"Challenge difficulty" will never work as designed

flyingparchment · February 6

i understand there are some people who think delves, public dungeons, etc. are devoid of players. this is not actually true, at least on PC-EU. it's very rare, outside of super off-peak times, that i'm in a delve or PD and there isn't at least one other player there, and usually more.

so how can i possibly enjoy "challenge difficulty" on a harder difficulty, when there's almost always some other player around who's going to kill my public dungeon bosses in 3 seconds? where is the challenge? where is the difficulty?

it's extremely obvious that this system will be a failure, not because "no one wants difficult content" (as some toxic casuals claim) but rather because you can't have difficult content if someone else in that content turns the self-nerf slider to "easy mode". challenge difficulty feels like something designed for a single player game, but ESO is not a single player game, it's an MMORPG.

someone please convince me that i'm wrong here, because i don't see how this can possibly work.

Gabriel_H · February 6

flyingparchment wrote: »

someone please convince me that i'm wrong here, because i don't see how this can possibly work.

Ok, I just ran every scenario in my head how this could work and I got nothing. You're right, it's a problem.

Currently overland mobs are set at 160CP. A level 10 can kill them because in the background the game scales the player up to 160CP. At 161CP the player begins to outscale the content, hence the problem of being too easy.

There is no solution in the foreground or background that I can see that would provide a 1,800CP (soft cap on power) on challenge difficulty with a challenge if a 1,800CP on easy setting rocked up. You'd effectively be like a level 10 with white gear, while the other player was destroying the mobs.

You can't scale the easy player down as that's unfair on them.
You can't scale the mobs up from two different perspectives.
You can't scale the challenge player down without ruining their experience.

This needs a truckload of clarity from ZOS.

SilverBride · February 6

I don't see how that will be any different than it is now where we have players of all different levels and skills fighting the same World Boss etc..

Gabriel_H · February 6

SilverBride wrote: »

I don't see how that will be any different than it is now where we have players of all different levels and skills fighting the same World Boss etc..

Currently:
A level 10 rocks up to a WB who is a 160CP mob. The game, in the background scales the level 10 up to 160CP.
A big bad 1,800CP rocks up and makes the fight a whole lot easier because they are overpowered compared to the mob.
The level 10 is grateful for the easy kill.

Under challenge mode:
A level 1,800CP rocks up to a world boss, with the player set to extra-super duper hard mode. They are taking a lot more damage, and doing a lot less. They are happy about it, they want this. They set the difficulty slider.
A second 1,800CP rocks up and makes the fight a whole lot easier because they are overpowered compared to the mob.
The first 1,800CP is super mad. They just had their gaming experience ruined.

The difference is intent and outcome.

Gabriel_H · February 6

flyingparchment wrote: »

i understand there are some people who think delves, public dungeons, etc. are devoid of players. this is not actually true, at least on PC-EU. it's very rare, outside of super off-peak times, that i'm in a delve or PD and there isn't at least one other player there, and usually more.

By the way, I love solo'ing content as well as playing with my friends. I'm also a content junkie and will pile through new content in a matter of hours. I always leave the WBs, delves and PDs to last, at like 4am, when no-one else is around, just to solo them. ~85% success rate (not of the clear, just doing it solo).

AlterBlika · February 6

flyingparchment wrote: »

so how can i possibly enjoy "challenge difficulty" on a harder difficulty, when there's almost always some other player around who's going to kill my public dungeon bosses in 3 seconds? where is the challenge? where is the difficulty?

Now you can't enjoy it at all so this is at least a step in the right direction.

Honestly though, the game population has been actively declining lately and dividing the community further doesn't seem like a good idea. We just "might" be that local minority because those who wanted challenging overland quit ages ago. I believe either the current population can't sustain separate difficulty instaces well (let's be real most zones has been "dead" for a long time, but this time this will be worse) or it's too much work to implement veteran/normal -like system like in dungeons for overland. It's actually a good thing they implement at least something so they can collect metrics and feedback from it. This is what ZOS say as well if you've been following threads.

