Maintenance for the week of December 23:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
There CANNOT be access gates to the Imperial City paid DLC
-
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »This is wrong-footed. It's CONTENT which is gated, so it's not the same as your example.
Content is content, whether it is imperial city or gear. In both cases, you have to work for it before you can get what you desire. If you desire raid gear, you have to raid. If you desire IC access, you have to cap keeps. Same underlying principle.
NO.
Gear is something you get from playing CONTENT.
CONTENT is the activity you are doing to have fun... and you don't have to rely on your entire Faction winning a contest of some sort to go on the Raid now do you?
Content should not be gated in a way which prevents you from accessing it for factors outside of your own control, and no matter how you slice it, there will be a sizeable number of players denied access with no recourse to fix the problem by their own effort.
This is fundamentally wrong.
No. You are just trying to define content in such a way that it suits your cause.
Content is everything that comes with the expansion. That includes the dungeons, and that also includes the items you get from those dungeons. Having players put in some effort before they get the expansion's 'desirables' is common practice. Here, the 'desirables' include access to IC, in addition to other things (like gear).
0 -
Defilted✭✭✭✭✭
✭What if they just combined all the campaigns into one? That way you would have enough population to take keeps no matter what. There might be of course more on the dominate population side, but it would be a lot harder for the dominate group to protect keeps all the time with all of the populations of a megaserver in one campaign.
The keep flip flop would be constant and no one group would have IC for very long. This would promote more PVP play IMO.XBOX NA
XBOX Series X
#NightmareBear0 -
Dekkameron✭✭✭✭✭Reminds me of old school WoW in WotLK in Wintergrasp.
On our server (Defias Brotherhood PVP-RP) Horde totally outnumbered the Alliance and thus the Horde always had control of it which blocked Alliance from ever doing the raids.- Veteran Combat Librarian -0 -
Dekkameron✭✭✭✭✭silly lag double postEdited by Dekkameron on August 4, 2015 12:35PM- Veteran Combat Librarian -0
-
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Dekkameron wrote: »Reminds me of old school WoW in WotLK in Wintergrasp.
On our server (Defias Brotherhood PVP-RP) Horde totally outnumbered the Alliance and thus the Horde always had control of it which blocked Alliance from ever doing the raids.
Two things should prever this from happening. First, there are three alliances, not two, and second, population cap is shared between cyrodiil countryside and the IC, meaning the more people a faction has inside IC, the weaker it's capability to prevent other factions from unlocking access.0 -
I_killed_Vivec✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Dekkameron wrote: »Reminds me of old school WoW in WotLK in Wintergrasp.
On our server (Defias Brotherhood PVP-RP) Horde totally outnumbered the Alliance and thus the Horde always had control of it which blocked Alliance from ever doing the raids.
Two things should prever this from happening. First, there are three alliances, not two, and second, population cap is shared between cyrodiil countryside and the IC, meaning the more people a faction has inside IC, the weaker it's capability to prevent other factions from unlocking access.
Your second point only means that there might be a switch in IC access because one successful faction has gained control of IC and therefore everyone has gone there leaving keeps undefended. However, if there is a massive numerical imbalance between factions it seems reasonable to assume that if a superior faction is booted from IC because of their failure in Cyrodiil then they will regain their position very quickly - as everyone from the lesser faction will be in IC.
So even with a flip-flop in access it is reasonable to suppose that a superior faction will have a considerably larger proportion of access to IC.
Maybe that's what ZoS want. Maybe they think that frustration with not getting into IC will encourage more people into PvP, or that it might somehow bring about a balance in campaigns. Maybe they think that people will migrate to different campaigns, and that these fluctuations will themselves balance PvP. I suppose we shall see...
But it does seem odd that even when I have bought new content I might never be able to set foot in it, through no fault of my own.
I'm EP on the EU server, and I will definitely be paying close attention to the campaign statuses before deciding whether to buy content I might never see.1 -
Enodoc✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
That would be great, but I don't think there's enough server capacity for that. Each campaign has a pop cap for a reasonWhat if they just combined all the campaigns into one? That way you would have enough population to take keeps no matter what.
