Best Of
Re: MMO does NOT mean Grouping
SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »I've never seen or heard of an MMO that didn't require grouping for end game content.
So yes, MMO does in fact mean grouping will be required if you want to run anything other than the most basic content.
I've never seen an MMO that didn't require grouping for the majority of the content. MMO's do have a lot of content to be completed solo, but the end game content is always group content. So ya, grouping is required if a player wants to play most of the MMO's content.
But after reading through this questionable thread it's clear the OP wasn't really posting to make a point about grouping. It's about pushing more solo content to the exclusion of group content because they don't like grouping themselves.
Re: MMO does NOT mean Grouping
This illusion that Solo players have been catered to is dismantled with just a few easy to answer questions…
-First, with One Tamriel definitively killing Overland in 2016, Overland is now finally getting attention… what year is it?
-Second, when was the last time we received any end-game solo content like an Arena?
Now one can make the claim that Questlines are solo content and with each new zone we’ve been “catered to” but even solo players are unhappy with these.
What we have had though, is a new trial and two new dungeon packs, yearly. The pile of repeatable group content has been growing each year, while someone who prefers solo content has been left with one and done quests that are so “accessible” that they could be played on a Guitar Hero guitar.
ZOS has been favoring the solo players over group players since circa 2016. That's why GH is hurting so bad and Project Vitality left after U35. Now virtually no tutorials or anyone to teach the newbies how to compete.
Re: MMO does NOT mean Grouping
JemadarofCaerSalis wrote: »ToddIngram wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »MMO only means there are multiple players in the game world at the same time. It does NOT mean that we have to group with them. Yet we frequently hear things like:
- "It's an MMO and that means grouping."
- "If you don't want to group maybe an MMO isn't the right game for you."
- "If players only do solo content it makes it harder for others to find groups."
None of those are true. The game world is like real life in that each player can go about their day doing the things that they enjoy. And they should not be pressured or judged because of how they choose to spend their time.
Except all of those statements are true.
Solo players are not victims. They are the most catered to subset of the player base. The self entitlement is unwarranted and ugly.
Except they aren't true.
MMO means Massively Multiplayer. Massively multiplayer means lots of players all playing in the same world together. It doesn't mean they have to group up to play, just that there are a LOT of players.
So, that automatically makes the second statement false, because Massively Multiplayer doesn't mean grouping, so therefore MMOs can be the right games for players that want to play solo, but with other players in the game to make the world feel alive. Or players who want to group occasionally but don't want to be forced to group up with others.
While the third statement might be true, the fact is that forcing players to group is only going to create a vastly toxic community, because the players that are forced to group are not going to like being there, and they are often going to resent being forced to group. So, you get players who only want X reward from the dungeon and so don't want to do anything but whatever is required to get that reward. you get players who want to do Y, who are now at odds with the people who want X, because Y means doing something different from what is required to get X. You get players who don't care they just want the final reward as quick as possible, and resent anyone who slows them down even slightly. You get players who want to do all the dungeon content, and are content to take their time, and they resent that they are being dragged along by the players who just want to take the fastest way to get the rewards.
All these people are being grouped together, so now you get people who just quit the game or just quit doing that content, which just leads to fewer people to group with.
Do you *really* think that ESO, if all the solo only players left, would be able to survive? If the players who prefer solo, but don't necessarily mind grouping, but don't want to be forced to group left?
The game is dying because ZOS caters almost exclusively to the solo player population. End game PvE died with U35 and PvP has been neglected for so long ZOS is now presenting the excuse that it's so messed up they're not even going to try and fix it.
When the most catered to people around complain that they're not catered to enough, that's a problem for everyone and is proving to be unsustainable. MMO's die when there is no focus on end game group activities.
Re: MMO does NOT mean Grouping
robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »Hot take: People who refuse to socialize should not be facilitated in MMORPGs. You should be able to play part of the game but it's not a reasonable expectation for a player to go into a MMORPG and expect everything outside of dungeons and raids to be catered to them.
It's not catered to solo players, it's catered to Elder Scrolls fans... who just happen to come from a solo player focused franchise.
Besides, I suspect ZOS knows they would lose far more players by trying to "force" them to do content they have no interest in than they would by annoying players who group/PvP by adding soloable dungeons etc.
Again, ESO is not the last in a long line of Elder Scrolls games. It's not even produced by the same company. ESO is a stand alone MMO with an Elder Scrolls theme. Adjust your expectations accordingly.
Sometimes I wonder how many times I have to say that ESO wouldn't exist without Elder Scrolls - it's based on it ffs. 🙄
Why not? They could have went with any theme they wanted and ESO would just have a different acronym with all the same content. The only difference would be the skins and the scenery.
Elder Scrolls enthusiasts aren't what's keeping ESO alive. It's the uniqueness of ESO that's keeping it alive. ....until all that is unique about ESO is nerfed to be just like every other game out there anyway.
I see... so, you're saying if Elder Scrolls hadn't have already existed, ZOS would've still, somehow, landed on ESO as it is, with all it's lore etc? Pray, how? It would, at best, have been just another generic fantasy MMO, nothing more.
And, you can bet your ass it's Elder Scrolls fans keeping it alive... MMO fans tend to be a little fickle and will happily jump ship for something new, they've proven it many times. Not all maybe, but a lot.
I'm not an Elder Scrolls fan. I've paid more than $5,000 to play ESO and have been here since 2014. I couldn't care less about "the lore". It's meaningless. I care about the game.
Explains everything.
It explains that it's not just Elder Scrolls fans paying the bills for ZOS, which was or is your thinking.
robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »Hot take: People who refuse to socialize should not be facilitated in MMORPGs. You should be able to play part of the game but it's not a reasonable expectation for a player to go into a MMORPG and expect everything outside of dungeons and raids to be catered to them.
