I am happy for the Solo players

Innocente

I am happy that you are getting the ESO game that you want. I am sure that, eventually, Craglorn and all the current group content will also be available to you as solo content. And, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It is the game that Zenimax has chosen to make out of ESO.

It could have gone the other way very easily. Zenimax could have put in large incentives to group: more experience when grouped, more loots when grouped, better loots when grouped, more power when grouped. Heck, they could have spent the time to make grouping actually work in the phased out world of ESO!

But, they did not. No matter what anyone tells you, ESO is not an MMO. Sure, it has lots of subscribers. There are lots of random people tossed into the countless instances in the game. But what makes an MMO - the heart of an MMO, group play, is just gone now.

The MMO players have been leaving ESO in large numbers, a trend I expect to continue. Eventually, the solo players will tire of it all; there will be no social bond to keep them here either.

But, for now, enjoy the game that Zenimax has given you. I am sure that most of you will be happy to see the so called 'elitist' MMO crowd go away. There could have been room for all of us. Sad that there is not.

theyancey

There are no incentives possible that would force me into formal groups. Just not worth the hassle. I do like the informal grouping that occurs though. That has been one of my favorite aspects of ESO. I will not miss those who wish to force me into groups though. I would unsub if they had the game they demand.

Innocente

TheYancey,

Understand your position. Nor do I think that you should be forced. But, the game is the game, as it were. Zenimax has chosen the road to give you all that you want, and virtually nothing for social MMO players. It is fine. It is your game now, and I am sure you will enjoy it.

DungeonGrind

Innocente wrote: »

No matter what anyone tells you, ESO is not an MMO.

I'm not so sure you are authorized or for that matter, qualified to make this kind of claim.

Innocente

DG, Oh, I don't know. 14 years playing MMOs should be enough, I think. ESO has more in common with Call of Duty and Modern Warfare than it does with World of Warcraft or EQ2 or WildStar.

DungeonGrind

So are you suggesting this is in the FPS genre? Please, what genre of game am i playing...?

Stalwart385

I play an MMO, I'm in a guild and I play most the content solo. Why, because I can group with friends when I want to. I hate the no solo in MMO argument.

BTW, as a primarily solo player this nerf killed my experience. What was a calculated endeavor is now a mindless grind.

Also as a primarily solo player the questing/progressing in this game was always horrible grouped up. It is almost impossible to stay on track in a group unless you always log on at the exact same times. It just slows everybody down. This nerf made grouping up even more pointless.

indytims_ESO

What I find most ironic is that the hardest content I've faced yet in ESO - *requires* that you face it solo.

In a perfect world, there would be places in the game-world where groups are -required-. Where Mr. Awesome with his kitted-out gear and 'uber' build can not solo. These places would be extensive, fun, challenging, and offer bonus XP, rewards, whatever.

The carrot needs to be a juicy one for groups to work. MOST people will take the path of least resistance that allows them to avoid the annoyance that is the risk of idiot group-members. I am guilty of this myself: if I am online by myself, I will try -anything- solo first, because I don't want to a) waste the time looking for a group and b) avoid the higher than usual risk of getting into a group with a bunch of ***.

Guilds in ESO, that I've seen so far, are not 'social'. They are more 'economic'-driven because of guild stores. While I am not really against that, I have yet to find a guild in ESO that reminds me of guilds in EQ1 or 2, or even WoW or GW2.

It's an issue that is really interconnected with other parts of the game.

Group-search tool
Viable -reasons- to group (rewards, xp, challenge, etc)
Guild functionality/incentives
Content that requires groups to defeat.

It's not an easy fix, and as silly as it sounds, I still think games like EQ1/2 still had the best layout when it came to grouping. Alas, that right there indicates that over time, there's just been more of a shift towards solo-play across the board, really. People complain that they wanna be able to log in for an hour and make 'appreciable progress'. They don't want to spend 30 minutes looking for a group, just to have a tank/CC/healer/whatever bail on them, etc.

That's why a happy balance of group/solo content, to me, would be ideal.

Istyar

Innocente wrote: »

DG, Oh, I don't know. 14 years playing MMOs should be enough, I think. ESO has more in common with Call of Duty and Modern Warfare than it does with World of Warcraft or EQ2 or WildStar.

The truth has been spoken.

Curragraigue

Innocente wrote: »

DG, Oh, I don't know. 14 years playing MMOs should be enough, I think. ESO has more in common with Call of Duty and Modern Warfare than it does with World of Warcraft or EQ2 or WildStar.