UESP: The Unofficial Elder Scrolls Pages - A collaborative source for all knowledge on the Elder Scrolls series since 1995
Join us on Discord - discord.gg/uesp0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I_killed_Vivec wrote: »Your second point only means that there might be a switch in IC access because one successful faction has gained control of IC and therefore everyone has gone there leaving keeps undefended. However, if there is a massive numerical imbalance between factions it seems reasonable to assume that if a superior faction is booted from IC because of their failure in Cyrodiil then they will regain their position very quickly - as everyone from the lesser faction will be in IC.
So even with a flip-flop in access it is reasonable to suppose that a superior faction will have a considerably larger proportion of access to IC.
As far as i know, there is currently no such thing as being booted from IC. Once you're in, you stay in. The only thing that will remove you is you logging out in IC, and trying to log back in later while your cyrodiil pop is capped(which will drop you in PvE land).Edited by Sharee on August 4, 2015 12:43PM0 -
Darlgon✭✭✭✭✭
✭What if they just combined all the campaigns into one? That way you would have enough population to take keeps no matter what. There might be of course more on the dominate population side, but it would be a lot harder for the dominate group to protect keeps all the time with all of the populations of a megaserver in one campaign.
The keep flip flop would be constant and no one group would have IC for very long. This would promote more PVP play IMO.
Lolz.. if they did that, with the current lag with only one faction pop locked at 250ish players, no one would be able to fire abilities or even walk, much less take keeps or get into IC. Mind you, that is the dream most of the hardcore AvA people thought this game would bring. (200 vs 200 large scale warfare) but appears unable to support.Power level to CP160 in a week:
Where is the end game? You just played it.
Why don't I have 300+ skill points? Because you skipped content along the way.
Where is new content? Sigh.0 -
Hiero_Glyph✭✭✭✭✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »OrdainedFaun wrote: »I wholeheartedly agree that not many will want to pay for a DLC when that money does not guarantee them access to said content.
Think about it this way.
When a raid expansion comes out, does every player automatically get all the gear that can be obtained through that raid, without having to do anything? Of course not. They have to work for it first. This means players are paying for an expansion without a guarantee to ever see the items that come from that raid.
IC access is the same - you have to work for it first. The only difference is that you have to work against enemy players, instead of enemy bosses (naturally, since it is a PvP expansion).
Except you cannot individually work for IC access.
But you can individually run a raid to get raid gear?Hiero_Glyph wrote: »Worse yet, you are at the mercy of the player population so if your availability does not align with your alliance's you may never even have access despite paying for the content.
And if your availability does not align with the group that is running a raid? You will never see the gear, despite paying for the content.byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »This is wrong-footed. It's CONTENT which is gated, so it's not the same as your example.
Content is content, whether it is imperial city or gear. In both cases, you have to work for it before you can get what you desire. If you desire raid gear, you have to raid. If you desire IC access, you have to cap keeps. Same underlying principle.
Are you really trying to compare a 12-player Trial to capturing a keep in Cyrodiil? If a new expansion comes out with a new Trial I can easily get a group to play at almost any hour I want. It's not even close to the same thing. As for running it individually, I can certainly organize 11 other players and accomplish something with my time while with 11 other players there is no guarantee that I will accomplish anything in Cyrodiil. Also, gear grinding is very different than organizing a group to try and capture a keep as not all content is equal. You should try telling someone who just purchased a Lamborghini that a car is a car; that would be a good laugh.1 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »Hiero_Glyph wrote: »OrdainedFaun wrote: »I wholeheartedly agree that not many will want to pay for a DLC when that money does not guarantee them access to said content.
Think about it this way.
When a raid expansion comes out, does every player automatically get all the gear that can be obtained through that raid, without having to do anything? Of course not. They have to work for it first. This means players are paying for an expansion without a guarantee to ever see the items that come from that raid.
IC access is the same - you have to work for it first. The only difference is that you have to work against enemy players, instead of enemy bosses (naturally, since it is a PvP expansion).