But ultimately, would you actually ever enjoy the difficulty to the fullest?

flyingparchment wrote: »

but ESO is not a single player game, it's an MMORPG.

This is the problem. In any possible scenario there are going to be other players running around. That vestige difficulty is nothing crazy if you do the math. If 3 players (all of them on vestige) will fight the boss at the same time, the boss will get melted.
You may argue that they can always make it more difficult but there's only so much you can do about it because ultimately the overland must be soloable otherwise nobody will actually play (I mean on daily basis) it. The idea of grouping to defeat a boss that drops trash overland gear will get old very fast.

Enemoriana · February 6

Gabriel_H wrote: »

The first 1,800CP is super mad. They just had their gaming experience ruined.

You mean first 1800cp player feels like almost everyone in game feels when 1800cp player come?

PrinceShroob · February 6

Not to sound rude, but did you forget that a lot of quests put the player in a solo instance where there can definitionally be no other players around? A lot of people want higher overland difficulty specifically to make the difficulty of quest bosses--which tend to be fought solo, anyway--commensurate to their importance to the story.

Desiato · February 6

The current plan for hard mode content is terrible. I say this as someone who wasn't only upset with the removal of vet overland content, but also the original vet difficulty nerf during the summer of 2014.

The "feature" is actually a debuff on the character. No one asked for that! We can basically already do that by sabotaging our stats to weaken our characters.

I want a dangerous area to explore where I need to be sharp and pay attention. I don't want to drink a poison that weakens me among other unweakened players while we play together. The idea of that is repulsive to me.

I don't care that hard mode difficulty instances would be less populated. I would see that as a feature because it would allow for a sort of hm community of like-minded players.

I don't think there needs to be multiple hard mode difficulties. Just one would be enough for me. It would be the restoration of a feature we lost in 2014.

coop500 · February 6

I agree with the OP, and I wasn't even really someone who cared to have more difficult overland. Like yeah I would like for it but it wasn't a huge thing for me.
I'd likely play with this system, but I do think having players on vastly different difficulties in the same instance is going to cause so much fighting and trolling and even accidental spoilering of fun. I just do NOT see it ending well.
And yes I play at randomly different hours on PC-NA, and never once have I been fully and entirely alone in a public area. Maybe at first, but usually SOMEONE is around.

Sadly this system seems to have been done in the most poor, lazy, and conflicting way possible and it's really sad, I truly hope they reconsider.

coop500 · February 6

Desiato wrote: »

The current plan for hard mode content is terrible. I say this as someone who wasn't only upset with the removal of vet overland content, but also the original vet difficulty nerf during the summer of 2014.

The "feature" is actually a debuff on the character. No one asked for that! We can basically already do that by sabotaging our stats to weaken our characters.

I want a dangerous area to explore where I need to be sharp and pay attention. I don't want to drink a poison that weakens me among other unweakened players while we play together. The idea of that is repulsive to me.

I don't care that hard mode difficulty instances would be less populated. I would see that as a feature because it would allow for a sort of hm community of like-minded players.

I don't think there needs to be multiple hard mode difficulties. Just one would be enough for me. It would be the restoration of a feature we lost in 2014.

Also I agree with IMO only needing Normal and Vet, I don't think we need like, what, 5 difficulty settings?
Just leave Normal as is, and set up a Vet one that's like, IDK, mildly challenging. Middling Vet Dungeon tier perhaps?

Tariq9898 · February 6

coop500 wrote: »

Desiato wrote: »

The current plan for hard mode content is terrible. I say this as someone who wasn't only upset with the removal of vet overland content, but also the original vet difficulty nerf during the summer of 2014.

The "feature" is actually a debuff on the character. No one asked for that! We can basically already do that by sabotaging our stats to weaken our characters.

I want a dangerous area to explore where I need to be sharp and pay attention. I don't want to drink a poison that weakens me among other unweakened players while we play together. The idea of that is repulsive to me.

I don't care that hard mode difficulty instances would be less populated. I would see that as a feature because it would allow for a sort of hm community of like-minded players.

