Maintenance for the week of September 1:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
Overland Content Feedback Thread
-
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Rewarding players that requested more difficult enemies just because they received the exact thing they asked for is what will break this game.
Show me a player that quit lotro because the slider there has exp gain on it.
This isn't Lotro.PCNA3 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭SilverBride wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Rewarding players that requested more difficult enemies just because they received the exact thing they asked for is what will break this game.
Show me a player that quit lotro because the slider there has exp gain on it.
This isn't Lotro.
This game also doesn't have a harder overland yet. So, we need to get examples from other games where someone getting exp caused a game to break and a mass exodus of players.
It doesn't have to be LOTRO. Show me any game destroyed by someone getting exp.2 -
VoxAdActa✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »There is not one valid objection to exp that I have heard.
Then I suggest you go back and read the thread from the beginning. There are dozens, from technical limitations to resource limitations to previous trials of similar ideas that didn't pan out to the fact that "immersion mode" would be empty without some extra incentive to get even the people who fought for it to play it. And dozens more.You don't want it to have any rewards, period.
If it needs rewards, then the goal was never "immersion." If the goal was "immersion," then immersion and more fun would be their own rewards. If the mode would be empty without extra incentives, then you don't want immersion as badly as you want us to believe you do. This isn't hard. Words < Actions.
So yes, you're right, I don't want it to have any rewards other than what you claim to be asking for: immersion.
Otherwise, it's nothing more than another difficulty gate that lets experienced players get more of whatever thing that's not immersion than inexperienced or less capable players.
And this game already has a whoooooole bunch of those. Like Perfected sets, motifs, cosmetics, the best/sharpest dye colors, and heck, even monster helmets (lots of people, like my dad, can't even touch vet content at all).
Edited by VoxAdActa on February 13, 2025 11:47PM7 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »Rewarding players that requested more difficult enemies just because they received the exact thing they asked for is what will break this game.
Show me a player that quit lotro because the slider there has exp gain on it.
This isn't Lotro.
This game also doesn't have a harder overland yet. So, we need to get examples from other games where someone getting exp caused a game to break and a mass exodus of players.
It doesn't have to be LOTRO. Show me any game destroyed by someone getting exp.
No. What any other game did is not relevant here. What is relevant here is what is fair and giving players extra experience for getting something they asked for with immersion as the goal is not fair in my opinion.PCNA4 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Then I suggest you go back and read the thread from the beginning. There are dozens, from technical limitations to resource limitations to previous trials of similar ideas that didn't pan out to the fact that "immersion mode" would be empty without some extra incentive to get even the people who fought for it to play it. And dozens more.
Yes, which is how I landed on a slider and abandoned the desire for a separate instance on par with a vet trial.If it needs rewards, then the goal was never "immersion."
Completely false. All content has rewards. Somehow the story quests in this game are able to offer immersion and Stibbon's fancy pantaloons as a reward, and immersion is still the main design goal. These are not mutually exclusive concepts.
Exp is only meaningful for a relatively short period of time and mostly not to vet players. The claim that vet players are desperate for exp they can barely even use is not compelling at all to anyone who genuinely plays at a vet level.
Are you even at a high champion point level? At a certain point you already have all the slottables you'll actually use and more exp is just for the sake of completionism. I'm way past that point. I don't even spend my cp.Edited by spartaxoxo on February 13, 2025 11:52PM4 -
VoxAdActa✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Completely false. All content has rewards.
Yes, and you want more of those, which are gated from a big section of us unwashed "git gud" peasants.
Doesn't this game have enough of those? Perfected sets, the best/sharpest dye colors, monster helmets, motifs, etc. etc.?
You want more exp, but you don't want more exp, hypothetical new players with the proper skills will want more exp, but y'all also just want more immersion, but you'll also ignore immersion if you don't get something else to go along with it.
It's easier to just not bother, at this point. You started out with "I want more immersion," and ended up with "I don't want more immersion if we don't get something exclusive, like faster leveling, to go with it."
The "more immersion" argument is bogus if immersion alone isn't a sufficient incentive to play in "immersion mode." If you need "immersion + more" or you (and/or the hypothetical "new player") won't play it, then it's not actually about just wanting more immersion, now is it? Again, words < actions.
5 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Yes, and you want more of those, which are gated from a big section of us unwashed "git gud" peasants.
You're gated from experience points? I can send you some potions.
I want the quest to retain its functionality =/= I don't care about immersion.
Ask anyone if someone being unhappy with a monkey paw wish means they never wanted what they wished for, and they'll what a ridiculous argument it is.
You try to assign fake motivations to me and then get claim I'm unreasonable for rejecting them, over and over again. It won't make it any more true.
