If they've abandoned GH, it's partly due to the community's attitude and refusal to help test stuff on Vengeance. Sorry to say it, but why should the devs try again?

If the devs made a version of GH that performed well, it would have to be a bit different from GH given that GH doesn't perform well. Is the PvP community going to bother testing it though? Or will we have another round of players refusing to engage constructively? I'm betting on the latter. Even if the new GH was as close to the old one as possible, I think most of the GH PvPers will still reject it. So why should ZOS put more money into fixing GH at this point?

I understand the reasons players don't like Vengeance, I really do. It absolutely isn't a satisfactory conclusion to the testing that was done. BUT I've never seen a game where devs put in this kind of effort to understand PvP problems and test on this scale. To see such a petulant response from players is just frustrating. Vengeance is now "PvErs and players who can't PvP" from what I've heard lol.

Quick update of outfit with "No pants" slot, happy to show more of my Imeprial's legs!

Why are duplicates an issue? Just gets them done faster?!

Cin_Vhetin wrote: »

With a little objectivity, the whole idea of having scruples about using animations to disassemble other pixels (in the shapes of Nixads, daedra, minotaurs, etc) is absurd when the entire premise of this game is slaughter of one kind or another, the stories are violent in the extreme and to level is to slaughter something. This whole discussion thread appears to be troll bait.

Some people just have different triggers, and that doesn't make a topic bait. That said, if something doesn't go beyond what a general audience would find upsetting but triggers you personally, then it's up to you to remove yourself from them rather than asking thousands of strangers to accommodate you.

In this issue there is a difference between cute non-aggressive critters, and an aggressive combatant like a minotaur.

I said above that animal cruelty is a specific trigger to me, but I don't expect them to make all animals untargetable or be upset if others want to kill them in a game. I know they aren't real, but that doesn't mean that witnessing even fictional depictions can't be upsetting for some.

In this situation, I understand I am outside the normal so I'm just not going into the zones while this activity is popular. I mean, I feel bad even accidentally clicking on butterflies since it apparently kills them to turn them into bait.

It's not inconvenient, it just makes no sense to me personally. If I wouldn't see any difference between creatures in this game and real living beings, I wouldn't play this game - where one kills dozens of people every day - at all.

Athory wrote: »

All player toxicity actually comes from DPS Sharing and logs.
That’s something we have to acknowledge, because it’s a big root of the “everyday” toxicity you see across the game. And this is something ZoS could change, but players don’t really want that.

That bolded statement is categorically false. Yes, there are some players who engage in toxicity over DPS parses. I’ve been rejected from runs because my DPS wasn’t high enough. But in my experience, it was just a matter of being told that my DPS was too low for what the group was looking for.

I’ve seen people get toxic over tanks that keep dying, heals that feel too low, people who don’t know or ignore mechanics, and someone getting a drop someone else wanted and not giving it to them.

And that’s PvE. If you want to talk about PvP toxicity, let’s start with people who send hateful whispers because they lost a fight, and end with the myriad exploits plaguing the landscape.

But ALL toxicity coming from DPS logs? No. Just no.