Is PvP really the best aspect of ESO?

Dubhliam

According to pcgamer.com, ESO has one of the best PvP in MMOs.
There were also other categories where ESO is nowhere to be found:
the best story-focused MMOs ,
the best sandbox MMOs,
the best "theme park" MMOs,

Playing ESO for quite a while now, I believe ZOS focuses far too much on other aspects of the game (like story) and fails to see that they have a gem in their pocket that they can cash in.
The decision to scrap PvP Justice might or might not be relevant to the whole "best PvP MMO" discussion, but it certainly does show their priorities.

Even when they left their PvP part of the game to wither for such a long time, leaving it in poor balance, horrible lag, exploiting and in the end blatant cheating, it still managed to get distinguished among so many other MMOs.
Imagine what would have become of ESO if PvP was nurtured and catered from the beginning. If the story of each DLC was supporting the idea of an ongoing war, instead of just ignoring it as just a separate part of the game.
If I get recognized by some NPCs as a savior of some sorry village, why do my feats in Cyrodill go unnoticed? Why does no NPC acknowledge my Alliance rank or recognizes me as a former emperor? Apart from Clivia in WGT, kudos for that.

ZOS, you better start treating PvP as a part of your game (and the best part, if I might add) before ESO's PvP gets outshadowed by some new and more exciting MMO.
You just might make ESO PvP something every MMO player would like to be a part of.

Phinix1

Just a few thoughts...

Not every game has to force PVP onto PVE whether PVE players want it or not.

More players prefer PVE-centric to PVP-centric in MMO's universally across all studies that have been done. A few Google searches will confirm this.

This is an Elder Scrolls game FIRST. Arbitrarily inserting a PVP focus would subtract from those elements and the developers rightly decided the weight of the genre was more important than chasing trendy PVP gimmicks.

PVP in ESO is fine. There are two entire zones (massive Cyrodiil and an entire DLC Imperial Sewers) devoted to PVP. No need to force it on the PVE zones.

A game can do both PVE and PVP well, AND keep them separate. I feel ESO strikes a good balance at that.

Rohamad_Ali

I agree ESO has the best setup for PvP but it's broken from neglect and exploitation . Needs a lot of maintaining .

Dubhliam

Phinix1 wrote: »

Just a few thoughts...

Not every game has to force PVP onto PVE whether PVE players want it or not.

More players prefer PVE-centric to PVP-centric in MMO's universally across all studies that have been done. A few Google searches will confirm this.

This is an Elder Scrolls game FIRST. Arbitrarily inserting a PVP focus would subtract from those elements and the developers rightly decided the weight of the genre was more important than chasing trendy PVP gimmicks.

PVP in ESO is fine. There are two entire zones (massive Cyrodiil and an entire DLC Imperial Sewers) devoted to PVP. No need to force it on the PVE zones.

A game can do both PVE and PVP well, AND keep them separate. I feel ESO strikes a good balance at that.

Nobody here is "forcing" anything. Stop using that word in defense against something that is no threat at all.

I am simply saying ZOS should stop burying the PvP content out of player's sight.
If any NPC mentions that there is an alliance war going on, he is most definitely a vanilla NPC (exists since the launch of ESO).

At a certain point (I believe it coincides with the cheat prevention update - where Cyrodill performance suffered greatly) they simply abandoned PvP completely and started focusing mosty on PvE and story aspects of the game.
And don't throw IC DLC in my face, it was in the works long before the game even launched, I was surprised it was not included in the vanilla game.

sadownik

For me ESO is pvp game with unwanted addition of hundreds upon hundreds of fully voiced fetch quests.

PvE apart from group content is extremely boring, artificially prolonged to the point when i think of leveling my last class - templar at lvl 11 ... i just cant.

Tried doing it lately but after one quest of immerisive "oh, trouble! Go activate those 3 shrines, great now go press those 4 buttons, superb - here is your half turnip - just dont spend it all at once" i returned to laggy, in many points broken pvp.

Nemeliom

I love pvp on ESO. Of course I would en Joy it more without cheaters/lag, but even with those I get tons of fun doing pvp.

Stoltverd

Phinix1 wrote: »

Just a few thoughts...

Not every game has to force PVP onto PVE whether PVE players want it or not.

More players prefer PVE-centric to PVP-centric in MMO's universally across all studies that have been done. A few Google searches will confirm this.

This is an Elder Scrolls game FIRST. Arbitrarily inserting a PVP focus would subtract from those elements and the developers rightly decided the weight of the genre was more important than chasing trendy PVP gimmicks.

PVP in ESO is fine. There are two entire zones (massive Cyrodiil and an entire DLC Imperial Sewers) devoted to PVP. No need to force it on the PVE zones.