No ESO is not even remotely similar to MW or COD. They both have single player missions which other than the main story (despite what you think) ESO does not and the multiplayer has significantly less players in an environment than ESO does. I'm also ignoring the obvious fact that they are both FPS which ESO is not but I'm sure that was not the element of those games you were relying upon for your comparison.

It is a shame you can't be happy with the changes to the game and the extensive group play elements that still exist in the game like guilds, group dungeons, dolmens, public dungeons, Craglorn, PvP and VR Dungeons which are all still set for group play.

Maybe you can give the changes that they are talking about in the Road Ahead a go with your friends and see if you can still enjoy the game then.

Eorea

I'm happy that you're happy for us. At least someone is. Besides us, that is.

Innocente

DG,

Well, the actual gameplay is closer to FPS than it is to traditional MMO. But that is not what I am referring to. In CoD and MW, you go into a 'Lobby' and then are placed in an instanced game session. That is actually what is happening in ESO, although you don't see the Lobby. Whenever you enter an instance, the engine places you into one with a random selection of people.

You have probably noticed going into some public dungeons that there are many folks inside, but on entering or exiting, you see no one. The 'funnel effect' of the mega-server tech is why. Zenimax has basically turned all of ESO into a giant WoW type Dungeon Finder game.

Curragraigue

Innocente wrote: »

DG,

Well, the actual gameplay is closer to FPS than it is to traditional MMO. But that is not what I am referring to. In CoD and MW, you go into a 'Lobby' and then are placed in an instanced game session. That is actually what is happening in ESO, although you don't see the Lobby. Whenever you enter an instance, the engine places you into one with a random selection of people.

You have probably noticed going into some public dungeons that there are many folks inside, but on entering or exiting, you see no one. The 'funnel effect' of the mega-server tech is why. Zenimax has basically turned all of ESO into a giant WoW type Dungeon Finder game.

That would be the group dungeons rather than the public dungeons but I get what you are saying I just disagree that one dungeon per zone makes a good comparison of the game play.

Plus those group dungeons are great fun with friends so would have thought they would be one of your favourite parts to play.

Firestar_

There is plenty of group content. Cyrodil. Group and Public dungeons. Sorry to disappoint you, but I do feel that I actually need content that I can solo as not everyone is on all the time.

I want to keep playing and that's what MMOs are going towards- whatever keeps players playing. I much prefer playing all day and when all my friends are online, "Hey guys, want to go run a dungeon or conquer a world boss or Dolmen?" Great! Let's group up and go do something harder.

Instant group play when I want it and not necessary when I can't have it.
-Because I lived in Japan for 5 years and it was impossible to find friends in my timezone.
-Because my friends have different work schedules.
-Because I want to play when *I* have the time, not when I schedule it.

This isn't a tabetop game. We don't have to cling to old ways of having that one person in the group get up at 4 in the morning just to play with friends if they want in.

Is nice that some players want forced grouping all the time but that meant you either PUG or don't play. DDO had that I believe and it was absolute garbage.

Innocente

The group dungeons are a favorite.
But, they are only worth running once.

And, the mega-server funnel effect is in play whenever you enter ANY instance.
Building, dungeon, new zone, whenever you see the loading screen.

Rev Rielle

Innocente wrote: »

I am happy that you are getting the ESO game that you want. I am sure that, eventually, Craglorn and all the current group content will also be available to you as solo content. And, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It is the game that Zenimax has chosen to make out of ESO.

It could have gone the other way very easily. Zenimax could have put in large incentives to group: more experience when grouped, more loots when grouped, better loots when grouped, more power when grouped. Heck, they could have spent the time to make grouping actually work in the phased out world of ESO!

But, they did not. No matter what anyone tells you, ESO is not an MMO. Sure, it has lots of subscribers. There are lots of random people tossed into the countless instances in the game. But what makes an MMO - the heart of an MMO, group play, is just gone now.

The MMO players have been leaving ESO in large numbers, a trend I expect to continue. Eventually, the solo players will tire of it all; there will be no social bond to keep them here either.

But, for now, enjoy the game that Zenimax has given you. I am sure that most of you will be happy to see the so called 'elitist' MMO crowd go away. There could have been room for all of us. Sad that there is not.

Group/difficult content leading to interaction with other players leading to the building of social bonds: You're right, it should be at the heart of any true MMO. One just has to look at any number of real-life examples to see how powerful such a mechanism is. Unfortunately it's all but lost from the modern day MMO.

