Maintenance for the week of September 8:
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: EU megaserver for maintenance – September 9, 22:00 UTC (6:00PM EDT) - September 10, 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: EU megaserver for maintenance – September 9, 22:00 UTC (6:00PM EDT) - September 10, 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
So Excited for Subclassing!!
-
ragnarok6644b14_ESO✭✭✭✭
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.3 -
sans-culottes✭✭✭✭✭
✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You say subclassing is “fixing” a system that was broken from the start. But ESO’s class design never followed traditional TES systems to begin with. Grave Lord, Ardent Flame, Siphoning, Soldier of Apocrypha—these aren’t TES-style skills like Destruction, Sneak, or Conjuration. They were never grounded in Elder Scrolls mechanics.
So subclassing isn’t a return to form. It’s a further drift. The system was already detached. Now it’s just unmoored.6 -
ragnarok6644b14_ESO✭✭✭✭sans-culottes wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You say subclassing is “fixing” a system that was broken from the start. But ESO’s class design never followed traditional TES systems to begin with. Grave Lord, Ardent Flame, Siphoning, Soldier of Apocrypha—these aren’t TES-style skills like Destruction, Sneak, or Conjuration. They were never grounded in Elder Scrolls mechanics.
So subclassing isn’t a return to form. It’s a further drift. The system was already detached. Now it’s just unmoored.
It's moving closer, which is good, but I agree, it was a travesty before. Unfortunately they can't use the regular TES spell schools because those haven't been reified in-universe yet (and so it would make equally less sense to use them as it does classes).
I would be eager to see how spells and spell education is thought of in universe as of 2e582 reflected in the class structure of the game, that would be super cool. Hopefully they're headed that way (and hopefully don't make it overly restrictive either if they do anchor it in that!).Edited by ragnarok6644b14_ESO on May 2, 2025 4:54PM0 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
And yet again, you twist things.
There is a difference between stating "ZOS should have gone the other way" vs stating "Subclassing should be removed".
Two completely different things. You seem heavily invested into the promotion of subclassing. Is there a reason for this outside of your desire to break the game?"Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes2 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't want to use.Edited by SilverBride on May 2, 2025 4:56PMPCNA3 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't want to use.
EXACTLY, but instead of listening to our concerns, we are being told "your concern is not valid" with all these back and forth useless arguments.
I want my voice heard, not bullied into submission."Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes3 -
ragnarok6644b14_ESO✭✭✭✭
Can you explain how "I am doing x" being met with "you should do y instead" is not also saying "don't do x"? This is genuinely mystifying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
And yet again, you twist things.
There is a difference between stating "ZOS should have gone the other way" vs stating "Subclassing should be removed".
Two completely different things. You seem heavily invested into the promotion of subclassing. Is there a reason for this outside of your desire to break the game?
As for my reasons, I actually don't want to break the game, but as for objective reasons:
1) bring it closer to how classing usually worked in the TES series and make it more lore-friendly.
2) make it possible to instantiate character identities that are not served by the current class structure, but yet exist in universe.
I mentioned class identity earlier and still don't know what it actually means, despite asking what it actually means and how it is different than character identity (and why it should be empowered to override character identity).SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't even want to use.
I also think it is actually unfortunate that balance won't be perfect out the gate, but as I mentioned much earlier in the thread, I actually think the overall balance will be improved (i.e. more viable endgame character identities than were viable before). If YOUR character identity becomes nonviable for endgame while it was before, that's really unfortunate - I have been in that boat for a while.0 -
ragnarok6644b14_ESO✭✭✭✭Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't want to use.
EXACTLY, but instead of listening to our concerns, we are being told "your concern is not valid" with all these back and forth useless arguments.
I want my voice heard, not bullied into submission.
Consider it heard, at least by me! I am not trying to bully you. Just trying to get you to admit your objections are subjective, and that other people can enjoy it, and therefore that it is okay that it is happening even if you personally disagree.2 -
sans-culottes✭✭✭✭✭
✭Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
@Pixiepumpkin, I agree. Structural critiques are not equivalent to “canceling” something.
@ragnarok6644b14_ESO, you are confusing volume of investment with structural distinction. Subclassed skills do not scale down in power or scale up with mastery—they’re functionally identical to base class skills, just gated behind more skill points. There is no “apprentice vs. master” gradient. The only mechanical differentiation is in the newly added class masteries, which apply solely to your original class. Subclassed skill lines gain no such bonus. This undercuts your point entirely.
As for your framing of class identity as a “nebulous” constraint, it’s telling that the only virtues you acknowledge are the ones you can quantify. But class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players. You might not value that—but many do, and they aren’t wrong for saying so.
Nobody is silencing your excitement. But pretending that critique is just disguised preference ignores what’s actually being argued. When a change dissolves long-standing structures, the burden isn’t on players to “like it more.” It’s on the system to justify what it replaces.5 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't want to use.
EXACTLY, but instead of listening to our concerns, we are being told "your concern is not valid" with all these back and forth useless arguments.
I want my voice heard, not bullied into submission.
Consider it heard, at least by me! I am not trying to bully you. Just trying to get you to admit your objections are subjective, and that other people can enjoy it, and therefore that it is okay that it is happening even if you personally disagree.
No, my obections are objective. I do not like the design of the game regarding classes going forward.
And the irony of you stating you are not trying to bully, but admit to "trying to get me to admit..."
"Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes3 -
Elvenheart✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
This is just a guess based what we’ve been told in the past, but at one point they said classes are so hardwired into our characters that they couldn’t do class change tokens. Otherwise, I think they would’ve done them a long time ago for all the money they could have made with them when people were asking for them.
