garethjolnir · May 2020

I fail to see how Richard acted out of line in that chat? [snip]

Still, pity about the weapons.

[Edited to remove Baiting]

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

Garethjolnir wrote: »

I fail to see how Richard acted out of line in that chat? [snip]

Still, pity about the weapons.

Who said they were offended? It was an unprofessional and petty response from the game's lead. We're disappointed and embarrassed for him.

HankTwo · May 2020

Garethjolnir wrote: »

I fail to see how Richard acted out of line in that chat? [snip]

Still, pity about the weapons.

Its more about the fact that he argues with random players on discord about an extremely controversial topic with flawed reason, while at the same time refusing to make an official statement for anybody to see. I really hope that ZOS will finally manage to improve their communication with the community, and bad PR seems to be the only thing they will take notice of at this point. But we'll see...

mairwen85 · May 2020

FR0STDEE wrote: »

[Quoted post was removed]

I guess that depends on how you view this.

Are people asking for what they haven't earnt?

Are people expecting to receive on merit alone?

Are people demanding access to something for no individual effort?

Are people requesting the established rules be changed as an exception for their own gain?

How do we define those parameters used to answer the questions above?

daemonios · May 2020

FR0STDEE wrote: »

[Quoted post was removed]

Yeah. Those pre-millennials had to work for their rewards by actually playing games. We just need to cough up the money for convenient solutions to made-up problems, and access to more fluff than you can ever earn in-game. How dare we criticize this nickel-and-diming where publishers keep players on hamster wheels, dropping the smallest of carrots from time to time instead of focusing on making a game that (a) is actually fun and (b) actually works.

Wanting to be treated with respect as a player is not being entitled. Rejecting shady decisions to make players replay old content is not being entitled. Nobody is asking to be rewarded for something they didn't accomplish. In fact, it's the opposite.

Ysbriel · May 2020

Claims we are not losing power but wait here for future sets and skills to be nerfed because the new weapons are too powerful. Then have that power loss conversation again.

Casul · May 2020

At this point may as well just make vMA a 4 man dungeons since the vet reward is so unrewarding that no one will bother refarming the perfect weapons.

Raudgrani · May 2020

Would be nice if they had the same approach to other sets as well:

- "Oh, we are nerfing Bloodspawn! Enjoy!"
- "OK. But not mine"
- "Yes, we are changing the set"
- "No, I had it before this change, so it should not be subject to change. I earned it in 2017, this is the 2020 model you are talking about"

Yes, I know "it remains the same"; but still not - it BECOMES a weapon you earn from Normal arenas, i.e. a weapon that you get from another achivement. And afaik I have never had a Maelstrom or Dragonstar weapon from Normal difficulty. I have the ones from VETERAN, not Normal. So I should by all logic have the ones from VETERAN, not Normal. Why would anyone even be doing this? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. What's the point in having those who want "BiS" gear go over the same X00 runs of VMA and DSA? It's not fun at all, and this is a game - not a ****** job where you sometimes has to do the ****** jobs too.

And that attitude from this guy, an official at ZOS? [snip]

[Edited to remove Bashing]

Raudgrani · May 2020

Ackwalan wrote: »

He's right. Just because you bought a 2018 car doesn't mean you get the 2020 model when it comes out.

Traditionally is a game with levels, all gear becomes worthless when a new expansion comes out. ESO does not use traditional level system, but that doesn't mean you get the new stuff handed to you.

Old gear getting replaced by new - better - sets is one thing. Yet again changing an existing set, that's unique. I would love seeing them making a new solo arena, with news sets to farm; but now they are trying to make Maelstrom "alive" by this? It's just wrong. It's not like anyone goes "Yay FINALLY! Now I can run VMA/DSA 300 times to get weapons I really already should be having! WOOOOOOO!".

And yeah, you don't need to tell me - you don't have any VMA/DSA weapons. This is literally the case with every single one defending this.

mairwen85 · May 2020

daemonios wrote: »

FR0STDEE wrote: »

We truly live in an “entitled” generation.

