Avatar

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Badges

QuarterStack

About

Username
QuarterStack
Joined
Visits
559
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
338
Rank
Uncommon
Posts
271
Badges
18
  • BORING

    Iselin said:



    Especially in ESO since it's not nearly as end-game focused as other MMOs. The trials are neither particularly numerous nor difficult- it's not a raiders MMO despite having raids.

    The gear that you get in trials is also not particularly BIS gear. For example, Twice Fanged Serpent from Sanctum Ophidia may be better than Spriggan's that you get from Bangkorai quests and overland drops but it's debatable. And if it is better, it's just barely so. And the meta for stamina DPS all pair either of those with Hundig's Rage which is a crafted set and only a 6-trait set that almost anyone can craft. You can 100% fully gear up with the best stamina DPS gear at CP160 without ever setting foot in a trial.

    The "game starts at end-game" mentality just doesn't work in ESO. It's also about the same as saying "Hi, I'm from WOW and I don't understand how ESO works." :)
    Very good point!

    There's a couple posts elsewhere here where someone's telling me how there's no true variety in ESO's character builds because it's all about the meta, and anything less sucks and you'll never get into end-game content unless you're following those builds.

    I know what they're talking about, becuase I've seen it in every MMO I've played. Hell, in FFXI that happened well before end-game; I couldn't get into CoP or BCNM groups if I had "the wrong job" or "the wrong setup".

    What they don't seem to understand is such restrictions come from the players, not the game. The players dictate that those are "the one and only build you're supposed to use". The game doesn't dictate that. If a setup can get the job done (as previous FoTM builds clearly could, or they wouldn't have been FoTM), then they are perfectly viable to go with. Again, the players demand "FoTM builds" for that content, not the game.

    The point they're all missing is... all those builds are effective. They all work. They all get the job done. Ergo, there are a variety of options in how you can choose to play in end-game content. It's not the game limiting it, it's the players themselves. Once again, an example of how MMO players can be their own worst enemies, killing their own enjoyment.

    I check out different vids on YT, from folks like Deltia or Alcast, or others, and they're all coming up with these different builds, for PvE and PvP. They all put out insane damage, have great utility, and offer a variety of different gear sets, build-outs and skill setups. It's impossible to see all of these build options and say, with any kind of honesty, that ESO doesn't offer enough "real options". It's all in how you mix the gear with the traits, glyphs, mundus stone, class, weapons and skill loadouts. Certain gear won't work well with one build, but will work great with another. It's all in finding the synergy between each aspect, and then making the most of it.

    And yeah, the whole "the real game starts at level cap" thing does not apply to ESO at all. I don't agree with that mindset in general - to me, the "real game" starts at character creation - but it most certainly does not apply here. People can try to play it that way, but they are literally playing against the game's design.

    There's another vid I saw on YT where the person was coming back to give ESO another try, after having hated it previous times. This time, they tried something different. They'd been trying to play it like a typical WoW-style themepark MMO, and it wasn't working (for good reason). They decided to try approaching it more like they would a single-player Elder Scrolls game, and suddenly the whole game came alive for them and they ended up loving it. Go figure, eh?
    YashaX
  • BORING

    Golelorn said:

    You can level in ESO in less than 2 days hard play to 50. Of course, a new player can't do that - you need resources. But what game can a new player level to max quickly? And... I do agree with you. Leveling faster should be an option in ESO. I do find it tiresome. Buts its the genre.. not the game.

    Also, do not forget. Once at 50 you do not have to regrind CP.

    And if you think a max CP toon should be had quickly.... wow. CP is better than gear in ESO. A naked 660 CP toon is stronger than a max gear CP 160 toon.
    I don't agree that it "should be an option".

    But here's a question to that end: Why?

    What is it about getting to the end, especially in a genre that's decidedly about the adventure (~90% of the game takes place before the end and contains the vast, vast majority of the content), that makes people feel they have to race to get there?

