Useless pets can become useful.

FullMax · July 15

There are a lot of different pets in the game, but they are all just decorative, except for those that expand the inventory.
Why not give them very small bonuses?
For example:

- dogs will be able to sniff out additional loot in random places that can be dug up and that cannot be found by scouting, but only by sniffer dogs;

- if you have any Dwemer pet summoned, the chance of getting a Dwemer style material is increased by 10%;

- if you have a book shell, book snake, dwarf observer, or other pet from the Apocrypha, experience gain is increased by 1%, and the chance of getting a style material from the Apocrypha is also increased by 9%;

- swamp dogs, salamanders and other pets from the Black Marsh increase the chance of getting a furnishing when disarming plant traps by 5%, and the chance of getting a style by 5%;

What do you think?

Erickson9610 · July 15

No

I'd rather not have to actively use pets to get passive bonuses, because I don't like using them. Maybe the benefit they provide ought to be passive like how the inventory pets don't need to be summoned to give you inventory slots — but at that point, it'd be a game of collecting pets (from the Crown Store and from content) just to get the highest passive bonuses.

I'd actually like to see them incorporated into a Scribing skill (like for Undaunted) which works in a similar way to how Trample uses our mount. That way we could make our pets useful by having them show up during combat to apply some sort of effect.

FullMax · July 15

Yes

Erickson9610 wrote: »

I'd rather not have to actively use pets to get passive bonuses, because I don't like using them. Maybe the benefit they provide ought to be passive like how the inventory pets don't need to be summoned to give you inventory slots — but at that point, it'd be a game of collecting pets (from the Crown Store and from content) just to get the highest passive bonuses.

I'd actually like to see them incorporated into a Scribing skill (like for Undaunted) which works in a similar way to how Trample uses our mount. That way we could make our pets useful by having them show up during combat to apply some sort of effect.

I think battle pets should be limited to Sorcerers, Necromancers, and Guardians like always, and regular cosmetic pets should be given small bonuses that the player can choose not to use. Don't let cosmetic pets fight.

Giving passive bonuses to ornamental pets when they aren't summoned is somehow wrong. They need to be summoned. If they are a nuisance, don't summon them. That's all.
Battle pets can be set to auto-cancel when the player uses the banker. This is necessary if they are bothering someone.

NoticeMeArkay · July 15

No

I voted no, but not because I dislike your idea. I actually really like the idea of giving pets unique small effects based on their nature or place of origin.

But the wide, wide, wide majority of pets is distributed by gambling. About 80% of all pets, if not even more, are stuffed inside crown crates. Now, veteran player who've collected a wide arrangement of pets by collecting seals, gems or accidentially lucky draws won't see anything bad about it.

But new players? They'll be faced with a new problem. The question: "Do I want to gamble to increase my chances for X".
And that's where the problem lies. It would give the game yet another excuse to introduce new players to gambling.
And I don't think there'll ever be a moral reason to do that.

Really neat idea, truly. But ruined from the start simply because of where the majority of pets come from.

Desiato · July 15

No

ESO already suffers from complexity and feature bloat issues.

Adding new functions is complicated because they interact with everything else and include a base of code that needs to be maintained which means someone has to have some level of understanding of it. The more moving parts something has, the more there is that can break. And then fans of those features will naturally have a wish list and may grow restless if it's not updated.

I don't want to be incentivized to walk around with a vanity pet I have never wanted to and have never used as part of a promotion or event. I'm already kind of exhausted by things like antiquities which were fun at first but are now just a chore to dig up.

I think vanity pets do a good job of serving their purpose without causing problems for those who do not prefer them.

FullMax · July 15

Yes

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

I voted no, but not because I dislike your idea. I actually really like the idea of giving pets unique small effects based on their nature or place of origin.

But the wide, wide, wide majority of pets is distributed by gambling. About 80% of all pets, if not even more, are stuffed inside crown crates. Now, veteran player who've collected a wide arrangement of pets by collecting seals, gems or accidentially lucky draws won't see anything bad about it.

But new players? They'll be faced with a new problem. The question: "Do I want to gamble to increase my chances for X".
And that's where the problem lies. It would give the game yet another excuse to introduce new players to gambling.
And I don't think there'll ever be a moral reason to do that.

Really neat idea, truly. But ruined from the start simply because of where the majority of pets come from.

Well, you know, the Dwemer spider is obtained after completing the quest.
I don't know about dogs, but the Breton Terrier can be collected. All guild banks are full of these terriers.
I haven't listed all the pets, but there are quite a lot of those that can be obtained simply by completing quests.

JemadarofCaerSalis · July 15

Other

Erickson9610 wrote: »

I'd rather not have to actively use pets to get passive bonuses, because I don't like using them. Maybe the benefit they provide ought to be passive like how the inventory pets don't need to be summoned to give you inventory slots — but at that point, it'd be a game of collecting pets (from the Crown Store and from content) just to get the highest passive bonuses.