I think what’s changed is that although they still cannot take the class out of the character, they have figured out a way to swap skill lines in and out, but the original class is still tied to the character and affects certain things like IA Class sets and Class Mastery scripts.Edited by Elvenheart on May 2, 2025 5:09PM0 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Can you explain how "I am doing x" being met with "you should do y instead" is not also saying "don't do x"? This is genuinely mystifying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
And yet again, you twist things.
There is a difference between stating "ZOS should have gone the other way" vs stating "Subclassing should be removed".
Two completely different things. You seem heavily invested into the promotion of subclassing. Is there a reason for this outside of your desire to break the game?
As for my reasons, I actually don't want to break the game, but as for objective reasons:
1) bring it closer to how classing usually worked in the TES series and make it more lore-friendly.
2) make it possible to instantiate character identities that are not served by the current class structure, but yet exist in universe.
I mentioned class identity earlier and still don't know what it actually means, despite asking what it actually means and how it is different than character identity (and why it should be empowered to override character identity).SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't even want to use.
I also think it is actually unfortunate that balance won't be perfect out the gate, but as I mentioned much earlier in the thread, I actually think the overall balance will be improved (i.e. more viable endgame character identities than were viable before). If YOUR character identity becomes nonviable for endgame while it was before, that's really unfortunate - I have been in that boat for a while.
I am a designer by trade. Its often said that arists are the only people who can agree and disagree with themselves on the same topic at the same time ( and I fully realize this had have for over 40 years). You may not be able to understand my perspective regardless of how I try to convey it.
The difference between the statement of "ZOS should have gone the other direction" vs your accusation of "ZOS should remove subclassing from the game" is different becasue the questioning of the design decision is different than requesting for the feature to be removed.
I don't know how to make it any more simple than that. They are two different things, two different ideas."Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes3 -
sans-culottes✭✭✭✭✭
✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Can you explain how "I am doing x" being met with "you should do y instead" is not also saying "don't do x"? This is genuinely mystifying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
And yet again, you twist things.
There is a difference between stating "ZOS should have gone the other way" vs stating "Subclassing should be removed".
Two completely different things. You seem heavily invested into the promotion of subclassing. Is there a reason for this outside of your desire to break the game?
As for my reasons, I actually don't want to break the game, but as for objective reasons:
1) bring it closer to how classing usually worked in the TES series and make it more lore-friendly.
2) make it possible to instantiate character identities that are not served by the current class structure, but yet exist in universe.
I mentioned class identity earlier and still don't know what it actually means, despite asking what it actually means and how it is different than character identity (and why it should be empowered to override character identity).SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't even want to use.
I also think it is actually unfortunate that balance won't be perfect out the gate, but as I mentioned much earlier in the thread, I actually think the overall balance will be improved (i.e. more viable endgame character identities than were viable before). If YOUR character identity becomes nonviable for endgame while it was before, that's really unfortunate - I have been in that boat for a while.
Let’s dispense with the idea that subclassing somehow makes ESO more “lore-friendly.” Nothing about slotting “Earthen Heart” onto a Necromancer or running “Soldier of Apocrypha” on a Warden resembles the skill progression of any previous Elder Scrolls title. If anything, then this breaks what internal coherence ESO did have. Past TES games used cohesive, thematically grounded skills tied to schools like Illusion, Conjuration, etc. ESO’s class lines were a departure—but at least a consistent one. Subclassing doubles down on that inconsistency, mixing fundamentally dissonant mechanics and visuals in the name of “freedom.”
On class identity: the evasion here is obvious. You keep demanding a universal definition while sidestepping the fact that ESO itself built its foundational systems—UI, gear sets, achievements, even voice lines—around the clarity of distinct classes. Now that structure is being eroded. Players aren’t objecting to novelty. They’re objecting to incoherence.
Finally, insisting that critique equals sabotage (“you should do Y instead = don’t do X”) is a false equivalence. Calling for an alternative design philosophy is not the same as demanding the removal of a feature post-launch. Pretending otherwise is rhetorical sleight of hand.Edited by sans-culottes on May 2, 2025 5:12PM6 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't even want to use.
I mentioned class identity earlier and still don't know what it actually means, despite asking what it actually means and how it is different than character identity (and why it should be empowered to override character identity).
My Characters identify with their chosen class. To me it's their profession. It's the path they chose that affects how they quest and run dungeons and other content and how they are seen by those around them. Class is the biggest factor of my Characters' identities.
All my Characters have their own personal houses that reflect this. Anyone walking into my Necromancers house can see right away that a Necromancer lives there. It's a huge part of who they are.
If players want to subclass then they should, but I don't want it implemented at my expense.PCNA2 -
licenturion✭✭✭✭✭
✭I am hugely in favour of subclassing because it opens lots of possibilities for experimentation and gameplay. And I will surely subclass with my characters for fun and for more power in some content.
But I also do agree with SilverBride on this. Existing play styles for people who don’t want to subclass should remain fully untouched as is. If they rebalance numbers they should do that within the constraints of the current gameplay flow of the class.
My main has always also been a magsorc without pets so I am curious to test it next week when the EU character copies are on the PTS.Edited by licenturion on May 2, 2025 5:17PM2 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭sans-culottes wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
@Pixiepumpkin, I agree. Structural critiques are not equivalent to “canceling” something.