Except you cannot individually work for IC access.
But you can individually run a raid to get raid gear?Hiero_Glyph wrote: »Worse yet, you are at the mercy of the player population so if your availability does not align with your alliance's you may never even have access despite paying for the content.
And if your availability does not align with the group that is running a raid? You will never see the gear, despite paying for the content.byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »This is wrong-footed. It's CONTENT which is gated, so it's not the same as your example.
Content is content, whether it is imperial city or gear. In both cases, you have to work for it before you can get what you desire. If you desire raid gear, you have to raid. If you desire IC access, you have to cap keeps. Same underlying principle.
Are you really trying to compare a 12-player Trial to capturing a keep in Cyrodiil? If a new expansion comes out with a new Trial I can easily get a group to play at almost any hour I want. It's not even close to the same thing. As for running it individually, I can certainly organize 11 other players and accomplish something with my time while with 11 other players there is no guarantee that I will accomplish anything in Cyrodiil. Also, gear grinding is very different than organizing a group to try and capture a keep as not all content is equal. You should try telling someone who just purchased a Lamborghini that a car is a car; that would be a good laugh.
Sure i do compare them. Both are cases of the game not giving you the reward without you putting in the effort first.
Of course the difficulty of the said tasks may not be equal, but that is besides the point. The point is, you are not entitled to whatever a DLC introduced into the game just on the grounds of you paying for the DLC. If its the item you want, you gotta kill that boss. If it's the IC access you want, you gotta cap that keep.
(On a related note, i consider the capturing of a keep in cyrodiil to be far, far easier than running a 12 man trial. Capping a keep is trivial in comparison, especially considering half of it's potential defenders will be instead having fun inside IC. With 11 other people, you can cap a keep in under two minutes.)Edited by Sharee on August 4, 2015 6:55PM0 -
GorraShatan✭✭✭✭I'd like all factions to be able to enter simply because IC is more fun with all 3 factions in it.0 -
Hiero_Glyph✭✭✭✭✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »Hiero_Glyph wrote: »OrdainedFaun wrote: »I wholeheartedly agree that not many will want to pay for a DLC when that money does not guarantee them access to said content.
Think about it this way.
When a raid expansion comes out, does every player automatically get all the gear that can be obtained through that raid, without having to do anything? Of course not. They have to work for it first. This means players are paying for an expansion without a guarantee to ever see the items that come from that raid.
IC access is the same - you have to work for it first. The only difference is that you have to work against enemy players, instead of enemy bosses (naturally, since it is a PvP expansion).
Except you cannot individually work for IC access.
But you can individually run a raid to get raid gear?Hiero_Glyph wrote: »Worse yet, you are at the mercy of the player population so if your availability does not align with your alliance's you may never even have access despite paying for the content.
And if your availability does not align with the group that is running a raid? You will never see the gear, despite paying for the content.byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »This is wrong-footed. It's CONTENT which is gated, so it's not the same as your example.
Content is content, whether it is imperial city or gear. In both cases, you have to work for it before you can get what you desire. If you desire raid gear, you have to raid. If you desire IC access, you have to cap keeps. Same underlying principle.
Are you really trying to compare a 12-player Trial to capturing a keep in Cyrodiil? If a new expansion comes out with a new Trial I can easily get a group to play at almost any hour I want. It's not even close to the same thing. As for running it individually, I can certainly organize 11 other players and accomplish something with my time while with 11 other players there is no guarantee that I will accomplish anything in Cyrodiil. Also, gear grinding is very different than organizing a group to try and capture a keep as not all content is equal. You should try telling someone who just purchased a Lamborghini that a car is a car; that would be a good laugh.
Sure i do compare them. Both are cases of the game not giving you the reward without you putting in the effort first.
Of course the difficulty of the said tasks may not be equal, but that is besides the point. The point is, you are not entitled to whatever a DLC introduced into the game just on the grounds of you paying for the DLC.