I don't think there needs to be multiple hard mode difficulties. Just one would be enough for me. It would be the restoration of a feature we lost in 2014.

Also I agree with IMO only needing Normal and Vet, I don't think we need like, what, 5 difficulty settings?
Just leave Normal as is, and set up a Vet one that's like, IDK, mildly challenging. Middling Vet Dungeon tier perhaps?

I do think there should be multiple difficulties. At least 3. The problem with having just two is the gap between Normal and Vet would be too large. A middle ground is nice for players who want to find a decent balance or use it as a stepping stone onto the next tier. This accommodates a wider range of players.

Gabriel_H · February 6

PrinceShroob wrote: »

Not to sound rude, but did you forget that a lot of quests put the player in a solo instance where there can definitionally be no other players around? A lot of people want higher overland difficulty specifically to make the difficulty of quest bosses--which tend to be fought solo, anyway--commensurate to their importance to the story.

The original main quest does, some zone story quests have some stages in a solo instance, but the vast majority of quests are in shared instances.

frogthroat · February 6

I suppose if you set your difficulty and port somewhere, it could place you in an overland instance where most people have chosen the same difficulty.

Gabriel_H · February 6

frogthroat wrote: »

I suppose if you set your difficulty and port somewhere, it could place you in an overland instance where most people have chosen the same difficulty.

It could, but it won't.

Skorro · February 6

Inb4 the "speed runner ruined my delve/questing" posts start cropping up

RebornV3x · February 6

They needed to do a tier system something like what The Division did. Though it might be a problem or undo able with the Mega-server they have and they don't want to split the player base so idk what the correct action is either split up the player base with a world tier system or what ZOS has decided to do instead your pick.

Treeshka · February 6

I do not understand why they do not want to split players. Do we need to see the players in the quest zones? I mean overland quest areas? If you want to do it with a person, they can group up anyway. I think all of them should be instanced based on the difficulty level we may choose. Because as many said here and maybe in other posts, mixing difficulties will ruin the experience sometimes.

Easy difficulty player will one shot the boss while the hard mode difficulty player's experience will be ruined if they stumble upon each other doing the same quest. They may feel good still though, you basically get more rewards with the help of another player. This is open the discussion i think.

Game can already do instance separation in a way that sometimes player disappear in front of you, because they are not completed the quest, or other way around. They should try this in the next test server cycle or give players a way to choose. Like a poll before the live update.

Didactiso · February 6

I like having multiple levels of difficulties as it grants me increased freedom to adjust my playstyle in more nuanced ways!

If I find Vestige to be too demanding for me, I can switch down to Master or Seasoned. With this, I can still be immersed with the gameplay difficulty without it being too easy. This also gives players a stronger sense of progression as they work their way up from one tier to the next. Two difficulties is not enough; it shouldn’t be all or nothing.

Don’t know why some are against options that would greatly cater to far more players of different skill sets.

zenonuk · February 6

The easiest thing would be to split Delves, PDs, story locations/instances, based on difficulty - we don't care if there's only one or two of us inside a delve. If we're grouped, everyone gets pulled into the same highest selected difficulty instance.

Solving outside world and world bosses (who are also generally outside) can then be looked at separately. Instancing the outside world would make interaction with non-grouped people more difficult (e.g. guild recruitment), and pop-sizes would be noticeable. The "world" might feel a bit empty as others have pointed out.

Personally, I'd be happy just instancing the delves/PDs as a starting point and a reasonable compromise in the first update.

NoireJin the Witchking · February 6

I always find it funny when peoples arguments are "YoU hAvE tO pLaY wItH mE iTs aN mMoRpG" the truth of the matter is if someone wants to play solo they will. I actively avoid doing things if there's tons of people doing it that ruins my immersion and know of others who do too, though i recognize that's anecdotal. It's different in places like the Night market/Dolmens/Harrowstorms etc. because that's fun to do in a group. While keeping communal areas non instanced like towns and cities.

Just add group specific zones like the Night market to keep up the MMO aspect, overland/delves public dungeons should otherwise be instanced.

