Cooperharley wrote: »

It's going to be optional. You can still smoke and chill...

People arguing against an optional change in difficulty are ridiculous IMO

I don’t think I’m ridiculous. People already have the option to play more challenging content.

sans-culottes wrote: »

But it’s telling that “I play to relax” is so often deployed as a shield against other people having fun a different way.

You already have that option

sans-culottes wrote: »

Curious how even the option of challenge gets treated like a vibe violation. As if the mere existence of difficulty sliders might disrupt a sacred ritual of ambient light attacks and chill menus.

No one’s proposing Tamriel become the Lands Between. But it’s telling that “I play to relax” is so often deployed as a shield against other people having fun a different way.

I don't find "I play to relax" to be a particularly compelling argument anyways.

If the only way you can get "relaxation" by playing a game is to have it so mind numbingly tedious and easy that it doesn't even require you to engage with it, well, Steam has a lot of idle games that play themselves that you can download. Then you can "smoke and chill" all you want without being expected to do even a thing.

All these "I just play to relax" or "I just want to smoke and chill" comments sound like you'd be better off just watching Netflix rather than playing an actual game.

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

How very cable news of you to snip part of a comment so that it and only it can be parsed. I'm not going to bother telling you why it's not elitism or why it's not elitism to expect this mythical vet overland to have rewards. I'm not gonna change your mind. I do hope you have a good weekend though. Life's to short to get worked up over video games right?

Franchise408 wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

I think it's just you.

It's not elitism to expect playing a game actually require engagement with said game beyond "smoking and chill"

It’s not just them though.

Iselin wrote: »

twisttop138 wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

How very cable news of you to snip part of a comment so that it and only it can be parsed.

Cable news? LMAO.

It's called responding to the specific part of your post that I wanted to respond to simply because that was the most clearly condescending and elitist part of it.

Except it wasn't condescending or elitist at all. It's a very cherry picked quote without the entire context. My post was reversing the line of logic from people who are against rewards for increased difficulty overland. Why is "wanting more challenge" less deserving of rewards than "want to relax and enjoy the story"?

Franchise408 wrote: »

Why is "wanting more challenge" less deserving of rewards than "want to relax and enjoy the story"?

as long as they are the same exact rewards then I don't see the problem, we can both have our cake and eat it too.

luc76985 wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Why is "wanting more challenge" less deserving of rewards than "want to relax and enjoy the story"?

as long as they are the same exact rewards then I don't see the problem, we can both have our cake and eat it too.

There should at least be more XP and gold. I agree that exclusive rewards such as pets, skins, mounts should not be in vet overland.

But XP and gold? That should increase.

Franchise408 wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

twisttop138 wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

How very cable news of you to snip part of a comment so that it and only it can be parsed.

Cable news? LMAO.

It's called responding to the specific part of your post that I wanted to respond to simply because that was the most clearly condescending and elitist part of it.

Except it wasn't condescending or elitist at all. It's a very cherry picked quote without the entire context. My post was reversing the line of logic from people who are against rewards for increased difficulty overland. Why is "wanting more challenge" less deserving of rewards than "want to relax and enjoy the story"?

Except you're asking for more, not the same, and some of you have a convoluted logic about slower kills meaning that your rewards per hour will be slower because of longer TTK. Well, duh, that's part and parcel of the original more difficult overland ask.

The whole point of the increased difficulty option is longer TTK, But now you're saying "wait a minute, we get fewer rewards per hour... not fair!"

If you're just looking to "relax" and your incentive is the story, why are you bothered by someone else getting more rewards?

LOL, I don't get bothered that easily. I just call BS when I see it.

And BTW, what makes you think I belong in your bucket of "relax"? I would in fact opt in for the higher difficulty whenever I feel like it, slower rewards and all.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

It is a snarky retort that applies the same logic that's being used against vets to those who say that vet players who don't want to be worse off for picking vet don't actually want vet content. Let's not pretend this comment was made in a vacuum.

Vet players have been getting vilified for wanting basic gameplay concepts for a couple of pages now.

Well, I'm a "vet" player who has been here on and off, but mostly on, since the start and I liked the original difficulty before CP when even delves in Cadwell 1 or 2 kind of needed a group. And I would definitely play in a more difficult phase at least some time (I think I would still do golden pursuits in normal for speed. )

I don't see any vilification in the past few pages. What I see is some wanting their cake and eat it too with post after post rationalizing greater rewards for the higher difficulty.