@ragnarok6644b14_ESO, you are confusing volume of investment with structural distinction. Subclassed skills do not scale down in power or scale up with mastery—they’re functionally identical to base class skills, just gated behind more skill points. There is no “apprentice vs. master” gradient. The only mechanical differentiation is in the newly added class masteries, which apply solely to your original class. Subclassed skill lines gain no such bonus. This undercuts your point entirely.
As for your framing of class identity as a “nebulous” constraint, it’s telling that the only virtues you acknowledge are the ones you can quantify. But class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players. You might not value that—but many do, and they aren’t wrong for saying so.
Nobody is silencing your excitement. But pretending that critique is just disguised preference ignores what’s actually being argued. When a change dissolves long-standing structures, the burden isn’t on players to “like it more.” It’s on the system to justify what it replaces.
@ragnarok6644b14_ESO ^ What he said.
@sans-culottes may I use "class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." as my signature? I will give you credit for the quote."Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes4 -
sans-culottes✭✭✭✭✭
✭
It’d be an honor.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »sans-culottes wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
@Pixiepumpkin, I agree. Structural critiques are not equivalent to “canceling” something.
@ragnarok6644b14_ESO, you are confusing volume of investment with structural distinction. Subclassed skills do not scale down in power or scale up with mastery—they’re functionally identical to base class skills, just gated behind more skill points. There is no “apprentice vs. master” gradient. The only mechanical differentiation is in the newly added class masteries, which apply solely to your original class. Subclassed skill lines gain no such bonus. This undercuts your point entirely.
As for your framing of class identity as a “nebulous” constraint, it’s telling that the only virtues you acknowledge are the ones you can quantify. But class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players. You might not value that—but many do, and they aren’t wrong for saying so.
Nobody is silencing your excitement. But pretending that critique is just disguised preference ignores what’s actually being argued. When a change dissolves long-standing structures, the burden isn’t on players to “like it more.” It’s on the system to justify what it replaces.
@ragnarok6644b14_ESO ^ What he said.
@sans-culottes may I use "class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." as my signature? I will give you credit for the quote.
2 -
ragnarok6644b14_ESO✭✭✭✭
I think there is sufficient justification in "it more closely (though not perfectly) represents the universe the game is set in, and it allows for greater manifestation of character identity".sans-culottes wrote: »Nobody is silencing your excitement. But pretending that critique is just disguised preference ignores what’s actually being argued. When a change dissolves long-standing structures, the burden isn’t on players to “like it more.” It’s on the system to justify what it replaces.
As for the rest of your post, I understand other people value those things. But that is a subjective value, and other people value character identity more than class identity. In a clash of values, there's no "right answer" - that's all I want to hear. "Subclassing isn't for me because of my preferences" is a far cry from "they should lean harder into class identity because subclassing doesn't fit my preferences".
"I do not like X" is a statement of preference - inherently subjective, if you recognize the validity of other people's subjective preferences.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »No, my obections are objective. I do not like the design of the game regarding classes going forward.
Trying to get someone to admit something they know to be true but does not serve their argument is not bullying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »And the irony of you stating you are not trying to bully, but admit to "trying to get me to admit..."
This is an argument from verbiage, not from lore. The lore is that any spell of any type was available to any person (as well as any swordplay, or shield-skill, or whatever). I think dispensing with that notion is a travesty.sans-culottes wrote: »Let’s dispense with the idea that subclassing somehow makes ESO more “lore-friendly.” Nothing about slotting “Earthen Heart” onto a Necromancer or running “Soldier of Apocrypha” on a Warden resembles the skill progression of any previous Elder Scrolls title. If anything, then this breaks what internal coherence ESO did have. Past TES games used cohesive, thematically grounded skills tied to schools like Illusion, Conjuration, etc. ESO’s class lines were a departure—but at least a consistent one. Subclassing doubles down on that inconsistency, mixing fundamentally dissonant mechanics and visuals in the name of “freedom.”
The fact that Blazing Spear is a flame-based Destruction Spell in Oblivion, but a light-based Templar skill in ESO, just further illustrates that the metaphysics of the universe mean that the same "phenomenon" can go by many names across many people and cultures (and that the same name can apply to different phenomena). And if my necromancer wants to use Blazing Spear like her Oblivion version does? That's metaphysically allowed in the setting, even if it looks more like light than fire.
I regret it was built this way, and I hope they are able to unravel it, but aforementioned technical limitations seem to make it very difficult.sans-culottes wrote: »On class identity: the evasion here is obvious. You keep demanding a universal definition while sidestepping the fact that ESO itself built its foundational systems—UI, gear sets, achievements, even voice lines—around the clarity of distinct classes. Now that structure is being eroded. Players aren’t objecting to novelty. They’re objecting to incoherence.
I hope this can be resolved.
I don't actually understand this. To me, if I say "I am turning right" and someone says "turn left instead", they are also saying "don't turn right". I admit I potentially read it wrong, but I think I associate 'calling for a different design philosophy' with the implication 'don't have the current design philosophy'. Is that wrong?sans-culottes wrote: »Finally, insisting that critique equals sabotage (“you should do Y instead = don’t do X”) is a false equivalence. Calling for an alternative design philosophy is not the same as demanding the removal of a feature post-launch. Pretending otherwise is rhetorical sleight of hand.Edited by ragnarok6644b14_ESO on May 2, 2025 5:32PM0 -
Cooperharley✭✭✭✭✭
✭Everyone is always welcome to leave opinions as it's a public forum.
