MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

Surely the main consideration is whether Microsoft consider Crossplay to be financially viable.

The game does function adequately on the 3/6 different servers. So MS would be looking at whether the rather significant time & cost that would need to be done to enable crossplay would mean increased profit - increased by a pretty decent amount to ensure that the investment was worthwhile.

And I’m not sure it would be.

I doubt Zos would work on it, if thats the case. Maybe they see some potential in it you can not see?
But if i remember correctly you also claimed the population on PS EU was fine, so im not suprised.

It’s not up to Zos, it’s up to Microsoft. They are a business and profit is the only thing that matters. See their recent actions.

And my experience of PSEU has no effect on this fact, so lovely that you tried to dismiss it because I have a different perspective on the population than you.

The recent actions have not effected the ZOS Team working on ESO opposite from they are fully focusing on ESO now.
Blackbird got canceled and they are planning to keep the game running for 30y now. So yes they are gonna invest in ESO now i guess.

Perspectives are fine as long you dont try to sell them as facts. About the population there were so many evidences and you was just like ''noup that´s not true, i seen people at deshaan'' , sort of thing

It has been stated elsewhere that the layoffs have affected the ESO team.

Keeping the game running on 3/6 servers as it has been for 10 years or so which brings MS a decent profit, is not the same as investing a quite considerable sum to bring about crossplay which is a risk and may not be as financially beneficial as hoped. That will be the key thing - it is for any business - and that will be why the cost/benefit analysis is the most important thing, not what players want. That is a fact, even if you think otherwise.

And it may be that MS consider it viable. But I’m not so sure that crossplay would increase their profits to the extent that it is a worthwhile investment.

And your evidence about populations was, like mine, anecdotal. I obviously have a very different experience in game to you.

I think crossplay actually does make sense business wise when u look at the long run, not just like “what’s it cost right now.” yeah they’d have to invest upfront but the payback comes in a bunch of ways.

first off, ppl stick around longer if they can play with their friends no matter the platform. nobody wants to be stuck on a “dead” server or locked cuz their friends are on xbox/pc/ps. more ppl staying subbed, buying crowns, all that = more $$$.

also it keeps the game from lookin empty over time. Splitting ppl across diff servers/console pops makes zones feel empty eventually, which is what kills MMOs. Crossplay makes one big healthy community = longer game life. longer life = longer cash flow.

Bigger population also means more guilds, more events, more ppl actually spending on cosmetics/houses etc. happy players spend more. simple as.

And tbh crossplay is becoming standard now. tons of games got it. not having it just makes ESO look old n out of touch, esp when MS is pushing Game Pass hard n wants ESO as a big MMO in their lineup.

So yeah, profit matters ofc, but crossplay isn’t just some “feel good” thing, it’s a long term investment that makes the game last longer, brings in more money, and keeps ESO relevant.

Also its confirmed now they are working on it. Not they are looking if its worth it - its saying they are working on it with a team

Microsoft has a "big" MMO in their lineup. They own WOW now, and "classic" alone has about 5x as many players as ESO. "Retail" has 10x. And it doesn't have crossplay. It's all PC only, and crushing it.

Decimus wrote: »

I'm not, because people don't even know what they're asking for.

Sure they do, they're the ones that loved being third-party rats or easy reward 2nd-placers. There's also a handful of sweats nostalgic for 15min 135-15-0 ball group stare-downs. So let them see it again without the rose glasses.

I like plain clothes.

I want my characters to wear peasants clothes, not armour.

There are scant few options. We definitely need more.

@ZOS_Kevin I was wondering why the Battleground queue doesn't follow the same procedure as the dungeon queue? For dungeons, once a group is found, you have to confirm you're ready - and only then are you teleported in. BGs are completely different; it checks your ready state after teleporting you. So if the group isn't full, a player has to sit there and do literally nothing for 5 minutes.

PvPers aren't very vocal on the forums because, let's be honest, PvP has received almost no love for the last two years. The PvP community is small right now, so you might not be aware of this, but those 5 minutes of forced inactivity really *** people off and make them quit PvP.

If you move the ready check before the teleport, it might lengthen the search time slightly (if someone doesn't confirm, it would need to find a new player), but at least everyone could finish their daily crafting, work on a quest, or go fishing instead of just standing or jumping on a spawn point.

Another thing - why is ESO missing a "concede" option? Especially in 4v4. I've seen many forum posts about teams that just give up and stand at the spawn point when they're being dominated. This wastes all 8 players' time (and again, it pisses people off and makes them avoid BGs). Let the majority vote to concede. They could then re-queue, hopefully get a better match, and actually play instead of waiting out the clock.

Yes, you can leave a BG, but the penalty is HUGE. You tried to add an auto-teleport for inactive players to fix this, but from my perspective, it failed. I see BG after BG where players just stand at spawn waiting for the timer to run out. They know they'll lose, but people hate dying repeatedly, so they stay put. Give them a different way to lose - via a vote. It's a much better alternative for everyone involved.