Yeah. Those pre-millennials had to work for their rewards by actually playing games. We just need to cough up the money for convenient solutions to made-up problems, and access to more fluff than you can ever earn in-game. How dare we criticize this nickel-and-diming where publishers keep players on hamster wheels, dropping the smallest of carrots from time to time instead of focusing on making a game that (a) is actually fun and (b) actually works.

Wanting to be treated with respect as a player is not being entitled. Rejecting shady decisions to make players replay old content is not being entitled. Nobody is asking to be rewarded for something they didn't accomplish. In fact, it's the opposite.

Thing is, they must've known from the outset this was going to be contentious. You would expect them to have had justifications and reasoning ready prior to announcement and have an approach ready for the backlash. The fact they didn't, screams of either lack of foresight or blatant disregard. The subsequent stonewalling and silence as response over several weeks only compounds that - - and worse still, the only official response is a somewhat backhanded unofficial tete-a-tete with a player via DM. ZOS have created a them vs us situation they still refuse to address. Whether it's entitled or not, this unfortunately sets a fresh tone for what we can all expect whatever side of the fence we sit on this particular point.

Raudgrani · May 2020

Hurbster wrote: »

Could be worse, at least we don't get to throw ALL of our toys away every expansion as we chase the latest 'borrowed power'.

Words of someone with the soul of a true thrall. I'm sorry, but I have a very hard time keeping up with this "Well, at least the robber didn't kill me! That's something!" attitude. It's this forgiving "Well, that's not fun. But all we have to do is farm them again!" attitude. WE pay their wages, WE are the providers, WE are the ones giving them a job. It wouldn't hurt if they listened once in a while.
Of course they can't listen to every wish/demand people have, but this is pretty groundbreaking. There's no logic behind it at all, nothing like "balance", nothing concerning performance, nothing concerning "equality for all players" - no nothing. It just doesn't make any sense, no matter how you twist and turn.

Raudgrani · May 2020

FR0STDEE wrote: »

[Quoted post was removed]

Entitlement from merits, is the old school way. Like having Maelstrom weapons from actually clearing a pretty hard content. Entitlement like getting the same weapons for running it on normal, that's true "crutch entitlement".

MasterSpatula · May 2020

This just illustrates what I dislike about ZOS as a company and, honestly, about MMOs in general. They're all based around the concept of the grind. Well, grindy is inherently bad.

Any designer who isn't actively hostile to the very concept of good game design is always looking for ways to keep the players engaged and playing without falling back on the tired old trope of making the game into the old joke about the definition of insanity.

There will be some grind almost by necessity, but any designer for whom there's any excuse for them ever having been given a job in game design is looking for ways to keep the grind to reasonable levels--because, as a person who deserves that job in game design, you dislike grindy content, too. It is a non-negotiable part of it being defensible for you to even have the job.

Our lives are measures in time, and so the value you place on a person's time is precisely the value you place on a person. When you treat someone as if it is acceptable to flush that person's time down a toilet, you are unambiguously stating that the value you place on the person is the same as the value of things you flush down toilets. You can only do that to people you hold in utter contempt.

Before anyone accuses me of hyperbole: I'm hold back here.

Sylosi · May 2020

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

It was an unprofessional and petty response from the game's lead. We're disappointed and embarrassed for him.

LOL, given the "problem" this thread is about, maybe whoever the "We're" refers to should take a look at themselves before complaining about others being petty.

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

Raudgrani wrote: »

[snip]

He's not just "an official at ZOS". He's the creative director for the entire game.

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

FR0STDEE wrote: »

[Quoted post was removed]

Sorry for demanding a minimum level of quality and respect from a developer that I've given hundreds of dollars to in microtransactions. I pay ZOS for new content, not to repeat content from 5-6 years ago.

mairwen85 · May 2020

Sylosi wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

It was an unprofessional and petty response from the game's lead. We're disappointed and embarrassed for him.