(On a related note, i consider the capturing of a keep in cyrodiil to be far, far easier than running a 12 man trial. Capping a keep is trivial in comparison, especially considering half of it's potential defenders will be instead having fun inside IC. With 11 other people, you can cap a keep in under two minutes.)
I'm sorry but your claim is false as basic consumer laws include an expectation of service. There is a difference between needing to reach a specific point to access something like a single-player DLC and having to rely on factors outside of your control to get access. Could you imagine ordering lunch, paying for it, waiting for it to be served, then being told that they no longer have the item you requested but you can come back at a later time to try again? Of course not, it would be absurd as they would just refund your order and offer you something else instead (probably for free too).
In this case the DLC would need to explicitly detail how to gain access to the IC except that there is no guaranteed method that will work for everyone. As a result it is a huge legal mess and charge backs would be 100% allowed as ZoS has no grounds to prevent them if the customer cannot acccess the IC despite trying to fulfill the detailed conditions. The expectation of service has not been fulfilled in this case. Let's be honest, legal ramificiations are all that matter when money is involved and ZoS wouldn't have a leg to stand on if one alliance was never given access, or was severely restricted. At best players would just make new characters for a different faction and we would have a 2 Alliance War, at worst ZoS would have a class action lawsuit filled against them.2 -
I_killed_Vivec✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I_killed_Vivec wrote: »Your second point only means that there might be a switch in IC access because one successful faction has gained control of IC and therefore everyone has gone there leaving keeps undefended. However, if there is a massive numerical imbalance between factions it seems reasonable to assume that if a superior faction is booted from IC because of their failure in Cyrodiil then they will regain their position very quickly - as everyone from the lesser faction will be in IC.
So even with a flip-flop in access it is reasonable to suppose that a superior faction will have a considerably larger proportion of access to IC.
As far as i know, there is currently no such thing as being booted from IC. Once you're in, you stay in. The only thing that will remove you is you logging out in IC, and trying to log back in later while your cyrodiil pop is capped(which will drop you in PvE land).
And within a few hours you will log out or be logged out.
I imagine within 4 hours real life/eating/sleeping/work will cause most people to log out. Some people might make it into double figures, I doubt anyone will make it to 24. Might be a bit different at weekends, but not much.
If your faction gains sole control of IC then after a day you should have a free run of the place.0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »
I'm sorry but your claim is false as basic consumer laws include an expectation of service.
When you buy an expansion, do consumer laws entitle you to get the gear that expansion brings automatically, without having to enter the dungeon and kill the boss? Of course not, you would get laughed out of the court.Hiero_Glyph wrote: »There is a difference between needing to reach a specific point to access something like a single-player DLC and having to rely on factors outside of your control to get access.
You rely on a group to kill a trial boss to get gear. You rely on a group to take a keep to get IC access. Same thing.
Both of these factors are equally outside of your control.Edited by Sharee on August 4, 2015 9:22PM0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I_killed_Vivec wrote: »I_killed_Vivec wrote: »Your second point only means that there might be a switch in IC access because one successful faction has gained control of IC and therefore everyone has gone there leaving keeps undefended. However, if there is a massive numerical imbalance between factions it seems reasonable to assume that if a superior faction is booted from IC because of their failure in Cyrodiil then they will regain their position very quickly - as everyone from the lesser faction will be in IC.
So even with a flip-flop in access it is reasonable to suppose that a superior faction will have a considerably larger proportion of access to IC.
As far as i know, there is currently no such thing as being booted from IC. Once you're in, you stay in. The only thing that will remove you is you logging out in IC, and trying to log back in later while your cyrodiil pop is capped(which will drop you in PvE land).
And within a few hours you will log out or be logged out.
I imagine within 4 hours real life/eating/sleeping/work will cause most people to log out. Some people might make it into double figures, I doubt anyone will make it to 24. Might be a bit different at weekends, but not much.
If your faction gains sole control of IC then after a day you should have a free run of the place.