Many of the same people that complain about everything are in this forum complaining. Lots of great arguments for sure and good points! In the real world I think it's totally fair and makes sense.
The issue with this sentiment, and what baffles me, is that after 10-11 years, they have not changed up the structure/loop of update-feedback-criticism-changes yet I see the same opinions, requests and statements being made.
You guys are complaining about a system as a whole. ZOS has NEVER - not once - announced a brand new feature to come to the game, seen criticism like this, and then straight up removed it. It just hasn't happened. Their changes are always just class nerfs and class balancing. Because this is a base game feature, you can be guaranteed it's coming. And you guys coming on here saying you don't like it simply will not do anything. Idk how you guys haven't seen this. The best thing to do feedback wise is to give targeted feedback.
"I don't like X passive, I think it should be done like X." is going to be SIGNIFICANTLY more possible and effective than "I'm not going to use it." What's the point of that? If you don't like it, don't use it, but that opinion is quite literally being yelled at a brick wall lol. All you're doing is telling other players you don't like it because that feedback does not matter to the devs IMO - this feature is coming.. They will not remove subclassing it's a common sense thing here. It's 100% coming, so let's help steer it in a certain direction. You would think that playing the game as long as yall have, you would've seen it by now, but that's just not going to happen.
The changes I would like to personally see is a MUCH longer PTS than 5 weeks. I think 5 weeks with the speed that ZOS makes changes and the TYPE of changes (massive sledgehammer nerfs or swings one way) completely unfeasible for a change this expansive to the game. It's essentially changing the foundation of the game and with the EXTREMELY small amount of changes we've seen so far, it's likely to be released in a VERY unfinished state which is what's really concerning. There's always a way to do updates to make more people happy, but this hard and short schedule ZOS sticks to is very confusing. It's a very static amount of time regardless of the size of an update and that's where most criticism really lies.
There were NO changes on the PTS this week and they said they have a lot coming next week. The likelihood of ZOS being able to make solid enough changes AFTER that is very unlikely. THAT is what's concerning. I'm sure there's absolutely a way to make it beneficial and optional for the playerbase. What ZOS really needs to work on is dedicating more time to testing and allowing the players to test (eg, evidence shows that people in charge of combat don't always understand it as well as many players), more time to bug fixing, and WAY more communication between developers and players DURING PTS cycles. A little bullet point under a change is hardly communication.
I think the future of ESO lies in a cultural shift at the company level that I don't really see happening. I think the idea of multi-classing (it's simply not a subclass..) is really cool. The way it's implemented. and being implemented currently is the issue IMO.PS5-NA. For The Queen!4 -
ragnarok6644b14_ESO✭✭✭✭I do agree that there needs to be greater effort in making sure the skill lines are balanced - it is hard from my perspective because the way they did the active and passives for tanks actually seem genuinely well-put-together, so I definitely have a best-case view.
I main tanks, and it is hard for me to snap into the DPS mindset and get a clear read (so I just trust people who say it is imbalanced). But more testing and attention is a good way to fix it.1 -
Pixiepumpkin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
I make this statement from a professioal observation. There is a blurred line between subjective and objective when we are discussing people. In the case of people, everything is subjective, even color or temerature. Even if those can be measured. But if everything is subjective, then objectivity does not exist...but it does. So if I am going to assert that my posiition is objective its becasue of the amount of study I have put into this for a period of decades both in the professional realm and the video game/player realm. Simply put. If the end goal is player retention, and the love for the Elder Scrolls universe comes from a lore rich standpoint, then I see no light at the end of the tunnel when it comes to pacifying the desires of players who intend to play a pure class, but are forced to subclass due to the power disparity.These players have a strong desire to express the identity of their role (their class) and to maintain purity.ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »"I do not like X" is a statement of preference - inherently subjective, if you recognize the validity of other people's subjective preferences.
The issue with subclassing is that without pure classes maintaining a damage/tanking/healing threshold that meets or exceeds subclassed builds, these people are forced into decimating their characters internal lore/head cannon. This can be strong enough to drive players away from the game, like myself and my wife.
We literally play the game to decorate houses for our characters, each one of them being a unique individual residing in Tamriel.
And this is where you miss the point. You are trying to get me to admit to something I do not agree with. That is the bullying part and frankly I am done with it.ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Trying to get someone to admit something they know to be true but does not serve their argument is not bullying.ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »I don't actually understand this. To me, if I say "I am turning right" and someone says "turn left instead", they are also saying "don't turn right". I admit I potentially read it wrong, but I think I associate 'calling for a different design philosophy' with the implication 'don't have the current design philosophy'. Is that wrong?
Not a good comparison.
Suggesting that the game should have gone a different design direction is not the same as asking/requesting for a feature to be removed.
If you do not read what I wrote here. Please answer me this question below.
What does your avatar mean in game?
Is your avatar a living, breathing character in game with a lore friendly name who has a role in Tamriel?
Or
Is your avatar simply a means to interact with the environement to crush PVP foes?
"Class identity isn’t just about power or efficiency. It’s about symbolic clarity, mechanical cohesion, and a shared visual and tactical language between players." - sans-culottes2 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Elvenheart wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
This is just a guess based what we’ve been told in the past, but at one point they said classes are so hardwired into our characters that they couldn’t do class change tokens. Otherwise, I think they would’ve done them a long time ago for all the money they could have made with them when people were asking for them.
I think what’s changed is that although they still cannot take the class out of the character, they have figured out a way to swap skill lines in and out, but the original class is still tied to the character and affects certain things like IA Class sets and Class Mastery scripts.