Players on normal get to level up with a fun and exciting story that features challenging combat. I want that same thing. I have argued in favor of that for 3 years with only a tiny amount of posts discussing rewards because they were of little importance. That's my actions. I discussed them so little that some players were under the impression I had never discussed them at all.Edited by spartaxoxo on February 13, 2025 11:58PM5 -
Kallykat✭✭✭✭✭Can I just say that I strongly disapprove of the term "immersion mode" being used to describe a higher difficulty mode? It gives a false impression that the current mode is not about immersion. For many people, the current mode is very immersive. For me, having to spend an inordinate amount of time in battles that block my questing progress and potentially force me to have to go farm better gear or look up strategies to beat bosses would cause a break in my immersion.
Also, questing is not for leveling. Questing is for advancing a story. Leveling is a byproduct of that.9 -
colossalvoids✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »[snip]
[snip]
What am I even reading at that point. You hopefully do aware that people are different and want different things for different reasons, some points align though like the veteran overland people talk about in this exact thread. After that there's a multitudes of cross roads be it implementation or incentives.
Trying to oppose something because you feel it's "disingenuous" is fine but that's going on in your head more so rather than in objective reality so trying to project your thoughts on posters isn't really working.
Some people want a different tier of the overland for various reasons, they do want it to be structured the same way as the other parts of the game as it is a game, produced by the same development team and not a fan mod. It is always following a pattern which is part of that immersion you're trying to bring up but conveniently avoiding other aspects of it.
If you genuinely feel like people here are craving some special, unique and super awesome, meaningful rewards that they want to hide from you by impenetrable barrier that'll guard day and night from you that's really, really far from what people are talking about with similar exp. gains etc. which are the basics of any difficulty increase if it's not just some high end vet specific mode where new players are excluded for some bizarre reason, as new players bouncing off is one of the reasons it's even considered now most probably.
[edited to remove quote]Edited by ZOS_Icy on February 14, 2025 1:39PM10 -
old_scopie1945✭✭✭✭✭VoxAdActa wrote:-
Your reward is the enhance immersion you asked for. If you won't play the high-immersion game you asked for without also getting extra special XP/gear for it, it starts to sound an awful lot like "more immersion" or "more fun" is a Trojan horse for "more stuff."
You either want "more immersion" or you don't. If you have to be incentivized with extra goodies to play your own "more immersion" mode, then you clearly don't want "immersion" that badly.[/quote]
Best description I have seen so far in this never ending tail.4 -
Muizer✭✭✭✭✭
✭Can I just say that I strongly disapprove of the term "immersion mode" being used to describe a higher difficulty mode? It gives a false impression that the current mode is not about immersion.
You can, and you'd absolutely be right too. A better word would be 'immersion calibration slider'. You know, a bit like the contrast setting slider: a setting that is specific to you and your setup.
Imagine the game had only one fixed contrast setting. It works better for some than others.
Imagine people complaining about this, resulting in a contrast slider being introduced.
Imagine the people that did not need the slider complaining that those who do benefit should somehow pay in some way for that 'privilege'.
Imagine that if people object to that, they get to hear "ah, so it's not really about getting the contrast right at all, because you're not even prepared to pay for it".
Now that would be a fair analogy of what's been going on in this thread lately. At least the exchanges I was involved in that concerned a compensation commensurate to the extra time spent on higher difficulty encounters: I.e. so those at higher difficulty don't have to 'pay' for calibrating their difficulty setting upwards.
Edited by Muizer on February 14, 2025 11:12AMPlease stop making requests for game features. ZOS have enough bad ideas as it is!4 -
ZOS_IcymodGreetings,
We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.
Thank you for your understanding.2 -
tohopka_eso✭✭✭✭Gonna chime in again on this. I still will side with Silverbride and Tasheen.
A game I play from time to time has the best solution I can think of. Even though it's leveled based it might work.
For story you are in an instance mainly by yourself with 3 settings easy, normal and hard. I have found this to be really good.
For overland, normaal mobs are left alone but they have fates and you have to sync if your over leveled. Not sure how to implement it in ESO but they become fun sometimes. There are two types one has a monster boss other is just constant trash mobs but some have objectives.
The named bosses that also pop in the zones can only be done as groups. Some have tried soloing them but usually fail.
This is the only thing I can think of that might work.1 -
Surgee✭✭✭✭Greetings,
We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.
Thank you for your understanding.
At this point I suggest closing this topic. It's the same few people arguing over "solutions" that completely makes no sense game design side and business side wise. Let ZOS do the update and then we can give feedback, rather than complaining for 10000 pages over something that didn't happen.Edited by Surgee on February 14, 2025 4:05PM2 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭At this point I suggest closing this topic. It's the same few people arguing over "solutions" that completely makes no sense game design side and business side wise. Let ZOS do the update and then we can give feedback, rather than complaining for 10000 pages over something that didn't happen.