However if i want to play in an instance with like minded players on the same difficulty as me then that is MY choice. You don't need to come off as some creepy dude at a bar who got rejected bc i don't want to play with you. It's my choice to choose if i want to interact with you, regardless if its an MMO or not.

There needs to be 2 difficulty settings. Normal and Vet, that way instances wouldn't split the players up immensely. Normal folks can play with their own and vet folks can play with theirs.
While also ZOS needs to take active measures to increase the Socialization in this game OUTSDIE of force grouping players. We can have both instances and a robust social system that encourages players grouping and working together. just saying "we don't want to split the player base" is inherently lazy and the worst of the options. Overhaul to group finders, adding guild missions to work towards guild specific rewards like a guild base etc and adding layers to grouping via rewards would be a start. Incentivize grouping rather than forcing grouping.

Again, being an MMO does not mean we HAVE to play together. I can enjoy your presence but i dont have to interact with you. Plenty of successful MMOs do that and are fine.

Tariq9898 · February 6

NoireJin the Witchking wrote: »

I always find it funny when peoples arguments are "YoU hAvE tO pLaY wItH mE iTs aN mMoRpG" the truth of the matter is if someone wants to play solo they will. I actively avoid doing things if there's tons of people doing it that ruins my immersion and know of others who do too, though i recognize that's anecdotal. It's different in places like the Night market/Dolmens/Harrowstorms etc. because that's fun to do in a group. While keeping communal areas non instanced like towns and cities.

Just add group specific zones like the Night market to keep up the MMO aspect, overland/delves public dungeons should otherwise be instanced.

However if i want to play in an instance with like minded players on the same difficulty as me then that is MY choice. You don't need to come off as some creepy dude at a bar who got rejected bc i don't want to play with you. It's my choice to choose if i want to interact with you, regardless if its an MMO or not.

There needs to be 2 difficulty settings. Normal and Vet, that way instances wouldn't split the players up immensely. Normal folks can play with their own and vet folks can play with theirs.
While also ZOS needs to take active measures to increase the Socialization in this game OUTSDIE of force grouping players. We can have both instances and a robust social system that encourages players grouping and working together. just saying "we don't want to split the player base" is inherently lazy and the worst of the options. Overhaul to group finders, adding guild missions to work towards guild specific rewards like a guild base etc and adding layers to grouping via rewards would be a start. Incentivize grouping rather than forcing grouping.

Again, being an MMO does not mean we HAVE to play together. I can enjoy your presence but i dont have to interact with you. Plenty of successful MMOs do that and are fine.

I agree on most of what you said. Especially with regards to MMOs being solo friendly as I’m a solo player myself. However, I still think having at least three difficulties is more beneficial.

Overland is by far the largest content in the game when it comes to population. Everyone shares it, casuals, endgamers, solo and group players, role-players, and so on. This means having just two settings will be too broad to accommodate for such a large variety of playstyles and skill levels.

More difficulty tiers allows for more of a spectrum rather than a false binary, better reflecting and catering to the skill range of the wider player population.

Now personally, I like the four difficulty settings and I think Vestige is gonna be extremely fun for someone like me. Just wish they were all instanced.

twisttop138 · February 6

coop500 wrote: »

I agree with the OP, and I wasn't even really someone who cared to have more difficult overland. Like yeah I would like for it but it wasn't a huge thing for me.
I'd likely play with this system, but I do think having players on vastly different difficulties in the same instance is going to cause so much fighting and trolling and even accidental spoilering of fun. I just do NOT see it ending well.
And yes I play at randomly different hours on PC-NA, and never once have I been fully and entirely alone in a public area. Maybe at first, but usually SOMEONE is around.

Sadly this system seems to have been done in the most poor, lazy, and conflicting way possible and it's really sad, I truly hope they reconsider.