"...classes are so hardwired into our characters..."
Not just in the game code but also in how many of us identify with our characters.Edited by SilverBride on May 2, 2025 5:57PMPCNA3 -
sans-culottes✭✭✭✭✭
✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I think there is sufficient justification in "it more closely (though not perfectly) represents the universe the game is set in, and it allows for greater manifestation of character identity".sans-culottes wrote: »Nobody is silencing your excitement. But pretending that critique is just disguised preference ignores what’s actually being argued. When a change dissolves long-standing structures, the burden isn’t on players to “like it more.” It’s on the system to justify what it replaces.
As for the rest of your post, I understand other people value those things. But that is a subjective value, and other people value character identity more than class identity. In a clash of values, there's no "right answer" - that's all I want to hear. "Subclassing isn't for me because of my preferences" is a far cry from "they should lean harder into class identity because subclassing doesn't fit my preferences".
"I do not like X" is a statement of preference - inherently subjective, if you recognize the validity of other people's subjective preferences.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »No, my obections are objective. I do not like the design of the game regarding classes going forward.
Trying to get someone to admit something they know to be true but does not serve their argument is not bullying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »And the irony of you stating you are not trying to bully, but admit to "trying to get me to admit..."
This is an argument from verbiage, not from lore. The lore is that any spell of any type was available to any person (as well as any swordplay, or shield-skill, or whatever). I think dispensing with that notion is a travesty.sans-culottes wrote: »Let’s dispense with the idea that subclassing somehow makes ESO more “lore-friendly.” Nothing about slotting “Earthen Heart” onto a Necromancer or running “Soldier of Apocrypha” on a Warden resembles the skill progression of any previous Elder Scrolls title. If anything, then this breaks what internal coherence ESO did have. Past TES games used cohesive, thematically grounded skills tied to schools like Illusion, Conjuration, etc. ESO’s class lines were a departure—but at least a consistent one. Subclassing doubles down on that inconsistency, mixing fundamentally dissonant mechanics and visuals in the name of “freedom.”
The fact that Blazing Spear is a flame-based Destruction Spell in Oblivion, but a light-based Templar skill in ESO, just further illustrates that the metaphysics of the universe mean that the same "phenomenon" can go by many names across many people and cultures (and that the same name can apply to different phenomena). And if my necromancer wants to use Blazing Spear like her Oblivion version does? That's metaphysically allowed in the setting, even if it looks more like light than fire.
I regret it was built this way, and I hope they are able to unravel it, but aforementioned technical limitations seem to make it very difficult.sans-culottes wrote: »On class identity: the evasion here is obvious. You keep demanding a universal definition while sidestepping the fact that ESO itself built its foundational systems—UI, gear sets, achievements, even voice lines—around the clarity of distinct classes. Now that structure is being eroded. Players aren’t objecting to novelty. They’re objecting to incoherence.
I hope this can be resolved.
I don't actually understand this. To me, if I say "I am turning right" and someone says "turn left instead", they are also saying "don't turn right". I admit I potentially read it wrong, but I think I associate 'calling for a different design philosophy' with the implication 'don't have the current design philosophy'. Is that wrong?sans-culottes wrote: »Finally, insisting that critique equals sabotage (“you should do Y instead = don’t do X”) is a false equivalence. Calling for an alternative design philosophy is not the same as demanding the removal of a feature post-launch. Pretending otherwise is rhetorical sleight of hand.
Calling this an “argument from verbiage” is a strange deflection. What’s actually being argued is structural coherence. TES titles have historically grounded their freedom within recognizable, rule-bound frameworks: skill schools, major/minor systems, or perks. ESO departed from that with classes, but it was at least a contained design. Subclassing doesn’t honor TES’s past. It disregards it, offering mix-and-match functionality without the internal constraints that gave prior systems their believability.
“Anyone can learn anything” has never meant “everyone is a seamless hybrid of contradictory powers with no narrative or mechanical cost.” Your example of Blazing Spear just proves the point: in Oblivion, the spell fit a school. In ESO, it was reassigned to a specific class. Now subclassing makes that even less coherent—casting the same skill across different archetypes, stripped of thematic grounding.
Your framing of “just turn left” as equivalent to “don’t turn right” misses a key distinction: direction and critique are not the same. Saying “this road was better when it was paved” isn’t the same as “close the road.” The fact that you struggle to recognize that difference is why so many players feel their feedback is being treated like sabotage rather than engagement.5 -
Koshka✭✭✭✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
Nothing?
If they can do it now, and they stay the same, they can still do it.
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.
It will affect any future content and players expectations.
Haven't you noticed that newer content tends to be harder because of power creep?
Yep, and I have noticed my theme builds and other player's theme builds in my guids compensating and working harder, while also staying on theme. It definitely makes it more fulfilling.
A lot of the new stuff is harder because of mechanics rather than DPS. There are very few DPS checks in newer content (though there are some). If you learn the mechanics (which imo is actually quite fun!) you can beat the content while doing fairly pedestrian DPS. Just look at Exiled Redoubt for an example!
Yes and no. Yes, the new mechanics are harder, but dps requirements are higher as well. Even if there are very little "hard" dps checks. For example, there is no hardcoded dps check mechanic in vLC hm (or if there is one, most groups will never see it), but good luck doing it with a team that cannot kill atronachs in time. Same with vDSR hm with the nereids and big 2h adds.