I was around when the higher difficulty overland became a hot topic, and have always supported an opt-in system via phasing.

But I have never supported the concept of more rewards for doing so, precisely because of the extra layer of elitism that it's guaranteed to create and the abuse from some of us with 2000 CP and great gear who will also breeze through that more difficult content reaping extra rewards.

Iselin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

It is a snarky retort that applies the same logic that's being used against vets to those who say that vet players who don't want to be worse off for picking vet don't actually want vet content. Let's not pretend this comment was made in a vacuum.

Vet players have been getting vilified for wanting basic gameplay concepts for a couple of pages now.

Well, I'm a "vet" player who has been here on and off, but mostly on, since the start and I liked the original difficulty before CP when even delves in Cadwell 1 or 2 kind of needed a group. And I would definitely play in a more difficult phase at least some time (I think I would still do golden pursuits in normal for speed. )

I don't see any vilification in the past few pages. What I see is some wanting their cake and eat it too with post after post rationalizing greater rewards for the higher difficulty.

I was around when the higher difficulty overland became a hot topic, and have always supported an opt-in system via phasing.

But I have never supported the concept of more rewards for doing so, precisely because of the extra layer of elitism that it's guaranteed to create and the abuse from some of us with 2000 CP and great gear who will also breeze through that more difficult content reaping extra rewards.

How else would anyone picture a gamer who is described as a "greedy, elitist who just wants to abuse a gameplay system?" And no, that's not a direct quote of anybody here. It's just an example that summarizes some of the various arguments against rewards. It's fine that we have different opinions about reward. I do see some arguments being based on how the rewards might impact the player base (Feeling bad to see a modifier, concern that exclusive rewards like mounts and titles may create pressure and force casuals to play on vet). So, I'm not saying there isn't any reason someone could have a different opinion.

Concerns about "force" only seem to go one way. There are no concerns about vet players being forced into normal to keep the gameplay function of quests (leveling of new characters, make a little gold).

All it comes across to me as that some players are of the belief that casual players should get more rewards than vet players out of overland in every way, down to the last drop exp of every single mob. Because that's what the opinion of "You can't even offset the exp loss," actually boils down to, mathematically. The concern seems to be based largely on FOMO. I view that argument the same way as I view the argument that we should get exclusive titles, mounts, dyes, etc for enabling vet overland.

I don't want or need extra rewards. Quests are one and done so of course there should not be exclusive rewards tied them for doing a quest in a particular game mode. By the exact same logic, I also do not think I should lose out on rewards because some players want their gameplay to be the most rewarding. I think we should all have equal rewards so that the only reason to pick one mode over the other is taste. I think actual, mathematical equality is the only way to ensure that nobody plays a gameplay mode they don't like. And that would require an offset. That's just a fact. You can't have mathematical equality by cutting someone's damage in half and doing nothing to offset that loss. If that makes me an elitist, so be it.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You guys have your story and your relaxing activities, you don't need resources or drops from them.

Is it just me or is this a rare, unfiltered, bit of elitism that is precisely the root for the “harder but more rewards” mentality beneath all the rationalizations?

It is a snarky retort that applies the same logic that's being used against vets to those who say that vet players who don't want to be worse off for picking vet don't actually want vet content. Let's not pretend this comment was made in a vacuum.

Vet players have been getting vilified for wanting basic gameplay concepts for a couple of pages now.

Well, I'm a "vet" player who has been here on and off, but mostly on, since the start and I liked the original difficulty before CP when even delves in Cadwell 1 or 2 kind of needed a group. And I would definitely play in a more difficult phase at least some time (I think I would still do golden pursuits in normal for speed. )

I don't see any vilification in the past few pages. What I see is some wanting their cake and eat it too with post after post rationalizing greater rewards for the higher difficulty.

I was around when the higher difficulty overland became a hot topic, and have always supported an opt-in system via phasing.

But I have never supported the concept of more rewards for doing so, precisely because of the extra layer of elitism that it's guaranteed to create and the abuse from some of us with 2000 CP and great gear who will also breeze through that more difficult content reaping extra rewards.