I'd actually like to see them incorporated into a Scribing skill (like for Undaunted) which works in a similar way to how Trample uses our mount. That way we could make our pets useful by having them show up during combat to apply some sort of effect.

This is what I was thinking.

While I wouldn't mind my pets giving me some sort of buff, I don't really want to have to use something like a spider because those pets are the ones that give the bonuses that fit my playstyle the best.

And, yeah, as much as I would love to have them be passive even if not summoned, I can see how that could easily become too overpowered, or each pet would have a buff that would be practically useless on its own.

I could also see them doing something like the trample skill, and I could also see them perhaps having be good for out of combat stuff as well.

Sort of take a scribing skill and make it like some of the food buffs, and apply the visual to a pet sort of thing.

For instance, right now I am fishing (got to go into cyrodiil *ugh*), and using the Artaeum Pickled Fish Bowls to enhance my chances of getting the trophy fish. So a scribing skill could take that passive, and apply it as a buff when cast, and make it so that the pet shows up or comes and does some sort of action to cast the buff.

I could see them having other buffs as well (harvesting, increased chances of getting furnishing plans/recipes, and so on)

The pets would likely show up for less than a minute, or if it uses the already summoned pet, give the pet some sort of glow/particle effect (depending on the buff) when the spell is active?

FullMax · July 15

Yes

Desiato wrote: »

ESO already suffers from complexity and feature bloat issues.

Adding new functions is complicated because they interact with everything else and include a base of code that needs to be maintained which means someone has to have some level of understanding of it. The more moving parts something has, the more there is that can break. And then fans of those features will naturally have a wish list and may grow restless if it's not updated.

I don't want to be incentivized to walk around with a vanity pet I have never wanted to and have never used as part of a promotion or event. I'm already kind of exhausted by things like antiquities which were fun at first but are now just a chore to dig up.

I think vanity pets do a good job of serving their purpose without causing problems for those who do not prefer them.

So passive bonuses are very small. No one forces you to use it.

Adding new features is a really difficult task, that's why tasks need to be solved) You need to accept the challenge, not run away from it.

SilverIce58 · July 15

Other

I think just having them be able to do something like bring you an item with a % chance of it being a style mat from one of the motifs in the zone you're in, and a % chance of them bringing you like a heavy sack or something minor, would be just fine. That way it gives them functionality, but its not enough to make them necessary.

There's other interactions you can have with pets thats not necessarily involving battle, like petting them, or feeding them, and it plays a little cutscene, but its a "/" command in chat to activate (that way theres not a floating button next to you everywhere like companions)

FullMax · July 15

Yes

SilverIce58 wrote: »

I think just having them be able to do something like bring you an item with a % chance of it being a style mat from one of the motifs in the zone you're in, and a % chance of them bringing you like a heavy sack or something minor, would be just fine. That way it gives them functionality, but its not enough to make them necessary.

There's other interactions you can have with pets thats not necessarily involving battle, like petting them, or feeding them, and it plays a little cutscene, but its a "/" command in chat to activate (that way theres not a floating button next to you everywhere like companions)

When there are many little things, they unite and become one big thing)

Cooperharley · July 15

Yes

Yea sounds cool!

JemadarofCaerSalis · July 15

Other

No for the original idea, but I voted other because I like Erickson's idea of having scribing skills that use non-combat pets in them.

Heren · July 15

No

Next time of 'Would be cool if' : give personalities a bonus ! Assassin get extra crit chance, dancer will make npc throw gold at you, and drunk will periodicaly make you fall and get stuned.

At some point, cosmetics are just that - cosmetics. There is no need to pile up bonus on them. I don't want my houses to generate materials depending on the prevalent type of furniture in there. I don't want my resistance to fire be improved depending on how dark the skin of my character is. I don't want the title I actively wore to give me any bonus.

Let cosmetics be cosmetics. Not everything need to bring a bonus.

FullMax · July 15

Yes

Heren wrote: »

Next time of 'Would be cool if' : give personalities a bonus ! Assassin get extra crit chance, dancer will make npc throw gold at you, and drunk will periodicaly make you fall and get stuned.

At some point, cosmetics are just that - cosmetics. There is no need to pile up bonus on them. I don't want my houses to generate materials depending on the prevalent type of furniture in there. I don't want my resistance to fire be improved depending on how dark the skin of my character is. I don't want the title I actively wore to give me any bonus.

Let cosmetics be cosmetics. Not everything need to bring a bonus.

That's also true. Then maybe we need more interaction with pets? And not just have them getting underfoot and doing nothing.

LunaFlora · July 16

No

i would like non-combat pets to do stuff and i wanna pet them.