I'm with you on the Hey it's cool but if it doesn't happen I won't flip tables attitude towards it. I'll probably only use it for instanced quest stuff. I don't need to be hassled picking flowers. But to be completely real here, what did people expect? Zos was never going to go back in and redo all the zones or even one zone to have trash with mechanics where you need to think and plan your next move. It was always going to be a debuff to players because that is the easiest way to do it. I'm super happy for the people that want it. I think it'll be a cool addition. But people hyped up what it could be so much over the years, it could never meet all expectations. And let's be honest. Zos is doing so bad we're moving to a battle pass. Not the sign of a thriving game. The amount of content this year is severely pared down from previous years and the quality of last year was atrocious for many parts, the dungeons excluded. They cooked on those. OC, eh. But I really think this is the best Zos can do. Let's just hope it helps bring people in this year. I hate to think about what will happen if the battle pass idea fails.

scrappy1342 · February 6

it seems like by the time they have announced something and put it to the pts, it's too late to change anything. it would probably be better to put the buff/debuff on the mobs instead of the players and it would pick the highest difficulty by default. if easy mode guy doesn't want to get hit, they can back off and let hard mode guy take the agro. you'll still get situations in delves where easy mode guy is going to get ahead of hard mode guy and clear everything to the boss... but by the time hard mode guy gets caught back up, easy mode guy is going to be long gone and out of their way.

and hard mode guy is probably going to be SOL if they want that chest/columbine and easy mode guy comes up. but i guess if you are concerned about chests/columbine, you're probably going to be on easy mode anyways

xylena · February 6

Not perfect, but least they are working towards a solution, not just letting it rot.

There's no reason to preserve a proven failure, like an overworld system that abjectly fails to teach players mechanics relevant to Vet content or PvP. Click-through-story mode could exist as a solo instance or something, if that type of accessibility is considered valuable for this game.

spartaxoxo · February 6

It works in other MMO so why can't it work in this one? A lot of major quest stuff is instanced already and there's really no reasonable expectation that a public dungeon would be a solo instance. You also don't run into people constantly because they already keep the instances populated in such a way that we're not tripping over each other all time.

Just wait a couple of days when new content drops and the crowd will thin out.

Thalmar · February 6

NoireJin the Witchking wrote: »

I always find it funny when peoples arguments are "YoU hAvE tO pLaY wItH mE iTs aN mMoRpG" the truth of the matter is if someone wants to play solo they will. I actively avoid doing things if there's tons of people doing it that ruins my immersion and know of others who do too, though i recognize that's anecdotal. It's different in places like the Night market/Dolmens/Harrowstorms etc. because that's fun to do in a group. While keeping communal areas non instanced like towns and cities.

Just add group specific zones like the Night market to keep up the MMO aspect, overland/delves public dungeons should otherwise be instanced.

However if i want to play in an instance with like minded players on the same difficulty as me then that is MY choice. You don't need to come off as some creepy dude at a bar who got rejected bc i don't want to play with you. It's my choice to choose if i want to interact with you, regardless if its an MMO or not.

There needs to be 2 difficulty settings. Normal and Vet, that way instances wouldn't split the players up immensely. Normal folks can play with their own and vet folks can play with theirs.
While also ZOS needs to take active measures to increase the Socialization in this game OUTSDIE of force grouping players. We can have both instances and a robust social system that encourages players grouping and working together. just saying "we don't want to split the player base" is inherently lazy and the worst of the options. Overhaul to group finders, adding guild missions to work towards guild specific rewards like a guild base etc and adding layers to grouping via rewards would be a start. Incentivize grouping rather than forcing grouping.

Again, being an MMO does not mean we HAVE to play together. I can enjoy your presence but i dont have to interact with you. Plenty of successful MMOs do that and are fine.

I also mostly agree what you wrote. A couple additional insights subjectively: After reading many many posts about two groups being against each others, I also strongly think maybe it really is time to do opposite of "we don't want to split the player base". The people who think MMOs must be played with groups only and solo players are not belong to ESO, and the people who enjoys MMOs solo and do not want to group up with others inside forced group content with better rewards.

Challange difficulty is a good oppurtunity to put these 2 group of players aka casuals and hardcore diehards into different instances can solve some problems. There are different categories like casuals who like hard overland for instance, but if there will be four, five different instances I am sure everyone can find a place for themselves, like it is said towns, cities etc should be for all.