I completely agree and posted a similar view recently, but I failed to follow my own advice because it's hard not to counter views we disagree with.
It would be great to close this thread until we see the update, then reopen it. Or better yet then start a new one based on how the update goes.PCNA5 -
Franchise408✭✭✭✭✭
✭Greetings,
We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.
Thank you for your understanding.
At this point I suggest closing this topic. It's the same few people arguing over "solutions" that completely makes no sense game design side and business side wise. Let ZOS do the update and then we can give feedback, rather than complaining for 10000 pages over something that didn't happen.
No, it should not be closed.
The bad faith actors who constantly rile up the same talking points over and over and over again need to be dealt with, while the people who are trying to genuinely discuss possibilities and solutions to the subject of overland can have a space to do so.
Certain individuals' inability to restrict themselves from the conversation that they say they don't even want is not reason to stop people who do want the conversation from having it.15 -
valenwood_vegan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Franchise408 wrote: »
No, it should not be closed.
The bad faith actors who constantly rile up the same talking points over and over and over again need to be dealt with, while the people who are trying to genuinely discuss possibilities and solutions to the subject of overland can have a space to do so.
Certain individuals' inability to restrict themselves from the conversation that they say they don't even want is not reason to stop people who do want the conversation from having it.
Absolutely. Individual users should not be allowed to control a conversation just because they don't like the topic or the viewpoint of others. Threads that comply with the rules should not be closed except as a last resort.14 -
SilverBride✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Franchise408 wrote: »No, it should not be closed.
The bad faith actors who constantly rile up the same talking points over and over and over again need to be dealt with, while the people who are trying to genuinely discuss possibilities and solutions to the subject of overland can have a space to do so.
Certain individuals' inability to restrict themselves from the conversation that they say they don't even want is not reason to stop people who do want the conversation from having it.
A player that doesn't feel that overland needs any changes is not a "bad faith actor". And no player should be "dealt with" because they have a different view.
This thread isn't just for those that want a change to discuss what they want, but rather is for all feedback from all players on overland content.
@ZOS_Kevin This is one reason why I would like to see this thread locked. Please take this into consideration.Edited by SilverBride on February 15, 2025 7:17PMPCNA8 -
disky✭✭✭✭✭
✭Also, questing is not for leveling. Questing is for advancing a story. Leveling is a byproduct of that.
Fundamentally disagree with this. To say that questing is "not for leveling" devalues questing in a material way, and it makes me think that some players have just played this game for long enough to believe that overland cannot possibly be more than it is now. Like, it isn't even supposed to be better. It's not the first time I've heard this kind of opinion and it really bums me out.
Yes, depending on the kind of quest you're doing, questing advances a story, but it also provides experience and rewards for completion, and it could certainly become a primary way of advancing a character. There are games which eschew combat experience entirely in favor of experience gain upon quest completion, and I think that's totally valid. Not to say that ESO should do that, but questing could become a more important part of leveling if ZOS changed their minds about it, and I actually think it could be a good way to get a greater number of players engaged with overland.3 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Not to say that ESO should do that, but questing could become a more important part of leveling if ZOS changed their minds about it, and I actually think it could be a good way to get a greater number of players engaged with overland.
It's still the primary way new players level. It's also possible to skip the story purely for the exp and skill points. It's for both story and levelling. I agree with you though. It honestly would be nice if quest exp gains scaled to CP or something.Edited by spartaxoxo on February 14, 2025 10:47PM3 -
TaSheen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Not to say that ESO should do that, but questing could become a more important part of leveling if ZOS changed their minds about it, and I actually think it could be a good way to get a greater number of players engaged with overland.
It's still the primary way new players level. It's also possible to skip the story purely for the exp and skill points. It's for both story and levelling. I agree with you though. It honestly would be nice if quest exp gains scaled to CP or something.
I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.______________________________________________________
"But even in books, the heroes make mistakes, and there isn't always a happy ending." Mercedes Lackey, Into the West
PC NA, PC EU (non steam)- four accounts, many alts....3 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.Edited by spartaxoxo on February 14, 2025 11:12PM2 -
TaSheen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.
Yes. I quite agree!______________________________________________________
"But even in books, the heroes make mistakes, and there isn't always a happy ending." Mercedes Lackey, Into the West
PC NA, PC EU (non steam)- four accounts, many alts....1 -
Vonnegut2506✭✭✭✭✭
✭spartaxoxo wrote: »I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.
And for the love of all that is holy, can companions actually receive experience from quest turn-ins. I would much rather quest than grind mobs.8 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Vonnegut2506 wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.
And for the love of all that is holy, can companions actually receive experience from quest turn-ins. I would much rather quest than grind mobs.