But i dislike the idea of bonuses for specific kinds of pets.

For more interaction, make them bark or hiss at enemies when we're in combat.

spartaxoxo · July 16

Yes

I would like this very much. They could just make it new "trained" pets that are earnable to avoid p2w concerns.

Versalium · July 16

Yes

Yes please. With these kind of features it would make sense to switch from different pets from time to time depending on needs.

Also, I wanna be able to pet my pets and other pets in the world. So far, I only found one dog on the festival that had an interactive pet option.

darkriketz · July 16

No

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

I voted no, but not because I dislike your idea. I actually really like the idea of giving pets unique small effects based on their nature or place of origin.

But the wide, wide, wide majority of pets is distributed by gambling. About 80% of all pets, if not even more, are stuffed inside crown crates. Now, veteran player who've collected a wide arrangement of pets by collecting seals, gems or accidentially lucky draws won't see anything bad about it.

But new players? They'll be faced with a new problem. The question: "Do I want to gamble to increase my chances for X".
And that's where the problem lies. It would give the game yet another excuse to introduce new players to gambling.
And I don't think there'll ever be a moral reason to do that.

Really neat idea, truly. But ruined from the start simply because of where the majority of pets come from.

I completely agree.
Let's not make TESO a pay-to-win game, if it's not already one.

bmnoble · July 16

No

So we can have best in slot pets? the inventory ones were annoying enough getting people to buy something they otherwise would not have bothered with.

I say no thanks only reason someone should have a non combat pet out is if they like that particular pet and want it to follow them as they play the game not because it comes with XYZ bonus.

FullMax · July 16

Yes

darkriketz wrote: »

NoticeMeArkay wrote: »

I voted no, but not because I dislike your idea. I actually really like the idea of giving pets unique small effects based on their nature or place of origin.

But the wide, wide, wide majority of pets is distributed by gambling. About 80% of all pets, if not even more, are stuffed inside crown crates. Now, veteran player who've collected a wide arrangement of pets by collecting seals, gems or accidentially lucky draws won't see anything bad about it.

But new players? They'll be faced with a new problem. The question: "Do I want to gamble to increase my chances for X".
And that's where the problem lies. It would give the game yet another excuse to introduce new players to gambling.
And I don't think there'll ever be a moral reason to do that.

Really neat idea, truly. But ruined from the start simply because of where the majority of pets come from.

I completely agree.
Let's not make TESO a pay-to-win game, if it's not already one.

I explain that there are already several types of pets in the game, and the Crown Store sells just other skins. I only counted four, but there are more in reality. The dog, the Dwemer spider, and some others can be obtained for free.

mdjessup4906 · July 16

Yes

This is a fun idea that would give me an excuse to dust off the pile of them in my collections.
What should the fluffy Maine ***/Norwegian forest cat have? Increased fish bait chance?

I see the point about the crates, but as someone else said, theres plenty in game to collect. Most of mine were free from login rewards, quests, tickets (indrick pets).

mdjessup4906 · July 16

Yes

Ffs the forum censored a cat breed name. Come on.

moo_2021 · July 16

Yes

Gryphon can dig mines
Chicken can pick flowers
Mudcrab can grab other mudcrabs
Nixad can read books
etc

Mesite · July 16

Other

I'd make them all the same so whichever pet you have works as well as any other , to reduce the requirement to gamble for others. I've mentioned before that the Torchlight games the pet can be sent back to town to sell the gear you don't need, and by eating certain fish they transform into creatures to fight for you. They are quite cool, but I'm not sure that would fit in ESO.

Danikat · July 16

No

I don't think there's anything wrong with cosmetic items just being cosmetic. Do you also think armour motifs/outfits, costumes, personalities, mount skins etc. need to give passive bonuses to stop them being useless? I don't think pets are any different even though they add a new cosmetic item rather than modifying something that already exists, like all the other cosmetics they're serving their purpose just by being there.

I also think this would be a nightmare to try to set up and keep balanced for all the different factors. A lot of people like to make characters based around a theme, or write a backstory for them and design their appearence to reflect their experiences, and that includes their pet/s. I don't think they'd feel very happy if they were pressured to change pets to one with a useful or relevant bonus instead of the one they like.

But also as other people have mentioned a lot of pets are only available from crown crates, others are from promotional events or sold with real-life merchandise, or were part of expansion pre-orders or the old community events which have never been re-run...there's a lot which are difficult or impossible for players to get if they don't already have them so it would not go over well if they give good bonuses, but it would also be a let-down for people who do have them if they're useless.

One way around that is to have a limited number of bonuses (10 for example) and multiple pets which give each one, so everyone has a chance to get all the bonuses. But then they need to be equally divided between not just pets still obtainable in-game and ones from other sources but different types and themes of pets (for example making sure there aren't bonuses only available from dwarven pets, or only flying pets, or only from spiders or whatever) and ones in crown crates vs the store vs promotional events...