This reminds me of a known solution airports use for wait times. People used to complain endlessly about waiting for their luggage, even though the delivery time was short. The airports didn't make the luggage arrive faster; they just made the walk from the gate to baggage claim longer. Now people spend the time walking instead of waiting, and complaints have dropped to zero. The lesson? Don't make people wait idly, or you'll face disappointment. Find a way to make the time feel productive or give them control. https://service-design.co/make-your-customers-busy-during-the-waiting-time-ad8a8e7e9172

I actually have much more to say, but the forum hasn't been helpful for the last two years. Almost every suggestion is ignored or "fixed" in a way that makes things worse (RIP Ravenwatch). So this post will probably also sink unheard, and I'm almost not even complaining about it anymore.

P.S. I've noticed that matches can sometimes start with only 6 players in a team (or at least they could at the start of the week, as per my screenshot - I don't have any of 6v6, though; it's either rare or I haven't paid enough attention). Did I misunderstand how the team size is supposed to work?

P.P.S. Regarding the bonus for missing players: Will it be available for the entire duration of a BG, and will it be adjusted dynamically? For example, if 3 people leave, will the remaining players get a +15% bonus ? And if 3 new people join later, will the bonus reset to 0%?

All those flappers should be limited to heavy armor. There is no reason for any of it on medium or light and it ruins otherwise nice chest/leg pieces. A great idea would be to attach all such flappers, pouches, potion/scroll cases, etc to belts since belts are such a natural and ever so much more flexible option.

i remember when one had to actually aim in pvp, now pvp is just spam AOE, stuns and zero skill proc sets... it sucks when you get hit with so many AOE and procs, that each death animation cancels each other out so you just respawn, standing there

Moonspawn wrote: »

Assuming Zenimax ever decides to spend the time (maybe two weeks?) it would take to revamp all of the three-sided objective modes, and we're granted these incredible gifts:
Chaosball >> Deathmatch with chaosball.
Crazy King >> Deathmatch with flags.
Domination >> Deathmatch all around, probably the closest we can get to a free for all.
Capture the Relic >> Deathmatch with training wheels.

First of all its ZOS. I would be seriously surprised if they managed to make changes like that within a year.

Moonspawn wrote: »

Do you honestly believe anyone would still choose to play two-teams?

Second, yes absolutely.

Asikoo wrote: »

loosej wrote: »

I can give one number, my own.

As a new player I tried (random normal) dungeons multiple times. It was horrible. You queue as dps thinking there will be a tank to hold aggro and a healer to keep everyone alive. Instead you die to a bunch of trash mobs while half the group is sprinting to the end boss.

I switched to what was, in my mind, a healer build. You know, resto staff and slotting healing skills. I got mocked and sometimes kicked for doing that instead of going pure damage.

And don't even think about talking to the quest giver, that will definitely get the rest of the group irritated.

I didn't quit the game over it, but I did start to play it as a single player game, ignoring any group based content. The moment I started dungeons again was much, much later, once I was good enough to outrun the speedrunners and live.

I still don't think that dps sharing and logs are the core issue (see my previous post). But I definitely agree that the game generates toxicity by design.

Well… welcome to ESO!
This is a game where you need to complete quests for skill points, but in group content you practically have to say “please” before the others let you talk to the quest giver—otherwise you’ll get ignored, mocked, or even kicked out.

It’s a game where you’ll be ridiculed no matter what role you try to play:

• A new tank? You’ll be mocked.
• A new healer? Mocked.
• A new DPS? Same story.

If you play solo, ESO feels amazing at first. But once you know the basics, you realize that outside of gear grinding there’s no real challenge left in the story content. It becomes easy, repetitive, and eventually boring.

You don’t believe DPS sharing and logs are at the core of the problem… well, give it time. Once you push further into the game, you’ll understand exactly what I mean.

This is just so untrue it's almost comical. I hope that people who are thinking of trying group content don't see this and think this is reality. If you read through the thread you will see many people giving the actual truth of the matter. I won't rehash everything but the gist is this.

If you join a random group anything can happen. You will not always be with people who want to play the same as you but often times you will find great people who just want to finish the dungeon. The majority of my randoms go like this. I type evening. Some might say hey! We do the dungeon and say GGs at the end.

Now if you're interested in doing veteran dungeons or trials. My advice to you would be to find a good guild. We teach vet dungeons in scheduled groups multiple times a week as well as trials. No dps requirements. Just the desire to learn.

I'm curious why someone would just show up in a random vet run, knowing nothing about it and expect the rest of the group to be happy. Now, that's not to say there is no problems. Yes people speed run. Yes there are trolls. Some people may vote to kick you or leave the group because you're not doing enough damage. That's random for you though. There's no way for Zos to police that and they shouldn't. They gave us plenty of tools to take care of it ourselves. Make a group finder group. Join a guild. Re-que and try again. Why let some bad people ruin your fun.

At the end of the day, this community is a pretty good one. I've met and even friended great people, some of whom I met in random groups. Don't let some obvious bitterness from someone with an agenda fool you into thinking different.

fizzybeef wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

[snip]

We all should be on it and address potential problems now while they can still be dealt with rather than waiting until it's implemented.

Are you always doing that? Adressing every potential problem wich could show up before anything is set? Nothing has been announced, lets find some problems 👍

No, I'm not always doing that. But for something this major that has major complications that could arise I think it's best to work these out before we are stuck with it.
[edited to remove quote]

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

[snip]

We all should be on it and address potential problems now while they can still be dealt with rather than waiting until it's implemented.
[edited to remove quote]