Yes! This should definitely be a thing. It's so annoying that companions have to be grinded out instead of being able to level by adventuring with you.5 -
Smitch_59✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Vonnegut2506 wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.
And for the love of all that is holy, can companions actually receive experience from quest turn-ins. I would much rather quest than grind mobs.
Yes! This should definitely be a thing. It's so annoying that companions have to be grinded out instead of being able to level by adventuring with you.
And just like that, we found something to agree upon!
By Azura, by Azura, by Azura!3 -
Franchise408✭✭✭✭✭
✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Vonnegut2506 wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.
And for the love of all that is holy, can companions actually receive experience from quest turn-ins. I would much rather quest than grind mobs.
Yes! This should definitely be a thing. It's so annoying that companions have to be grinded out instead of being able to level by adventuring with you.
I don't use companions. They really don't level up with you? Yea, I would also agree that they should.2 -
TaSheen✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Franchise408 wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Vonnegut2506 wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »I have always been unhappy that the quest XP is so small. I would much rather have quest XP in larger amounts than having to mess with combat for XP.
They honestly should give a bigger boost of exp from quest completion, especially if you're already over level 50. If it scaled, it would be so much better for everyone and not just new players/alts.
I think that's something that has the potential to benefit all players and is a nice QOL change outside of the discussions about difficulty.
And for the love of all that is holy, can companions actually receive experience from quest turn-ins. I would much rather quest than grind mobs.
Yes! This should definitely be a thing. It's so annoying that companions have to be grinded out instead of being able to level by adventuring with you.
I don't use companions. They really don't level up with you? Yea, I would also agree that they should.
They don't. And aside from my intense dislike of sidekicks that issue just adds to my whole malaise about companions - I'm so not thrilled with combat anyway, and having to kill stuff to level them up is just so painful to contemplate....______________________________________________________
"But even in books, the heroes make mistakes, and there isn't always a happy ending." Mercedes Lackey, Into the West
PC NA, PC EU (non steam)- four accounts, many alts....2 -
Kallykat✭✭✭✭✭Can I just say that I strongly disapprove of the term "immersion mode" being used to describe a higher difficulty mode? It gives a false impression that the current mode is not about immersion.
You can, and you'd absolutely be right too. A better word would be 'immersion calibration slider'. You know, a bit like the contrast setting slider: a setting that is specific to you and your setup.
Imagine the game had only one fixed contrast setting. It works better for some than others.
Imagine people complaining about this, resulting in a contrast slider being introduced.
Imagine the people that did not need the slider complaining that those who do benefit should somehow pay in some way for that 'privilege'.
Imagine that if people object to that, they get to hear "ah, so it's not really about getting the contrast right at all, because you're not even prepared to pay for it".
Now that would be a fair analogy of what's been going on in this thread lately. At least the exchanges I was involved in that concerned a compensation commensurate to the extra time spent on higher difficulty encounters: I.e. so those at higher difficulty don't have to 'pay' for calibrating their difficulty setting upwards.
I'm not really sure how this a response to my quote, other than the first line. All I'm saying here is call your hypothetical slider "difficulty calibration slider" instead of "immersion calibration slider" to avoid making that unsupported leap.2 -
Kallykat✭✭✭✭✭Also, questing is not for leveling. Questing is for advancing a story. Leveling is a byproduct of that.
Fundamentally disagree with this. To say that questing is "not for leveling" devalues questing in a material way, and it makes me think that some players have just played this game for long enough to believe that overland cannot possibly be more than it is now. Like, it isn't even supposed to be better. It's not the first time I've heard this kind of opinion and it really bums me out.
Yes, depending on the kind of quest you're doing, questing advances a story, but it also provides experience and rewards for completion, and it could certainly become a primary way of advancing a character. There are games which eschew combat experience entirely in favor of experience gain upon quest completion, and I think that's totally valid. Not to say that ESO should do that, but questing could become a more important part of leveling if ZOS changed their minds about it, and I actually think it could be a good way to get a greater number of players engaged with overland.
My point is that story-telling is what is fundamental to questing, what sets it apart from other leveling or experience-gaining activities such as pvp, crafting, or pure combat. Just because you or others use it with the intent to benefit from the byproduct is irrelevant to its primary identity as a system in a game with many systems that also provide similar rewards. Whether or not you think the xp rewards from questing should be greater is also irrelevant. I think questing can be used for leveling if that is an individual's goal, but my initial point was really to counter what seemed to me to be an assumption about the primary function of questing on a universal (or at least widespread) scale. I think if we are going to assign any universal purpose to a system like questing, it should be based on the feature which sets it apart from other systems.
As a side note that does not change my argument in the least, I also wouldn't mind if questing had better rewards since that is the system in which I most commonly choose to engage.3