Logging out won't kick you out of IC. You will only get kicked out if you try to log back in while your faction is locked. And if your faction is locked, then the other faction hardly has 'free run of the place'.Edited by Sharee on August 4, 2015 9:16PM0 -
cjthibs✭✭✭✭✭
✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »I'm sorry but your claim is false as basic consumer laws include an expectation of service. There is a difference between needing to reach a specific point to access something like a single-player DLC and having to rely on factors outside of your control to get access. Could you imagine ordering lunch, paying for it, waiting for it to be served, then being told that they no longer have the item you requested but you can come back at a later time to try again? Of course not, it would be absurd as they would just refund your order and offer you something else instead (probably for free too).
In this case the DLC would need to explicitly detail how to gain access to the IC except that there is no guaranteed method that will work for everyone. As a result it is a huge legal mess and charge backs would be 100% allowed as ZoS has no grounds to prevent them if the customer cannot acccess the IC despite trying to fulfill the detailed conditions. The expectation of service has not been fulfilled in this case. Let's be honest, legal ramificiations are all that matter when money is involved and ZoS wouldn't have a leg to stand on if one alliance was never given access, or was severely restricted. At best players would just make new characters for a different faction and we would have a 2 Alliance War, at worst ZoS would have a class action lawsuit filled against them.
Dude, it's a multiplayer game.
That means to reach a certain outcome you -DO- rely on multiple players.
See what I did there? I used some context clues and reasoning. You should try it.
When you do a raid or group dungeon you also rely on other entities to reach the desired outcome. You can't gripe to ZOS about not getting your reward at the end because someone else messed up.
You are paying to play a game. Games challenge the players to complete certain objective or reach certain conditions in order to win or gain rewards. How is this any different from reaching the conditions necessary to enter the Imperial City?
There have been DLC's in the past which required the player to complete the main story before accessing the DLC and they didn't wind up with class action lawsuits. Again, this is no different.
You cannot sue a game-maker because you don't want to play the game. That's insane.1 -
k2blader✭✭✭✭✭
I thought early on the idea was sold that access to IC would be contingent on meeting certain requirements in Cyrodiil, thus making the war in Cyrodiil relevant. Given that, I thought to further the war (over IC as well as Cyrodiil) Zeni would've added great new, non-RNG gear rewards via AP/PvP quests for all classes/builds. That would've provided a nice option for people who don't want to play IC and would've given everyone an incentive to keep up the fight in Cyrodiil.
Disabling the grass may improve performance.0 -
Mawgusta✭✭✭We don't know how respawning in IC works if the factions gate is closed. I would assume, like Darkness Falls, if you don't have gate access then you respawn outside of IC. Which would leave a minimal of each closed gate faction in IC trying to get stuff done while hiding from a larger enemy.
Also if 90% AD are in IC, 10% EP and 10% DC are inside sneaking around.. That leave 90% EP to fight over opening the gate with 90% DC.. Considering faction imbalances I don't know if 90% DC is 30 player and 90% AD is 70 players... but it doesn't look good at all for DC..
And against the preaching sermon above.. DC players would be stupid to pay for content that they rarely get access too and for sure won't have enough access to it to achieve much with the ridiculous grinds IC is introducing.
1 -
AzothOTGB✭✭Anyway back to the OP I predict that the "Buff Campaigns" or since the buffs don't carry over outside Cyrodiil lets call them "Access Campaigns" will make a major comeback.
I think that is highly likely. If the Developers don't adjust the mechanism, the players will find a way to make it work to their advantage.Azoth of the Great Beyond | V14 | Ebonheart Pact | PC / NA
Guild Leader of The Dragon's Heart
Formerly of CM500 & Pride
Wabba 1.0 Certified1 -
AzothOTGB✭✭We don't know how respawning in IC works if the factions gate is closed.
I could be mistaken, but if I recall from the descriptions of the Imperial city fairly recently, it was said that if your faction loses control over access you get locked inside.
Azoth of the Great Beyond | V14 | Ebonheart Pact | PC / NA
Guild Leader of The Dragon's Heart
Formerly of CM500 & Pride
Wabba 1.0 Certified0 -
Taleof2Cities✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@ZOS_RichLambert @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_BrianWheeler
This thread is almost eight (8) pages now. Though the discussion has been good, can you tell us where this is headed so we're not speculating once we're live?