LOL, maybe take a look at yourselves before complaining about others being petty.

Personally, I'd prefer to keep ad hominem and sweeping appeals to the person out of the debate. However, pettiness aside, the lack of professionalism is a solid point. Whether that should be leveraged in the discussion is another matter; the ongoing silence and lack of official response to the playerbase at large, in my mind, says it qualifies.

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

Sylosi wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

It was an unprofessional and petty response from the game's lead. We're disappointed and embarrassed for him.

LOL, given the "problem" this thread is about, maybe whoever the "We're" refers to should take a look at themselves before complaining about others being petty.

Nobody in this thread is being petty. We're commenting on an unprofessional comment from a developer.

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

MasterSpatula wrote: »

This just illustrates what I dislike about ZOS as a company and, honestly, about MMOs in general. They're all based around the concept of the grind. Well, grindy is inherently bad.

Grinding new content has always been part of the MMO experience. Grinding content from 5-6 years ago is an ESO exclusive experience. No other MMO does that. Blizzard and Square release new content when they want you to grind new gear. Developers need to invest resources into enticing us to keep playing their game. ZOS is trying to take a shortcut here. And they're giving a big middle finger to their veteran players in the process.

If ZOS had released new content for us that dropped this gear, not a single person would be complaining. Even something as trivial as a new difficulty setting would keep people happy. But asking for even the bare minimum effort is too much from ZOS.

FR0STDEE · May 2020

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

FR0STDEE wrote: »

We truly live in an “entitled” generation.

Sorry for demanding a minimum level of quality and respect from a developer that I've given hundreds of dollars to in microtransactions. I pay ZOS for new content, not to repeat content from 5-6 years ago.

Then don’t repeat the content. You already have a perfectly good VMA weapon.

Kaliki · May 2020

FR0STDEE wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

FR0STDEE wrote: »

We truly live in an “entitled” generation.

Sorry for demanding a minimum level of quality and respect from a developer that I've given hundreds of dollars to in microtransactions. I pay ZOS for new content, not to repeat content from 5-6 years ago.

Then don’t repeat the content. You already have a perfectly good VMA weapon.

I don’t intend to repeat vMA for the slightly updated weapons, but I still don’t like that all my vMA rewards are now going to be normal rewards.

tgrippa · May 2020

The real question here is why does ZOS make a design choice that forces people to do years old dead content again, instead of investing some more money and GIVING THE COMMUNITY WHAT THEY REQUESTED FOR YEARS.

Where
Is
Our
New
Single
Player
Arena

The current decision makers at ZOS are clueless and out of touch. Instead of making new content, they would prefer to do this and say “here you go, here is your new single player raid. It’s the same boring years old one but with slightly better drops, go do that for another four years and maybe you will have another single player raid by then, if you are still playing this trash”

mairwen85 · May 2020

FR0STDEE wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

FR0STDEE wrote: »

We truly live in an “entitled” generation.

Sorry for demanding a minimum level of quality and respect from a developer that I've given hundreds of dollars to in microtransactions. I pay ZOS for new content, not to repeat content from 5-6 years ago.

Then don’t repeat the content. You already have a perfectly good VMA weapon.

Raudgrani · May 2020

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

zvavi wrote: »

I am trying to get a list of points for both argument side, without silly arguments like the bonus stat that the weapons had before they could carry an enchantment.

For not upgrading:
* New weapons should be farmed a new
* Initiative to run old content
* It is zos's choice
For upgrading:
* Not upgrading devalues the time vets spent on their current weapons
* The new reward is actually nMA drops, and not the perfected that will drop in vet
* Forcing perfectionists run the content in its current bugged state is wrong

Did I convey both sides right?

I heard only one reasonable comment for not upgrading (from Moonsorrow) - to make veterans to run vDSA again, because otherwise newbies simply have nobody to run with, especially PVP ones which don't have good PVE toons

And I'll completely remove and forget argument about normal MA drops - it immediately triggers some players to start song about toxic elitists, which can de-rail any discussion if such discussion will happen in ZOS. I mean fact that maelstrom weapons will now drop is normal - it is good change, it is not linked with non-upgrading existing weapons in any way and it's better not to be mentioned at all.