I too am sad it's not here anymore. And yet everywhere you turn you seemingly see more and players asking for further selfish, short-term quick-fix, changes to diminish the need for player-player interaction, which just takes any MMOs further and further down the wrong path.

DeLindsay

Innocente wrote: »

I am sure that most of you will be happy to see the so called 'elitist' MMO crowd go away. There could have been room for all of us. Sad that there is not.

This sums up why you are incorrect. Any game that favors one play type over another play type will ALWAYS alienate one group of players. ESO was unique from the start and there was a heavy weight over it's head about whether it was going to be mostly solo with a benefit of grouping or a traditional MMO. ZoS even hinted at the fact they they are unhappy that more players didn't see the vision they had for VR which was a group dynamic. People need to realize that the ESO forums probably aren't even 30% of the daily comments/suggestions/feedback ZoS gets.

If ZoS had chosen ESO to be more traditional MMO type group play (which is a farce, 99% of people solo most of the time to level cap in every MMO) then we'd be having this EXACT SAME conversation from all the people pissed that the game is too group oriented. How is this a hard concept to understand? ZoS is literally in a catch 22 with this topic, and will NOT be able to make everyone happy no matter what they do.

DungeonGrind

Innocente, i agree with you on what these changes have done and a few other posts here that outline the challenges of group play, however, the term MMO has to stay as defined without letting previous titles influence its meaning.

MMO - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_game

MMOGs can enable players to cooperate and compete with each other on a large scale, and sometimes to interact meaningfully with people around the world.

This game does this. It may not be like the other great genre defining MMO or that first really great genre building MMO, but it is online, provides a persistent world with the potential to interact.

Aside from any other points to squabble over, case closed, this is an MMO and i will let other people tell me so.

Innocente

*Laughs*

Fine, if you want it to be an MMO, it is an MMO.

Enjoy it.

DungeonGrind

Innocente wrote: »

*Laughs*

Fine, if you want it to be an MMO, it is an MMO.

Enjoy it.

Sweet, first ever, forum argument win +1 for me. Thanks!

Anastasia

Firestar_ wrote: »

There is plenty of group content. Cyrodil. Group and Public dungeons. Sorry to disappoint you, but I do feel that I actually need content that I can solo as not everyone is on all the time.

I want to keep playing and that's what MMOs are going towards- whatever keeps players playing. I much prefer playing all day and when all my friends are online, "Hey guys, want to go run a dungeon or conquer a world boss or Dolmen?" Great! Let's group up and go do something harder.

Instant group play when I want it and not necessary when I can't have it.
-Because I lived in Japan for 5 years and it was impossible to find friends in my timezone.
-Because my friends have different work schedules.
-Because I want to play when *I* have the time, not when I schedule it.

This isn't a tabetop game. We don't have to cling to old ways of having that one person in the group get up at 4 in the morning just to play with friends if they want in.

Is nice that some players want forced grouping all the time but that meant you either PUG or don't play. DDO had that I believe and it was absolute garbage.

---

Completely understandable post. I want for you to have those requests Firestar.

I just fully expected ZOS to create it, provide an indepth soloing content for you and others who want it post-50 in ADDITION to the preparatory group-encouraged content that is/was already there...NOT to take AWAY the group-centric content that was there in V+ 1 - 10. o-0

hamon

Innocente wrote: »

DG, Oh, I don't know. 14 years playing MMOs should be enough, I think. ESO has more in common with Call of Duty and Modern Warfare than it does with World of Warcraft or EQ2 or WildStar.

one would think that 14 years of MMO play would prevent you from making such dramatic and utterly mistaken statements like that

someuser

indytims_ESO wrote: »

Guilds in ESO, that I've seen so far, are not 'social'. They are more 'economic'-driven because of guild stores. While I am not really against that, I have yet to find a guild in ESO that reminds me of guilds in EQ1 or 2, or even WoW or GW2.

Ah, you found the words I've been looking for. As it stands right now, in my opinion of course, the biggest mark against ESO as a MMO is the sub-par guild structure.

I've been here since early release and the first thing that jumped out at me was how inadequate the guild / social structure was. Using @someuser instead of my character name was HORRIBLE... which was only compounded by some of the HORRENDIOUS log in names of other players... there was no tags over anyone's heads showing a character name or guild... and guild's themselves were/are filled with characters from all three alliances.

Ok, ok I get that Mr. Sage wanted a minimalist approach... to which I'm not 100% opposed to... but you must have a sense of community that extend past miniature auction houses.

All of my guilds I'm in are nothing more, to me, than auction houses for buying and selling. I have NO idea when a guild mate runs across my screen or spams /zone for help.