Are you sticking to the original plan for controlled access on all campaigns?
... Or has the discussion here made an influence ... could we see some tweaks to IC access that could be forthcoming (especially with the presence of buff servers)?Edited by Taleof2Cities on August 4, 2015 10:20PM0 -
Artis✭✭✭✭✭
✭OrdainedFaun wrote: »I wholeheartedly agree that not many will want to pay for a DLC when that money does not guarantee them access to said content.
Think about it this way.
When a raid expansion comes out, does every player automatically get all the gear that can be obtained through that raid, without having to do anything? Of course not. They have to work for it first. This means players are paying for an expansion without a guarantee to ever see the items that come from that raid.
IC access is the same - you have to work for it first. The only difference is that you have to work against enemy players, instead of enemy bosses (naturally, since it is a PvP expansion).
That's a bad analogy. In case of a raid expansion, everything depends on a player (or 12). Not on whether thousands of other players wanna let you see content or not.. In case of working against bosses you know FOR SURE that it is 100% possible to overcome their resistance, once you figure out what gear/strats to use in the raid. In case of working against other players there is no way to know whether you will see content in the end, because we are talking about thousands of players. Just like OP said, no matter how much you want to work for it, you can't do much by yourself if your faction is underpopulated. Besides, others work for it too and if in case of PvE it would only affect your place on leaderboards, here their effort automatically works against you. PvE raid is made so that you can complete it, PvP in Cyro is not balanced at all. Think about WoW's battlegrounds - at least there you knew you have as many players as your enemies. But you can't win a 100+ raid with a 12ppl raid.
I mean, really? Do I need to explain? Don't you see the difference?
2 -
wraith808✭✭✭✭Taleof2Cities wrote: »@ZOS_RichLambert @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_BrianWheeler
This thread is almost eight (8) pages now. Though the discussion has been good, can you tell us where this is headed so we're not speculating once we're live?
Are you sticking to the original plan for controlled access on all campaigns?
... Or has the discussion here made an influence ... could we see some tweaks to IC access that could be forthcoming (especially with the presence of buff servers)?
IC is on PTS, and they're testing a variety of access strategies. With that in mind, how could they give you anything no matter how many pages this gets up to?Quasim ibn-Muhammad - VR 12 Redguard Dragon Knight
Taladriel Vanima - VR 5 Altmer Nightblade
Ambalyo iyo Bogaadin - VR 1 Redguard Sorceror0 -
DaveMoeDee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭There is an argument here regarding getting what you pay for.
Before you pay, learn about what you are buying. If the thing you are buying properly represents itself, where is the problem?
Clearly, some people should not buy this DLC. I might be one of those people. I get the feeling I won't bother with IC for the time being, mostly because I am DC and I am skeptical that it is worth getting this DLC as DC based on player numbers.1 -
AzothOTGB✭✭What if they just combined all the campaigns into one? That way you would have enough population to take keeps no matter what.
Probably because of the lag that comes with a higher pop cap.
Azoth of the Great Beyond | V14 | Ebonheart Pact | PC / NA
Guild Leader of The Dragon's Heart
Formerly of CM500 & Pride
Wabba 1.0 Certified0 -
Hiero_Glyph✭✭✭✭✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »
I'm sorry but your claim is false as basic consumer laws include an expectation of service.
When you buy an expansion, do consumer laws entitle you to get the gear that expansion brings automatically, without having to enter the dungeon and kill the boss? Of course not, you would get laughed out of the court.Hiero_Glyph wrote: »There is a difference between needing to reach a specific point to access something like a single-player DLC and having to rely on factors outside of your control to get access.
You rely on a group to kill a trial boss to get gear. You rely on a group to take a keep to get IC access. Same thing.
Both of these factors are equally outside of your control.