It probably could be done, but it would be a lot of work for something most players will probably rarely/never think about and you'll still have people upset that their specific combination of requirements isn't met - like someone who's main character is a lizard-obsessed bosmer Antiquarian and now they're angry that the antiquity lead buff isn't available from a lizard pet that's found in Valenwood and isn't restricted to some old promotional event.

It would also heavily discourage using the randomise feature ZOS added a while ago, because if you need a specific pet for the buff they give the last thing you want is it changing at random.

FullMax · July 16

Yes

Danikat wrote: »

I don't think there's anything wrong with cosmetic items just being cosmetic. Do you also think armour motifs/outfits, costumes, personalities, mount skins etc. need to give passive bonuses to stop them being useless? I don't think pets are any different even though they add a new cosmetic item rather than modifying something that already exists, like all the other cosmetics they're serving their purpose just by being there.

I also think this would be a nightmare to try to set up and keep balanced for all the different factors. A lot of people like to make characters based around a theme, or write a backstory for them and design their appearence to reflect their experiences, and that includes their pet/s. I don't think they'd feel very happy if they were pressured to change pets to one with a useful or relevant bonus instead of the one they like.

But also as other people have mentioned a lot of pets are only available from crown crates, others are from promotional events or sold with real-life merchandise, or were part of expansion pre-orders or the old community events which have never been re-run...there's a lot which are difficult or impossible for players to get if they don't already have them so it would not go over well if they give good bonuses, but it would also be a let-down for people who do have them if they're useless.

One way around that is to have a limited number of bonuses (10 for example) and multiple pets which give each one, so everyone has a chance to get all the bonuses. But then they need to be equally divided between not just pets still obtainable in-game and ones from other sources but different types and themes of pets (for example making sure there aren't bonuses only available from dwarven pets, or only flying pets, or only from spiders or whatever) and ones in crown crates vs the store vs promotional events...

It probably could be done, but it would be a lot of work for something most players will probably rarely/never think about and you'll still have people upset that their specific combination of requirements isn't met - like someone who's main character is a lizard-obsessed bosmer Antiquarian and now they're angry that the antiquity lead buff isn't available from a lizard pet that's found in Valenwood and isn't restricted to some old promotional event.

It would also heavily discourage using the randomise feature ZOS added a while ago, because if you need a specific pet for the buff they give the last thing you want is it changing at random.

There is no need to give each pet a separate bonus, you just need to divide them into categories:
Dogs, Dwemer mechanisms, swamp creatures, etc.
Or leave the subcategories as they are: flying, exotic, etc.
It does not matter what kind of pet you have, from a crown box, or received at the end of a quest - their effects will be the same.

If some types of pets cannot be obtained for a quest, but only bought, or received after completing a veteran dungeon, Daedric for example, then make simple pets without special effects, which can be purchased like a regular horse for 10k gold.
In general, I think that regular pets and mounts, without glowing whistles, should be sold for regular gold.

Pets will be useful to both those who bought them for 10k gold and those who bought them for crowns, the only difference is that pets for crowns glow and have special effects.

kargen27 · July 16

No

This would be just another calculation to put more strain on the server. Pets are extremely annoying in group activity we don't need another excuse to keep them out while doing a trial.

DreamyLu · July 17

No

I'm out of those who dream of the possibility to turn invisible followers at all services. So no matter what idea that could mean to see even more followers than now around services: NO GO. Very egoistic but true. Sorry.

Elvenheart · July 17

Other

I saw your other thread first, so I didn’t understand at the time what you meant about passive bonuses and that influenced my comment there.

I sort of like this idea, but instead of having different passive bonuses per type of pet I think it should be a lot simpler and if you have any pet out, it will pick up the loot monsters drop and put it in your bag for you so you don’t have to worry about looting. This should be an optional feature people could turn off if they don’t like that idea. Black Desert Online had something like this in place except with the added complication of you having to keep the pet well fed like a survival gamefor it to work, bleh.

Waseem · July 17

No

Pay to win outrage

Plus, the Development still fixing problems date back to 2014, like logging in to server and problems in Cyrodiil when there are 60+ players at the same castle

Al_Ex_Andre · July 17

No

No.

Short answer : Would turn the game in a pet fest like in WoW, thank you but no thanks.

Longer answer: I like IRL pets, but I generally can't stand pets in games. Coming from WoW, the game rewards are essentially mounts and pets since many years..like they should matter when you got thousands of them already. Pets contributed to kill the game for me. I think there are other games for that, like Pokemon Masters. Plz check these games, you will like them.

The Elder Scrolls Online

Useless pets can become useful.

Useless pets can become useful. 95 votes