I am very much looking forward to the next major update that will atleast allow guilds to have "uniforms" and open up the possibility of more global auction houses. I hope this trend continues and further improvements are made.

I really want to be more social but right now the system just makes it hard.

GreySix

indytims_ESO wrote: »

What I find most ironic is that the hardest content I've faced yet in ESO - *requires* that you face it solo.

Quoted for truth.

babylon

Innocente wrote: »

*Laughs*

Fine, if you want it to be an MMO, it is an MMO.

Enjoy it.

Well, I still manage to group up, and voice chat. Not sure what you're doing wrong.

drogon1

I sympathize with the OP quite a bit. Group play needs a HUGE boost in this game for bona fide MMO players (the type of players that snooze through content tuned for a single player - typically quests).

I do not have a Vet level player yet, but I think that the general quest driven Vet content should be solo friendly. However, they game needs to beef up it's group play signficantly. Make playing dungeons MUCH more rewarding in terms of XP and loot than they currently are. They are already buffing PvP XP again so this should be an improvement for those that like group play.

But, in the end, ZoS needs to beef up its PvE side with group content - more and varied instanced content. This content should provide leveling alternatives to questing, PvP, and mob grinding.

As of now, with dungeons only worth running a single time due to low rewards, I agree that the game is more akin to a single player title than an MMO. Having said that, I think last patch jacked up dungeon XP pretty significantly. Now I think it only takes just over 20 dungeon runs at level 30 to level, instead of the previous over 200. Can someone confirm? I was running dungeons anyway for the fun of them, so this change was welcomed.

LrdRahvin

DungeonGrind wrote: »

Innocente wrote: »

*Laughs*

Fine, if you want it to be an MMO, it is an MMO.

Enjoy it.

Sweet, first ever, forum argument win +1 for me. Thanks!

You're doing it wrong

Archaole

They just need to add a genre called Online RPG and start to distinguishing this game as such. There are a lot of people online and there is some group content. But guilds are born in this game for the stores and zone chat is mostly for trade. The only guild I've found that people actually want to play with other people was made by a group of people who played previous mmos, and they are mostly gone now. VR 1-10 also needs to be changed to levels 51-60.

dodgehopper_ESO

They just need to make it possible to phase in with people who are in different stages of a quest than you are. If there were a way to 'match phasing' with a player, at least for quests that aren't Main Quest, I think this would enhance grouping a great deal. As it stands now, the great difficulty is getting players to be all on at the same time for every mission. Those characters which I have played with friends in a dedicated manner have never gotten past 25. Whereas I have veterans from going solo, pvp, dungeons, or grinding mobs with friends. The mission content is where the problems of phasing come into play and I think hurt this game's social aspect. If they could fix this one element, I do not believe they would have had to make Veteran content easier.

Mallius

I can't help but think that most people are putting group and solo content in different categories.... Why can't the content just be content, achievable by both "solo" players and "group" players?

The benefit of being in a group then would be that the content is easier, I don't think there is a need to alienate one group or the other to be quite honest, but this game does that. A game where both methods are possible would be nice, solo players are very well catered for at the moment but group players are being preventing from playing with friends because of phasing, people aren't able to help friends in need because of phasing. If someone wants to play in a group with a friend at the moment they have to make sure that they never get ahead in quest lines at all otherwise they make it impossible to play together; which I think is ludicrous for an mmorpg to do. Why should I have to play with strangers because they are conveniently in the same phase when I pay my subs? I want to play this with my friends not a stranger only.

drogon1

Mallius wrote: »

I can't help but think that most people are putting group and solo content in different categories.... Why can't the content just be content, achievable by both "solo" players and "group" players?

The benefit of being in a group then would be that the content is easier, I don't think there is a need to alienate one group or the other to be quite honest, but this game does that. A game where both methods are possible would be nice, solo players are very well catered for at the moment but group players are being preventing from playing with friends because of phasing, people aren't able to help friends in need because of phasing. If someone wants to play in a group with a friend at the moment they have to make sure that they never get ahead in quest lines at all otherwise they make it impossible to play together; which I think is ludicrous for an mmorpg to do. Why should I have to play with strangers because they are conveniently in the same phase when I pay my subs? I want to play this with my friends not a stranger only.

Group content IS different from solo content, namely it is tuned for groups, not single players, and it is also typically instanced. This is a good thing: it provides greater variety of gameplay. Grouping for content tuned for a single player is faceroll, and quickly boring for many players. But because many players prefer to solo, this content is important for any MMO.