It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Let me guess, Trump University?Go to college and study and you can too.Well, you are the expert on "socialist" (sic) countries.Yes because socialist countries are hot beds of innovation.SomethingUnusual said:Because net neutrality has literally nothing to do with investment and predictions. Improving the networks requires the same money whether net neutrality is present or not. Investment incentive is also non-existent in the US. These giants are only out to make money, not spend it giving neighborhoods better connection services.What makes people think Net Neutrality means more providers and better speeds. Everyone always paints the rosiest future for Net Neutrality and the worst for the other side. Maybe Net Neutrality means slow speeds because there is no incentive to make it faster and less providers because there is no cash for providing something better.
Cameltosis, there is both the possibility to go almost anywhere and a sense of your character growing stronger.OK, so with what you're describing, what is the point of One Tamriel scaling?I think he meant that there are some monsters that are stronger than others, these could appear in any zone.That doesn't really answer any questions I asked unfortunately.Like I said, this is second hand testimony so I have no way of verifying it. But, I had assumed it was true both from the way One Tamriel was advertised, the reviews it got across the internet, the various discussions about it on these boards and from what my friends have told me.So, the way my friends explained it (and this has been echoed on these boards and in many reviews) is that the scaling system removes any sense of progression and flattens the majority of the difficulty.I've read this a few times around here and it's simply not true.A level 50 is more powerful and a level 1, and CP 500 more than a CP 100. More skills, more CPs.It's just not the tremendous power gap from levels and gear you have in EQ/WOW clones.
If that is not true, how does the scaling work? Do enemies gain more skills when fighting high level characters? Are they actually harder to kill, or do they just have higher health and damage? Is content noticeably easier if you spend time getting good gear whilst leveling, or does content scaling take into account gear as well?In ESO, the difficulty of the enemies is not based on their level but on their abilities and (quite realistically) also their size (a mammoth or a troll will have more health than a human for instance). It requires knowledge of the game from the player to counter specific mobs. Mobs packs can also have synergies between their members, making them more dangerous than the sum of them alone.
Do enemies scale to the player? Or is it the players who scale? Do they scale to a zone, or is the whole game set to level 50 and everyone is scaled up to 50 at all times? If I play through a starter zone as a newbie, will anything change if I come back at level 50?
Also, your explanation of how difficulty is set (enemy skills) implies that as you progress through the game, the enemies get harder and you need to know more and more. This was presumably offset by the fact that players would have more skills to counter the enemy as well as increased health/stamina/magic.
How does that work with scaling?
For example, if I were to take a level 5 newbie through to a former lvl45 zone, does the scaling tech allow the level 5 to complete the content? Assuming equal gear quality, will the content be harder for the level 5 player or the level 45 player? I've heard conflicting reports - some say it is harder for the lvl5 because they don't have the skills. Some say it is easier for the lvl5 because the scaling tech gives them more health etc to make up for lack of skills. Some say there is no difference at all.
What I find is that when leveling up from 1 to 50 + CP 160, the main form of progression comes through expanding your skill set and passives. During this time you have to keep upgrading your gear or you will actually become weaker than at a low level.
Once you reach level 50+160CP you can wear end game gear. Progression from here involves accumulating CP, golding out equipment, finding/crafting equipment to create the build you want, and getting more passive/active skills (there are a lot).
How this feels in practice: If you took your level 5 toon to the troll just near the starting area in the Morrowind expansion you might be in for a hard fight because you have limited skills and weak gear. Come back at level 45 with good gear, food buffs, potions, and all the extra skills and passives and it should be a cake walk. Come back at CP690 with gold gear and the troll might not even be able to break through your passive health regen (depending on how you have built your character).Exactly.Same experience in a public dungeon (not a delve, the bigger model).First time I enter (it was before level 10ish), the first trash pack wiped the floor with my ass.Later, at level 30+, I could manage them, no problem.Now I can just faceroll them, they barely beat my natural health regen.
You've just described a situation where it is not possible to complete leveling content if you are not a high enough level, thus defeating the purpose of scaling content. Don't get me wrong, if your going to use vertical progression, this is the way I'd like it, but if you are advertising your game as "go anywhere, anytime and be able to complete the content" then the scenario you've just described would count as a failure of the feature to me.
With One Tamriel, it felt like a direct response to everyone complaining that ESO didn't feel like an Elder Scrolls game. It allowed players to freely explore everywhere at any time with no restrictions, but came at the cost of removing the feeling of progression. Your explanation as to why you think the feeling of progression is still there is at odds with how scaling has been explained to me everywhere else, so I wanted to explore what you meant.
CrazKanuk said:I agree. A part of the issue is that many non-gamer parents probably aren't even aware of what has been happening in the industry the last few years.Phry said:They just need to ensure that games that employ such 'dodgy' loot box game mechanics are classed as being 'adult' rated, in the same way that games that feature explicit nudity do. That more than anything will help curb the industries 'love affair' with loot boxes.
It needs to be spelled out that these games are designed to extract as much money as possible from players by incorporating potentially addictive gambling mechanics. Parents (and players) also need to be made aware that this is very different from past practices of buying dlc or expansions.
Making such games adult rated with a warning about the gambling would be a start to addressing the issue (and this is something that actually deserves an adult rating). It would also be good if schools and other educational facilities discuss the issue in classes on virtual safety/cyber bullying etc.
Again, this is the type of post that makes it seem like this is pandemic, when there is no proof this is even a problem worth solving. Please, feel free to give me the statistics that would back this up. We're talking about a GOVERNMENT actually doing something. The question is whether a GOVERNMENT has bigger problems to solve than this. My guess is that they do. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time a government attempted to solve something that wasn't a problem.