I think you have confused grinding with paying for content. Yes, IC includes items that require grinding, that is not the topic of gated access nor has it ever been the point of this thread. The point of this thread is that you can purchase the IC DLC and never be given access to explore/play the IC itself. What does grinding for gear have to do with this?
No one expects items and drops to be given to them when they purchase the DLC. Has that ever been discussed in this thread? Again the point is that DC players may never be given access to IC beyond the brief period at the start of a campaign. This does not meet the expectation of service when you have to pay for said content. ZoS can simply provide campaigns with unrestricted IC access to avoid this issue and legally speaking they must do this in some form otherwise the expectation of service has not been fulfilled.
The point is that gated access is fine so long as there are methods in place to ensure that all customers have an equal opportunity to access the content that was purchased. Campaign population imbalances do not provide such an opportunity in the current live campaigns so ZoS needs to address this before release.1 -
Rescorla_ESO✭✭✭✭
The lag is supposed to be getting fixed with the changes to how the game handles AOE calculations. If that works then the server caps can be increased.
If access to IC is not tied to owning your keeps, then that will kill Cyrodil PVP pretty much completely. The PVP action in IC is more frequent and chaotic than in Cyrodil so almost everyone is going to want to be there instead of outside.
1 -
Hiero_Glyph✭✭✭✭✭Hiero_Glyph wrote: »I'm sorry but your claim is false as basic consumer laws include an expectation of service. There is a difference between needing to reach a specific point to access something like a single-player DLC and having to rely on factors outside of your control to get access. Could you imagine ordering lunch, paying for it, waiting for it to be served, then being told that they no longer have the item you requested but you can come back at a later time to try again? Of course not, it would be absurd as they would just refund your order and offer you something else instead (probably for free too).
In this case the DLC would need to explicitly detail how to gain access to the IC except that there is no guaranteed method that will work for everyone. As a result it is a huge legal mess and charge backs would be 100% allowed as ZoS has no grounds to prevent them if the customer cannot acccess the IC despite trying to fulfill the detailed conditions. The expectation of service has not been fulfilled in this case. Let's be honest, legal ramificiations are all that matter when money is involved and ZoS wouldn't have a leg to stand on if one alliance was never given access, or was severely restricted. At best players would just make new characters for a different faction and we would have a 2 Alliance War, at worst ZoS would have a class action lawsuit filled against them.
Dude, it's a multiplayer game.
That means to reach a certain outcome you -DO- rely on multiple players.
See what I did there? I used some context clues and reasoning. You should try it.
When you do a raid or group dungeon you also rely on other entities to reach the desired outcome. You can't gripe to ZOS about not getting your reward at the end because someone else messed up.
You are paying to play a game. Games challenge the players to complete certain objective or reach certain conditions in order to win or gain rewards. How is this any different from reaching the conditions necessary to enter the Imperial City?
There have been DLC's in the past which required the player to complete the main story before accessing the DLC and they didn't wind up with class action lawsuits. Again, this is no different.
You cannot sue a game-maker because you don't want to play the game. That's insane.
It is completely different as I can play the game at my own pace with the understanding that when I complete the required conditions I will always be given access to the content that was purchased. In the case of IC, DC will almost never have access beyond the start of each campaign. There is no method where a player can say 'I want to play IC', load up Cyrodiil, and be guaranteed access unless they are a part of the correct alliance, which is determined when you create a character. Besides, developers have been sued over bull shots or misrepresenting spec requirements, you don't think selling content that some players cannot play is enough to invoke false advertisement?
1 -
Artis✭✭✭✭✭
✭
You rely on a group to kill a trial boss to get gear. You rely on a group to take a keep to get IC access. Same thing.
Both of these factors are equally outside of your control.
Yeah, by the way, whenever you are fighting that boss in that trial, you ARE ALREADY doing new content. Here, people were discussing that you can't get an access to new content whatsoever. Imagine, your access to new trial is only opened when your faction's online is precisely 123321 or if it's greater than online of another faction... These are factors that don't depend on you. It doesn't even get to the point when you rely on your group. When you rely on a group it's up to the group to come up with the way of killing the boss or to replace players that can't grasp it.
2