A game can do both PVE and PVP well, AND keep them separate. I feel ESO strikes a good balance at that.

I agree... And they are forcing it into us PvE players with the indicators.

dtm_samuraib16_ESO

Yes, and I said it before, it's a PvP game with a tad of PvE.
Hence I said: separate PvP to a different server and fix up ESO.

Luigi_Vampa

Phinix1 wrote: »

Just a few thoughts...

Not every game has to force PVP onto PVE whether PVE players want it or not.

More players prefer PVE-centric to PVP-centric in MMO's universally across all studies that have been done. A few Google searches will confirm this.

This is an Elder Scrolls game FIRST. Arbitrarily inserting a PVP focus would subtract from those elements and the developers rightly decided the weight of the genre was more important than chasing trendy PVP gimmicks.

PVP in ESO is fine. There are two entire zones (massive Cyrodiil and an entire DLC Imperial Sewers) devoted to PVP. No need to force it on the PVE zones.

A game can do both PVE and PVP well, AND keep them separate. I feel ESO strikes a good balance at that.

Chasing trendy PvP gimmicks? Like what? PvP requires very little compared to PvE. PvP players, besides IC (which was more PvE than PvP) have been playing the same content since launch.

Danikat

Well ESO obviously wasn't going to be featured in the 'best sandbox MMOs' category because it's not a sandbox MMO. So that one's irrelevant to the discussion.

It could have been a contender for the other two. But most of the time these things simply come down to the writers personal opinion and a few contributing factors. For example there aren't any repeats in this list - each MMO is only in one category. So it could be as simple as he wanted to include ESO, PvP was his personal favourite part (or the part he thought was most interesting to write about) and so that's the list he put it in. Or it could be a marketing decision. I doubt anyone would be surprised to hear an Elder Scrolls game has a great story, but great PvP is more unexpected and therefore more likely to draw attention (as it has, this topic being an example) and get people reading the article (or at least clicking the link which is what counts these days).

As for why there's been more PvE focused DLC so far I suspect it's a combination of two things: 1) all of the DLC we've had was planned before launch, they've been talking about adding the Dark Brotherhood as long as they've been talking about adding the Imperial City, so they've just been releasing what they had ideas for.
2) IC was not particularly well received when it was released. There was a lot of complaining from both PvPers and PvErs so that may have made them wary of releasing any more PvP focused content. Especially since any time they do anything PvPers shout at them for not fixing the lag in Cyrodiil first.

Nestor

dtm_samuraib16_ESO wrote: »

Yes, and I said it before, it's a PvP game with a tad of PvE.
Hence I said: separate PvP to a different server and fix up ESO.

From my point of view, it is a PvE game with some PvP over in that zone that is not easy to get to.

Which is really the underlying magic that needs to be nurtured and developed to make this game truly legendary, in that people can play the way they want. You can play against, or with, or without, other players.

RebornV3x

The PVE in this game is pretty boring and super easy I don't believe I died questing tell I got to Craglorn and most of the questing in this game can be done solo. Most of the NPCs are bland, the world for the most part doesn't change based on your actions and almost every quest is a fetch quest if this game would embrace its M rating it could be good as well really liked Orsinium's questline since it was a little darker but thats about it the PVP is what keeps TESO alive and its sad to see Zenimax neglect it.

Bananko

Mmm... PvE!

Leslannister

RebornV3x wrote: »

The PVE in this game is pretty boring and super easy I don't believe I died questing tell I got to Craglorn and most of the questing in this game can be done solo. Most of the NPCs are bland, the world for the most part doesn't change based on your actions and almost every quest is a fetch quest if this game would embrace its M rating it could be good as well really liked Orsinium's questline since it was a little darker but thats about it the PVP is what keeps TESO alive and its sad to see Zenimax neglect it.

Omg, have you played WoW? Questing in ESO is way way better then WOW's ... I'm not much into questing either way but it honestly seems as good as it gets in ESO.

Chori

The PvP in this game used to be better, I haven't played the other TOP MMO's as for now aside of BDO but I cant even imagine how poor their performance must be to have ESO called the best among several other titles. This game lacks performance, bya big margin.


Thing about ESO is the link to previous elder scrolls titles, the elder scrolls saga will always bring here a lot of players who fell in love with the lore and the beautiful views in terms of map design that Bethesda was able to bring to the table, a catching story on the backgroun and the ability to do whatever you wanted on an open world game.

Also lets not forget the fact it is now a multiplayer which adds another ingredient to the bowl, the fact you can interact with other people. Social side of a multiplayer game is always a deciding factor when it comes to its success.

I cant lie though, I really really miss NPC's telling me "Never should of come here!" or "I used to be an adventurer like you..." yada yada. Or closing portals on Oblivion even...