    I'm sincerely curious about this, because it seems to me people are just stunting and undermining their own experience by playing this way. Time and again, they race to the end, skipping through cutscenes/dialogue, avoiding content that "isn't worth the reward" and generally tracking the "most efficient path to level cap". Then they burn through the end-game content in a few weeks, and are left bored with "nothing to do" because they just raced past/through all of it.

    People will dismiss everything pre-level cap by saying "it's just a tutorial", or "it's just filler", or "it's just there to slow you down so you'll have to play longer". There's a boat load of problems with that last one in particular, especially for as often as I see it argued; of course they want you to stick around as long as possible.. it's at the heart of the business and the design. MMORPGs are long-term hobbies. They're services. They aren't intended to be something you just shoot through, finish, and put down. You can. But that's not what they're designed as. This is why they continually add new content... to give you more to do and more reason to keep playing.

    But here's the catch to that which people never seem to consider... they have to make sure you're entertained enough to stick around at all in the first place. If they can't keep you engaged and wanting to log in to begin with, then the rest doesn't matter.

    It baffles me how people literally complain about a game which, by design, is intended to keep them engaged for a long time... because it provides content which keeps them playing for a long time. It's like complaining that motorcycles "only have 2 wheels and no side windows to keep the air out". It completely misses the point of the design.

    To my mind, it's the most counter-intuitive approach you can take to playing a game at all, much less one specifically designed around on-going adventure; unless it's specifically a racing game where getting to a finish line the fastest is the goal.

    Racing to the end in a MMORPG results only in on-going lay-overs and holding patterns, as players wait for the next batch of end-game content to roll in, so they can race through that and find themselves right back in the same position. That doesn't sound fun to me at all... and from all the complaints of "boredom" I see from such people across the genre, it's clearly not. So why do people obsessively and repeatedly engage in that kind of playstyle? That whole "definition of insanity" thing comes to mind. Why race toward what is ultimately going to be nothing but extended stretches of boredom, punctuated by shorter periods of entertainment?

    Another common thing I see said is "I don't have enough time, and it takes too long to do "x" in -insert game here-". This is another statement that sounds valid on its face, but rather falls apart when you think about it further. Of course you have the time to play the game... you're playing it. The problem isn't a "lack of time", it's that you want to be able to obtain/achieve something in a quicker time-frame than your available time allows. This is where the whole "I have a career and family and can't spend hours playing MMOs like I used to. Therefor MMOs should change to fit my schedule/lifestyle better" type of arguments come from.

    People find it unfair that someone with more time to play can achieve things "more quickly" than they can. It's perfectly fair. At the end of the day, you're both going to be facing the same challenges and obstacles, and probably the same overall amount of in-game time played (not "real world time" - important distinction there) to achieve that goal. The difference is in how that time is distributed. Is it across one 10 hour session, five 2 hour sessions, or some other breakdown?

    What people are really saying when they say "I don't have the time" is, "I don't have the time to sit and achieve that goal in a single session like someone with 10 hours to play does, and I don't like that". Then, they expect the game devs to change the design so they can have that goal in a single session. It's a completely self-entitled mentality. The game developer is not responsible for their players' life decisions. The players are. Devs are responsible for producing a product that people will want to stick around and play. They are not responsible for catering to every individual's life circumstances.

    Rather than saying "I have more limited time to play so here's what the devs should do", the responsible, reasonable thing to say, I think, is "I have more limited play time, how should I re-prioritize and plan my play sessions to achieve my goals accordingly?". It's what people did back in the "old school days" - yes, there were people playing EQ1 and DAoC and UO and all those games who balanced playtime with careers and families and such as well. They adapted to their situation. They didn't demand or expect that the developers do so. Big difference.