It's not catered to solo players, it's catered to Elder Scrolls fans... who just happen to come from a solo player focused franchise.
Besides, I suspect ZOS knows they would lose far more players by trying to "force" them to do content they have no interest in than they would by annoying players who group/PvP by adding soloable dungeons etc.
Again, ESO is not the last in a long line of Elder Scrolls games. It's not even produced by the same company. ESO is a stand alone MMO with an Elder Scrolls theme. Adjust your expectations accordingly.
Sometimes I wonder how many times I have to say that ESO wouldn't exist without Elder Scrolls - it's based on it ffs. 🙄
Why not? They could have went with any theme they wanted and ESO would just have a different acronym with all the same content. The only difference would be the skins and the scenery.
Elder Scrolls enthusiasts aren't what's keeping ESO alive. It's the uniqueness of ESO that's keeping it alive. ....until all that is unique about ESO is nerfed to be just like every other game out there anyway.
I see... so, you're saying if Elder Scrolls hadn't have already existed, ZOS would've still, somehow, landed on ESO as it is, with all it's lore etc? Pray, how? It would, at best, have been just another generic fantasy MMO, nothing more.
And, you can bet your ass it's Elder Scrolls fans keeping it alive... MMO fans tend to be a little fickle and will happily jump ship for something new, they've proven it many times. Not all maybe, but a lot.
Re: MMO does NOT mean Grouping
robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »robwolf666 wrote: »AlexanderDeLarge wrote: »Hot take: People who refuse to socialize should not be facilitated in MMORPGs. You should be able to play part of the game but it's not a reasonable expectation for a player to go into a MMORPG and expect everything outside of dungeons and raids to be catered to them.
It's not catered to solo players, it's catered to Elder Scrolls fans... who just happen to come from a solo player focused franchise.
Besides, I suspect ZOS knows they would lose far more players by trying to "force" them to do content they have no interest in than they would by annoying players who group/PvP by adding soloable dungeons etc.
Again, ESO is not the last in a long line of Elder Scrolls games. It's not even produced by the same company. ESO is a stand alone MMO with an Elder Scrolls theme. Adjust your expectations accordingly.
Sometimes I wonder how many times I have to say that ESO wouldn't exist without Elder Scrolls - it's based on it ffs. 🙄
Why not? They could have went with any theme they wanted and ESO would just have a different acronym with all the same content. The only difference would be the skins and the scenery.
Elder Scrolls enthusiasts aren't what's keeping ESO alive. It's the uniqueness of ESO that's keeping it alive. ....until all that is unique about ESO is nerfed to be just like every other game out there anyway.
I see... so, you're saying if Elder Scrolls hadn't have already existed, ZOS would've still, somehow, landed on ESO as it is, with all it's lore etc? Pray, how? It would, at best, have been just another generic fantasy MMO, nothing more.
And, you can bet your ass it's Elder Scrolls fans keeping it alive... MMO fans tend to be a little fickle and will happily jump ship for something new, they've proven it many times. Not all maybe, but a lot.
I'm not an Elder Scrolls fan. I've paid more than $5,000 to play ESO and have been here since 2014. I couldn't care less about "the lore". It's meaningless. I care about the game.
Re: Vengeance
Hopefully it will open with white strakes event. Even if just a temp campaign.
I'm going to vomit uncontrollably if ZOS mandates vengeance for Whitestrakes this year.
reazea
5
Re: Vengeance
pop lock GH = same number of players as 2 bars Vengeance
You don't know that. ZOS has never released any data from anything other than their first iteration of vengeance when they ran a golden pursuit at the same time to artificially increase participation.
And even using your figures GH still had double the population vengeance ever had. Additionally, performance during the last instance of vengeance was very similar to performance in GH.
Vengeance is a lose lose proposition. And it means ZOS is wasting dev time and resources on vengeance instead of working on GH when GH is by far more popular. ZOS continuing to invest in vengeance will cause the population to continue to decline.
The only thing that can save this situation is for ZOS to do what they've always said they were doing "They're working on it", meaning working on GH, not vengeance.
reazea
5
Re: How is it that so many players can solo vet dlc dungeons and many groups fail to complete ?
First off, you can't believe everything you read on forums or the internet in general.
Now with that said, the skill gap in ESO is extreme to the extreme. The strongest players get accused more or less daily of hacking when they just have really good builds and know how to play them and know the mechanics. If you saw how much time these players have in game it would probably surprise you.
Now with that said, the skill gap in ESO is extreme to the extreme. The strongest players get accused more or less daily of hacking when they just have really good builds and know how to play them and know the mechanics. If you saw how much time these players have in game it would probably surprise you.
Re: [PvP] From "Dragonknight Rework" to DK Nerfs... What Happened?
I'm more surprised how nobody seems to be complaining that take flight lost what 10% damage.......Now we can truly say that merciless resolve is the highest hitting ult in the game.
Except its not an ult, its a 5s cooldown skill that can be shot twice while also giving a heal, major buff on both bars, and bonus passives.
Except its not an ult, its a 5s cooldown skill that can be shot twice while also giving a heal, major buff on both bars, and bonus passives.
IC should always release into the sewers
I have no idea why release drops me in some random base my faction happens to control. I just take the ladder down and go back to where I was. The extra hop increases the chances that I de-sync and quit for the night. Seriously, the sewers should be the only place release sends you. If you want to get dropped at a different base, press E instead of R and choose one.
EDIT: LOL I got desynced while going down the ladder. Gonna go watch season 2 of Landman. RIP ESO.
EDIT: LOL I got desynced while going down the ladder. Gonna go watch season 2 of Landman. RIP ESO.