And don't tell me that vDSR or vLC trifecta requires the same dps numbers as TTT. The difficulty is pretty obviously tuned around whatever was "good" dps at the time of their release.Edited by Koshka on May 3, 2025 12:47PM1 -
Prism_ADCSoul ShrivenI will give it an honest try. I am really dedicated to my one character so far, and so new build options sounds nice to me. I don't think any of the meta stuff will affect me for some time, since I only quest.Pain is nothing but an infinite enemy upon my conscience
Echo of Täsyä - Dark Elf Templar2 -
Daoin✭✭✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Can you explain how "I am doing x" being met with "you should do y instead" is not also saying "don't do x"? This is genuinely mystifying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
And yet again, you twist things.
There is a difference between stating "ZOS should have gone the other way" vs stating "Subclassing should be removed".
Two completely different things. You seem heavily invested into the promotion of subclassing. Is there a reason for this outside of your desire to break the game?
As for my reasons, I actually don't want to break the game, but as for objective reasons:
1) bring it closer to how classing usually worked in the TES series and make it more lore-friendly.
2) make it possible to instantiate character identities that are not served by the current class structure, but yet exist in universe.
I mentioned class identity earlier and still don't know what it actually means, despite asking what it actually means and how it is different than character identity (and why it should be empowered to override character identity).SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't even want to use.
I also think it is actually unfortunate that balance won't be perfect out the gate, but as I mentioned much earlier in the thread, I actually think the overall balance will be improved (i.e. more viable endgame character identities than were viable before). If YOUR character identity becomes nonviable for endgame while it was before, that's really unfortunate - I have been in that boat for a while.
and so the whole eso universe should pay because you cant find a nice group to play with ? it has nothing to do with character vadility, its been explained numerous times what classes means to people. i could go on forever what eso has become and hinestly this subclassing makes it worse. to show its time to move on from thinking about it here one for OP
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=I57hkclh3kk
pointer sisters singin I'M SO EXCITED Edited by Daoin on May 4, 2025 7:02AM3 -
Sabclassing is only for fans of beating dolls and measuring the level of damage, for PVP fans this is another pain that makes you not want to play this game at allIn Aldmeri Dominion We Trust!
Xbox EU5 -
AngryNecro✭✭✭MightyBelarus wrote: »Sabclassing is only for fans of beating dolls and measuring the level of damage, for PVP fans this is another pain that makes you not want to play this game at all
lol what? subclassing its spesial for pvp playrs. How can you be a pvp fan if you're not looking forward to making a bunch of hard builds? Especially since you're with Xbox, the pvp is empty there.0 -
Elvenheart✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Can you explain how "I am doing x" being met with "you should do y instead" is not also saying "don't do x"? This is genuinely mystifying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Is this you?:Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
ESO is not being shut down, and is being actively developed. I understand you think paying a subscription once means every change must meet with your approval, but that's not how it works. Don't like a change, stop paying.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
I was just responding to the question (what if other numbers get bigger and yours stay the same).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »
Someone else getting biggerer numbers doesn't affect that.It's always interesting when people come back with the argument of reducing options, when this is how the game has ALWAYS BEEN. Every time a new update nerfs or buffs classes, suddenly everyone is on the train to the newest meta, the shiny new build... until the next cycle. So exactly HOW is subclassing going to be any different? I've played this game long enough to see classes destroyed and return from the grave sometimes 'years' later... it's the same cycle in all MMOs. I've seen people leave- myself included- because the game became so stale after playing every class for years. Same skills, same rotations, same weapons... BORING. At least now with subclassing, any time I get bored I can swap a class line or two... it will keep people interested for much longer than maintaining classes that have grown completely stale IMO.
As someone else said, every time we have a major shakeup- all we hear are "the sky is falling" and usually followed up with, "I think this time I'm done for good" and yet they're still here for the next round of "the sky is falling".
The problem is, it drastically increases the gap between optimal and less optimal choices.
Opzimized builds nowadays can push 130k+, but non-optimal ones can still hit 100k. So you can still participate in group content and do most things just fine.
But what will happen when dps ceiling goes up by 40-50k and less optimal builds stay the same?
@SilverBride is right and you are completely incorrect. The average psychology behind any given damage dealing player is that the other players around them should be doing the same DPS. This has been EXTREMELY evident and observable for LITERAL DECADES now.
anyone who does not measure up gets harassed/bullied (smack given in dungeon/trials etc) and in many cases kicked from the group.
Increasing the damage gap between a non subclass player vs a subclass player is not a good thing. It might be for the ego of the people who think doing top damage means somehing in the real world, but its not a good thing.
Secondly, the people doing the same damage now, contrary to your assertion, WILL NOT be doing the same damage going forward as pure classes are being nerfed pretty much across the board. You can visit the PTS and witness this yourself.
If bullying an harassment is this bad, I am surprised anyone plays. I can't say I hit the top numbers now with my DPS but haven't been bullied on the dungeons I do.
That said, my main is a tank so I don't DPS religiously, and it's possible the bullying happens in whispers. I hope the report/ignore button works though as I am a firm believer that people shouldn't be harassed for playing their theme (provided they have put decent effort into making the theme work). That's true regardless of subclassing.
Unless you are top DPS in the game *right now*, not much will change. Their numbers get bigger, yours will not, but you already were getting bullied and harassed (if it is truly the case that this is a major problem) for not being the top anyways. It's not like bullies and harassers measure your distance from the top and increase their awfulness based on the gap.
And yet everything I said is true. Happens now in game and has been since I first started. In fact it's caused my wife and I to quit the game multiple times in the past. She will not even do a non-pug trial due to the harassment.