How else would anyone picture a gamer who is described as a "greedy, elitist who just wants to abuse a gameplay system?" And no, that's not a direct quote of anybody here. It's just an example that summarizes some of the various arguments against rewards. It's fine that we have different opinions about reward. I do see some arguments being based on how the rewards might impact the player base (Feeling bad to see a modifier, concern that exclusive rewards like mounts and titles may create pressure and force casuals to play on vet). So, I'm not saying there isn't any reason someone could have a different opinion.

Concerns about "force" only seem to go one way. There are no concerns about vet players being forced into normal to keep the gameplay function of quests (leveling of new characters, make a little gold).

All it comes across to me as that some players are of the belief that casual players should get more rewards than vet players out of overland in every way, down to the last drop exp of every single mob. Because that's what the opinion of "You can't even offset the exp loss," actually boils down to, mathematically. The concern seems to be based largely on FOMO. I view that argument the same way as I view the argument that we should get exclusive titles, mounts, dyes, etc for enabling vet overland.

I don't want or need extra rewards. Quests are one and done so of course there should not be exclusive rewards tied them for doing a quest in a particular game mode. By the exact same logic, I also do not think I should lose out on rewards because some players want their gameplay to be the most rewarding. I think we should all have equal rewards so that the only reason to pick one mode over the other is taste. I think actual, mathematical equality is the only way to ensure that nobody plays a gameplay mode they don't like. And that would require an offset. That's just a fact. You can't have mathematical equality by cutting someone's damage in half and doing nothing to offset that loss. If that makes me an elitist, so be it.

The slower XP rate in a higher optional difficulty is part of the increased difficulty option. Why carve that out? The whole point of a tougher overland option is slower TTK, slower game play, more meaningful slower leveling speed. It's a package deal. And to quote you, that's a fact.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

The slower XP rate in a higher optional difficulty is part of the increased difficulty option. Why carve that out? The whole point of a tougher overland option is slower TTK, slower game play, more meaningful slower leveling speed. It's a package deal. And to quote you, that's a fact.

It isn't part of it. That's not a fact. .

It is most definitely a fact in every game, MMO or not, when difficulty.is compared.

Part of the difficulty of souls game is very much getting your ass handed to you and needing to repeat content. THAT slows your progression down significantly, as does the slower TTK.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

The slower XP rate in a higher optional difficulty is part of the increased difficulty option. Why carve that out? The whole point of a tougher overland option is slower TTK, slower game play, more meaningful slower leveling speed. It's a package deal. And to quote you, that's a fact.

It isn't part of it. That's not a fact. .

It is most definitely a fact in every game, MMO or not, when difficulty.is compared.

Part of the difficulty of souls game is very much getting your ass handed to you and needing to repeat content. THAT slows your progression down significantly, as does the slower TTK.

Dark souls does not have difficulty modifiers. Games with difficulty modifiers use offsets to ensure that the players who choose them at the very least come out at a net neutral.

Not only does dark souls not have difficulty settings, but it's also a bad example in the first place. You are absolutely progressing while getting your ass kicked as you're collecting souls to level up your character.

Diablo is a better example where higher difficulty gives higher level drops and XP. ESO itself is a better example where vet dungeons and trials drop better loot than normal.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

The slower XP rate in a higher optional difficulty is part of the increased difficulty option. Why carve that out? The whole point of a tougher overland option is slower TTK, slower game play, more meaningful slower leveling speed. It's a package deal. And to quote you, that's a fact.

It isn't part of it. That's not a fact. .

It is most definitely a fact in every game, MMO or not, when difficulty.is compared.

Part of the difficulty of souls game is very much getting your ass handed to you and needing to repeat content. THAT slows your progression down significantly, as does the slower TTK.

Soul games do not have difficulty modifiers. Games with difficulty modifiers use offsets to ensure that the players who choose them at the very least come out at a net neutral. Dark Souls ensures equality of experience by not having an easier mode at all.

Diablo and ARPGs in general are the exception, not the rule. None of the TES games, none of the Mass Effect games, none of the Dragon Age games, none of the Witcher games have ever had better XP or rewards for higher difficulties.

I've played pretty well all ARPGs including the current ones and that has always been part of that genre but not any other top RPGs that I can think of.