But anyways it is a good start to give different levels for everyone, it can be perfected in time. Options are always better than forcing people to play the way they do not want.

AzuraFan · February 6

Didactiso wrote: »

Don’t know why some are against options that would greatly cater to far more players of different skill sets.

The options aren't the problem. It's that people with different difficulty settings will be in the same instance, so people are concerned that those of us playing on the lower difficulty will quickly burn down stuff, depriving those set to a higher difficulty of their challenging fights.

It's a valid concern. I'm curious to see how it will work in practice.

Tariq9898 · February 6

Thalmar wrote: »

NoireJin the Witchking wrote: »

I always find it funny when peoples arguments are "YoU hAvE tO pLaY wItH mE iTs aN mMoRpG" the truth of the matter is if someone wants to play solo they will. I actively avoid doing things if there's tons of people doing it that ruins my immersion and know of others who do too, though i recognize that's anecdotal. It's different in places like the Night market/Dolmens/Harrowstorms etc. because that's fun to do in a group. While keeping communal areas non instanced like towns and cities.

Just add group specific zones like the Night market to keep up the MMO aspect, overland/delves public dungeons should otherwise be instanced.

However if i want to play in an instance with like minded players on the same difficulty as me then that is MY choice. You don't need to come off as some creepy dude at a bar who got rejected bc i don't want to play with you. It's my choice to choose if i want to interact with you, regardless if its an MMO or not.

There needs to be 2 difficulty settings. Normal and Vet, that way instances wouldn't split the players up immensely. Normal folks can play with their own and vet folks can play with theirs.
While also ZOS needs to take active measures to increase the Socialization in this game OUTSDIE of force grouping players. We can have both instances and a robust social system that encourages players grouping and working together. just saying "we don't want to split the player base" is inherently lazy and the worst of the options. Overhaul to group finders, adding guild missions to work towards guild specific rewards like a guild base etc and adding layers to grouping via rewards would be a start. Incentivize grouping rather than forcing grouping.

Again, being an MMO does not mean we HAVE to play together. I can enjoy your presence but i dont have to interact with you. Plenty of successful MMOs do that and are fine.

I also mostly agree what you wrote. A couple additional insights subjectively: After reading many many posts about two groups being against each others, I also strongly think maybe it really is time to do opposite of "we don't want to split the player base". The people who think MMOs must be played with groups only and solo players are not belong to ESO, and the people who enjoys MMOs solo and do not want to group up with others inside forced group content with better rewards.

Challange difficulty is a good oppurtunity to put these 2 group of players aka casuals and hardcore diehards into different instances can solve some problems. There are different categories like casuals who like hard overland for instance, but if there will be four, five different instances I am sure everyone can find a place for themselves, like it is said towns, cities etc should be for all.

But anyways it is a good start to give different levels for everyone, it can be perfected in time. Options are always better than forcing people to play the way they do not want.

Agreed. I don’t see much of a problem having 4 instances either, one for each difficulty. ZOS’ fear of zones being too desolate can be soothed by the inevitability of crossplay. Plus most players prefer to be left alone, anyways.

Another benefit of having separate instances is it can bring about a renewed sense of comradeship. If I see someone on Vestige instance, I’ll have sure knowledge that they’re also gonna struggle just like I am. And if I see them fighting a world boss on Vestige, I’d be happy to jump in and help!

CalamityCat · February 6

If someone joined in on a harder fight with their difficulty lower, I can easily just wait for the next spawn and try again. Unless there's an event on, it's not that much of an inconvenience.

Is it genuinely that difficult for players to take turns in a multiplayer game? Actually don't answer that, I know the answer already!

Nestor · February 6

The only way Challenge Difficulty will work is to Shard every player or have 3 Instances and funnel players as needed.

Me, if I want a challenge, I go out and find it. DLC WB or Solo Dungeons of various levels for example. If I am bopping around a zone or running story content I dont want protracted fights, that would be annoying to me.

So, I will leave the "challenge" stock and ignore the whole challenge system.