Widening the gap between a low DPS player and a high DPS player is not a good thing. That is the end of the discussion. There is nothing that comes beneficial in the game by doing so. All it allows for is more ego ego ego.
How do you propose making the game harder for anyone ever (one of the most called-for changes to overland) without widening this gap between a naked person punching with fists and a well-thought-out and carefully-played build?
The floor is pretty floor (reduce the damage in naked dudes punching?) so...
Where did I ever state that a naked player should be doing similar damage to someone who is outfitted in golds?
Hyerbole gets you nowhere. I defer to my previous post.
Your previous posts contain hyperbole, I think.
What you stated is "don't elevate the damage ceiling without elevating the damage floor to keep the gap narrow". In my opinion, the best way to keep that gap narrow is to balance things.
Balance is good. Sometimes balance requires nerfs. To not adapt to the nerfs, and instead cry about change, seems contradictory.
You don't actually *know*, without trying to adapt, how narrow the gap is between the average and the ceiling after subclassing.
You may know that you are below average, and you may not want to change anything, but there seems to be something hypocritical in crooning about how the top numbers are changing if you aren't even concerned with being average.
It starts to feel like a manufactured problem to complain about change, rather than a genuine issue.
Except that subclassing does not balance things at all, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Creating a wider gap in damage output.
The classes being nerfed will not create "balance" it lowers the damage output of those classes while simultaneously buffs subclass builds, way beyond was is necessary in game.
This design decision by ZOS will force players who choose not to engage in subclassing to do so if they intend on keeping up with the social strucutre of the game regarding damage output thresholds.
And as far as not *knowing* and adapting. I DID NOT PURCHASE AND SPEND THOUSANDS, LITERALLY THOUSANDS of dollars on this game to be forced to "adapt" by subclassing my main and for eschewing class identity.
I hate weapon skill lines. I think guild skill lines are stupid, but I can see their place.
Being able to use a different professions abilities is extremely lame, and destroys all sense of class identity. Because class identity is not just want I play, but what I see being played.
Making changes to a game is one thing, adapting to those changes is one thing and I agree that both must happen. But when a core aspect of the game is rewritten after people have spent thousands of dollars on the game then we the people need to stand up and express to ZOS how utterly bad this decision is if they intend to maintain their current player base.
So do you think game direction should be based on a poll given only to those who spend thousands of dollars on it, or?
Because it would be fascinating if that were a business model (at *any* game company) just as a study of economics.
Currently, that idea for game direction is too radical of a change for me and I will have to think about how I feel about it; certainly it is a larger change to the game's core and unity of design (in the long run) than mere subclassing.
I never asserted that. Those are your words, your deflection.
Subclassing changes the dynamics of the game so severely that its not something that should be done.
It is completely disrespectful to the players who purchased ESO for its class centric design.
Subclassing changes some unfortunate dynamics of the game so completely that it corrects a long oversight in ESO's place in the TES universe.
It is a welcome sign of respect for the players who purchased ESO for its setting, world, lore, and potential.
I am sorry you purchased it because it had classes, but I hope you can understand why I might be happier that it will now not.
Not a good argument.
1. You purchased ESO and have had your fun. It was never promoted that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing". Yet, you had a blast these past 10 years. Now it gets better for you. The value of the money you invested continues on.
2. I purchased ESO and have had my fun. It was never promoited that "in 10 years we are going to release subclassing destroying class identity". The game is now, no longer appealing to me. The value of the money I invested no longer has any meaning except that I feel like I was mislead.
That is the difference. I should not have to point this out.
I think this gets to a deeper opinion on games as services: is money spent in the past intended for enjoyment in the past, or for enjoyment in the future?
If I buy a movie ticket, enjoy the film, and then complain when they stop showing it in theaters, is that reasonable? That's not a very good analogy but it is thought provoking.
Let's look at another service instead: if you pay for, say, the drink subscription at Panera and enjoy it several times, and then they change the flavor of drinks they offered some decade down the road to a flavor you do not like, did Panera lie to you for that whole decade? Has it made the enjoyment of those last 10 years less worthwhile somehow?
In the ESO case, if you buy a monthly subscription, enjoy it for a month, and then discontinue it, did you get your money's worth?
If you do not feel like you got your money's worth in those 10 years, that is a problem unrelated to subclassing. I certainly understand if you think you won't get your money's worth in the future, but you also haven't paid that money yet.
Not even remotely the same.
MMORPGS are well known to be "Forever games". Meaning the game will have ongoing development for as long as it makes money. No business is going to shut down a cash cow.
I fail to see how it is game-*breaking*. That has not been sufficiently illustrated to me.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »When I spend money on ESO, especially when I spend a year in advance for ESO+, I am investing into theg game for my leisure time.
When a change comes around that is LITERALLY game breaking for many players, its my right as a customer to stand up and voice my disapproval, and that is what I am doing here.
All I see is "I don't like it". Which is fair, but not necessarily a defeat of "I DO like it." And you are welcome to say you don't like it, but that isn't what you are saying. You are saying "THIS SHOULDN'T HAPPEN" which is a statement of fact rather than opinion and typically requires backing up with a "because".
I have addressed it, repeatedly. I do not value class identity, and I see you do. Why is class identity valuable? We already had this discussion and I didn't actually see a convincing answer (though I did see a *valid* one about nonverbal player communication).Pixiepumpkin wrote: »So, none of your back and forth "I need to win this argument" commentary has any validity whatsoever. Because not a SINGLE person yet has addressed the issue of the removal of class identity and how it impacts those players whom this is important to. And this is not a "wait and see if you like it" scenario, I can see fully RIGHT NOW what it has done to class identity and pure classes.