    Long rant there... lol. But it's pretty much what goes through my mind when ever I see posts where people talk about how it "takes too long" or "should be faster". There's so much behind such statements.
    IselinDemogorgonlaseritGhostRider00gervaise1
  • BORING

    Gorwe said:
    Does this game actually get interesting? Sure, the audiovisuals are breathtaking and the world building's amazing. Even the little stories are fun and interesting. BUT! The combat S.U.C.K.S. Really, it's one of the worst combat systems I ever saw. No impact, very spammy(this comes from someone who likes the likes of Arsenal Mercenary in SWTOR!), next to no sense of progression(yeah, thanks One Tamriel! I thought that we graduated this issue with Oblivion...guess not), too open zones...

    This is almost painful to play. Sure, visiting Hammerfell or Elsweyr or the like is always awesome, but...THAT COMBAT!

    Must say... I didn't think I would ever see someone complaining about zones being "too open".

    When I see people overstating the level scaling, or insisting there is no progression, I wonder if they've actually really played the game at all. At best, I imagine they saw it has "level scaling", remember that Oblivion had level scaling, and assume it's exactly the same. It's not. It's not traditional level progression, but there is definitely progression there.

    A world boss that one-shotted me at level 24 has a much harder time of it now that I'm into my CP levels and have better gear and skills, etc.

    If I'm wrong, please post footage of someone on a new character somewhere like Bloodroot Forge, or hell, even Cradle of Shadows, or White Gold Tower, and reliably performing on par with more advanced and developed characters. Post their parse results.

    As for the combat... To each their own, I guess. I rather enjoy it.
    gervaise1IselinGorweYashaXJeleena
  • A few questions to decide if I give TESO another try

    Horusra said:

    I have never played a game where basic rats wiped me in the next zone.  That is a strawman generalization you are making. 

    No, they're not at all, actually. You're focusing on the specific example given, and ignoring the greater point. But, if the "scale" of Torval's example is hanging you up, then fine. it works just as fine if we replace the uber powerful rats in the next zone with rats that are not drastically but still notably more powerful at all,  simply because you crossed an invisible line somewhere.

    In a scaled system there is no sense of progress.  Your character is as weak today as he is tomorrow.  Nothing changes.  You get more flashy skills...whoopee.  You still get owned by the very first creature you ever met in the game.  It makes the world feel static. 

    Incorrect. You absolutely do get a sense of progress and you absolutely do not get "owned" by the very first creature (talk about strawman generalizations...).

    For example, earlier this evening, I went into a Delve in ESO. There were two enemies I had to get past, attacked them and the fight took a bit of time, with me having to dodge a number of attacks, taking significant damage. I finish them off with about 1/3 life left. As I approach the next set of enemies, another player runs up behind me and we both attack them. It's over before it begins. The other player annihilates them.

    In a game with level scaling.


    The difference? The other player had more time on their character, and acquired better skills and better gear.

    In a word: Progression.

    YashaXIselinSlyLoK
  • A few questions to decide if I give TESO another try

    Horusra said:


    When the basic squirrel levels to your supposedly super power level that is not a virtual world.
    0/10

    That was a horrible, horrible, utterly disingenuous comment. If you're going to try and bash a game, at least try to make it sound like you have a clue.

    1. You don't fight squirrels, or anything comparable to them, unless you're going after the small 'flavor' critters running around, which are incredibly weak. This isn't WoW, FFXIV, etc.

    2. Different enemies still have different levels of difficulty, within a given area, and certainly as you progress further from starting areas. Those closer to starting areas are notably weaker than those in later areas.

    3. Levels still play a role in terms of the gear you can use, and to a degree, what skills you have unlocked/improved. There is a big difference between a new player going after an enemy in lower level in weaker gear and someone going after that same enemy in stronger gear and better skills they acquire later.

    I wasn't a fan of the level scaling at first, either, but as I progressed through the game and realized the scaling isn't "linear", but differed depending on the enemy, the area, and what gear/skills I'm using, it actually made the game more enjoyable to me than a strict, linear "you can go to this area at this level range" approach. It allows you to "reasonably" survive in an area at any "level", but by no means guarantees you're going to survive very long. There are other variables involved.

    Put another way, even with the scaling, I'm not going to be doing any Craglorn Trials on my level 6 Nightblade.
    YashaX