I'm originally a PVP'er, but because of the state of the game, I am on a leave from PVP and do PVE instead. Already prior to this, I have been helping PVP'ers out getting Master Weapons. But it's not like I stood in Mournhold and announced I'm helping people get VDSA weapons - I helped friends, and I might do it again. I wouldn't help PVP'ers who are too lazy to learn PVE (which is OFTEN the case!) just for the sake of it, but because it benefits me if group members have better gear.

ZOS "forces" at least Stamina PVE'ers to grind PVP content for abilities, without any consideration. Why would they show some kind of courtesy to "new players" by forcing us to re-grind VDSA weapons? Nobody helped us when we got them.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

I think the worst thing about this is that someone had to leak a private discord conversation for us to learn about the opinion of ZOS' important people.

Why can't we just have a normal discussion with the Devs? It could go something like this:
GinaBruno posts a sticky to the forum with topics they want feedback on.

There are threads for each topic being made where feedback and arguments are collected

after time has passed the feedback gets condensed and properly written down by one person and the first reply of the thread gets edited so everyone can see the points that have already been made

then ZOS goes and looks at the forum thread's first replies and gives a quick statement on each of the points before going back to work

the forum then responds to the response by stating their counter arguments in the same fashion. This repeats until...

In the best case an agreement can be found that makes both sides happy which is then implemented. In the worst case it is exposed the two sides of the argument follow different mutually exclusive paradigms, in which case ZOS goes with what their own views tell them is right, since they are the ones making the game, but at least that way it is easier to understand for the community what the developers actually think and vice versa.

We have class reps. Why aren't they being made use of? They could be the moderators in this and be the ones gathering the feedback. A lot of them are also very qualified for this task already, seeing how a lot of them are well-spoken and have good game knowledge that allows them to understand the issues at hand better.

Seems they ain't having a normal or abnormal discussion about this. All they give us is silence, since the "a 2018 car isn't a 2020 car, right?" comment.

Milli_Rabbit · May 2020

The reality is that if you want BiS and want to min/max you are going to grind for it. That is the nature of MAXIMUM POWER. Wanting to min/max while also not wanting to grind for it is just a poor way of thinking that will leave you disappointed in most games. If you don't want to min/max, then why do you care? Play the game for what makes it fun and don't worry about grinds you don't want to do. Those are really the only two realistic outlooks. Anything else is just causing yourself undue burden.

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

tgrippa wrote: »

The real question here is why does ZOS make a design choice that forces people to do years old dead content again, instead of investing some more money and GIVING THE COMMUNITY WHAT THEY REQUESTED FOR YEARS.

Where
Is
Our
New
Single
Player
Arena

The current decision makers at ZOS are clueless and out of touch. Instead of making new content, they would prefer to do this and say “here you go, here is your new single player raid. It’s the same boring years old one but with slightly better drops, go do that for another four years and maybe you will have another single player raid by then, if you are still playing this trash”

That would require an investment of resources. You can't do this if you spend resources on creating new content:

MLGProPlayer · May 2020

Milli_Rabbit wrote: »

Wanting to min/max while also not wanting to grind for it is just a poor way of thinking that will leave you disappointed in most games..

No other game attaches new gear to old content.

I'm fine with grinding new content. But I refuse to grind content I've already done. If ZOS wants us to play their game, they need to give us new content. It's not asking a lot.

mairwen85 · May 2020

James-Wayne wrote: »

We have new content in the chapter, this is old content that is being adjusted for new players and we all know ZOS builds this game with new players in mind first, this will not change

Greymoor doesn't add to maelstrom arena, and the arena changes are base game. I get them whether I purchase the new chapter or not. As for your point on new players, of course, but they can do this without short-changing veteran players.