I am sorry you feel that way. For what it's worth, I feel the opposite, and perhaps your dislike and disappointment can be tempered for a bit by the enjoyment other people will find, even if you dislike the feature enough to shift games. I don't know what else to say - you aren't wrong for disliking it. Nor are you wrong for stating you dislike it.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »I am STATING as a long time paying customer both with ESO+ for every minute I have played the game and massive amounts of crowns purchased that I VEHEMENTLY DISLIKE the idea and implemenation of Subclassing. It has no appeal and destroys why I bought the game in the first place so many years ago.
I feel like I have beem mislead, I feel like I have been lied to and I feel like my value as a customer who has supported this project for an extremely long time has ZERO meaning to ZOS.
Just wrong for saying "it has to stop" just because you don't like it.
I agree, but it wasn't, and now they are fixing that. Can't change the past, sadly.SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
I understand that it should have been there from the beginning. Indeed, I think it was even a terrible oversight that it was not.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »It's not fear. It's disappointment that such a huge drastic change is being made that completely changes the way we have played for the past 11 years.
All players ever asked for was a class change token. So why this instead?
Because this is more in tune with the universe ESO is set in than a class change token...
Then it should have been that way from the beginning rather than after we have invested 11 years into our characters.
Ya, I don't think they understand this part and I am having a hard time conveying why this is important, because to me its blazingly obvious why.
I do not accept the argument that "it was this way then, therefore it shall be this way forevermore."
People who make mistakes try to fix them, even if the original mistake was years and years ago. They don't just go "well, it was wrong then, guess I should keep being wrong".
You literally misinterpereted every single point I have made.
You use hyperoble in every argument, always missing the point.
bottom line is simple
I am a customer. I have a right to voice my concern/opinon about subclassing and how it will affect the game and how it affects me.
That is the end of the line.
No one is denying you the right to be upset. All I am saying is calling for a feature I am really looking forward to to be removed is something I do not appreciate, and justifying it solely with "I don't like it" isn't sufficient, because that's just putting your own likes and preferences above my own.
The only reasons (outlined above that I have seen) for removing subclassing is "class identity" (which is a nebulously defined concept with non evident objective virtues at best, and an utterly spurious notion that unreasonably constrains playstyles at worst) and the nonverbal interplayer communication, which *is* a good point. Just not important enough to me to override the goodness of subclassing, in my opinion.
I never asked for it to be removed. AGAIN, you are putting words into my mouth I did not say.
BUT even if I did it's irrelevant to you. I am not concerend with your opinion. I only care about expressing mine and that is I do not like the idea nor the implementaiton of subclassing.
Seems a pretty normative statement for someone who isn't saying ZOS should not do subclassing.Pixiepumpkin wrote: »ZOS should have gone the other direction and doubled down on class identity.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
And yet again, you twist things.
There is a difference between stating "ZOS should have gone the other way" vs stating "Subclassing should be removed".
Two completely different things. You seem heavily invested into the promotion of subclassing. Is there a reason for this outside of your desire to break the game?
As for my reasons, I actually don't want to break the game, but as for objective reasons:
1) bring it closer to how classing usually worked in the TES series and make it more lore-friendly.
2) make it possible to instantiate character identities that are not served by the current class structure, but yet exist in universe.
I mentioned class identity earlier and still don't know what it actually means, despite asking what it actually means and how it is different than character identity (and why it should be empowered to override character identity).SilverBride wrote: »ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Everyone's feedback is their own likes and preferences. That's what feedback is.
Feedback that is limited to "I don't like this" is much less useful than feedback that is underpinned by more well-structured arguments (such as "I think you should do XYZ because it brings things closer to the TES universe, or it makes the connection clearer to the buff/debuff system, or it's obviously demonstrating unintended behavior", etc.).
We've given reasons. Subclassing destroys our feeling of class identity and nerfs our characters making them weaker if we choose not to subclass. All for a feature we don't even want to use.
I also think it is actually unfortunate that balance won't be perfect out the gate, but as I mentioned much earlier in the thread, I actually think the overall balance will be improved (i.e. more viable endgame character identities than were viable before). If YOUR character identity becomes nonviable for endgame while it was before, that's really unfortunate - I have been in that boat for a while.
and so the whole eso universe should pay because you cant find a nice group to play with ? it has nothing to do with character vadility, its been explained numerous times what classes means to people. i could go on forever what eso has become and hinestly this subclassing makes it worse. to show its time to move on from thinking about it here one for OP
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=I57hkclh3kk
pointer sisters singin I'M SO EXCITED
This is one of my favorite songs! Years ago they performed at a conference I attended and they were set up in a smallish ballroom, and I was standing very close to where they were singing - that’s a favorite memory of mine. 🥰0 -
PDarkBHood✭✭✭I will give it an honest try. I am really dedicated to my one character so far, and so new build options sounds nice to me. I don't think any of the meta stuff will affect me for some time, since I only quest.
I am really looking forward to subclassing and I am in the same situation as you, one main character. That is where the Armory system will really shine. You should be able to save multiple skill lines with your single character, and also keep a character without subclassing via the Armory system. However, there is only 10 Armory slots, I would like more Armory slots please, up it to 15 to 20 Armory slots please. Only if subclassing and the Armory system are compatible, which I have no doubt they will be as it is a great system to save character variations!!0