ESO lacks the inmersion Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim has; but it has the multiplayer aspect and PvP side to try to make up for it.

Tandor

Dubhliam wrote: »

Phinix1 wrote: »

Just a few thoughts...

Not every game has to force PVP onto PVE whether PVE players want it or not.

More players prefer PVE-centric to PVP-centric in MMO's universally across all studies that have been done. A few Google searches will confirm this.

This is an Elder Scrolls game FIRST. Arbitrarily inserting a PVP focus would subtract from those elements and the developers rightly decided the weight of the genre was more important than chasing trendy PVP gimmicks.

PVP in ESO is fine. There are two entire zones (massive Cyrodiil and an entire DLC Imperial Sewers) devoted to PVP. No need to force it on the PVE zones.

A game can do both PVE and PVP well, AND keep them separate. I feel ESO strikes a good balance at that.

...Nobody here is "forcing" anything. Stop using that word in defense against something that is no threat at all...

Sorry but that is precisely what the PvP element of the Justice System (referred to in your original post) was designed to do. If anyone wanted to participate fully in the PvE part then they were going to be forced into PvP. We saw with IC how unpopular the mixing of PvP and PvE tends to be and I support ZOS announcing that they will keep both playstyles separate in future. I'm all for them adding more PvP as long as it doesn't impact adversely on PvE. There's plenty of scope in the game for both, but they should be kept separate.

MightyBantam34

It's okay but it has so much potential that for one reason or another has not Been brought to life , for me a another map choice for a 7 day campaign would be nice,could be fought in some distant land ...could even get rid of the 3 factions ...a mercanary war 4 sides or 2.
Keep the 30 day campaign cyrodil..IC
Battle grounds
Just my 2 pence worth

RebornV3x

I think the problem I have is that it was too easy I blew through most of the quests with no problem so maybe I wasn't really engaged.. I do like the Orsinuim DLC that was fantastic memorable characters, cool story, nice visuals so thats something.

Vaoh

No...... No no no! Absolutely not!!!!

If I played strictly for PvP I would have left a long time ago due to the horrific performance (lag!) and Dev credibility/intelligence regarding Cyrodiil class imbalances.

PvE has been the focus, and imo it is noticeable.

At least for me PvE brings more joy in general to the game.

ArchMikem

No.

"Best" is relative to the player. I DESPISE PvP because of how crap I am to the Easymode Vampire Nightblades. However I get my kicks off of the PvE Narrative.

Others would completely disagree with me. That's just how they are, and this is just how I am.

Luigi_Vampa

Tandor wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

Phinix1 wrote: »

Just a few thoughts...

Not every game has to force PVP onto PVE whether PVE players want it or not.

More players prefer PVE-centric to PVP-centric in MMO's universally across all studies that have been done. A few Google searches will confirm this.

This is an Elder Scrolls game FIRST. Arbitrarily inserting a PVP focus would subtract from those elements and the developers rightly decided the weight of the genre was more important than chasing trendy PVP gimmicks.

PVP in ESO is fine. There are two entire zones (massive Cyrodiil and an entire DLC Imperial Sewers) devoted to PVP. No need to force it on the PVE zones.

A game can do both PVE and PVP well, AND keep them separate. I feel ESO strikes a good balance at that.

...Nobody here is "forcing" anything. Stop using that word in defense against something that is no threat at all...

Sorry but that is precisely what the PvP element of the Justice System (referred to in your original post) was designed to do. If anyone wanted to participate fully in the PvE part then they were going to be forced into PvP. We saw with IC how unpopular the mixing of PvP and PvE tends to be and I support ZOS announcing that they will keep both playstyles separate in future. I'm all for them adding more PvP as long as it doesn't impact adversely on PvE. There's plenty of scope in the game for both, but they should be kept separate.

All they would have had to do is add a toggle. No need to force people into anything.

MaxwellC

No it's a huge lag storm I've been kicked over 10 times from the game due to so much lag. I'm trying to catch up to a person who was emperor when the campaign reset so he was able to get a massive lead + according to him he's been up since Wednesday morning... I did cut the lead to 160k AP but man he's still on so it's even harder with all these game kicks.

Cinnamon_Spider

The PVE in this game is easy and mostly boring. There used to be challenging content, but it's been nerfed too much.

I logged in after a few months of not playing and did a few vet dungeons before I realized I was missing a mundus and didn't spend my cp. It is so easy that content meant for 160 cp can be done without any.

Too bad the PVP is a frustrating buggy mess.

driosketch

I mean it definitely has the foundation of great action based sword and magic pvp. Could use a lot of love, but it's still enjoyable enough to put up with so many issues.

Mojmir

Both aspects of the game lack serious objectives and end game content.pvp is map flipping,pve is map finishing.

dtm_samuraib16_ESO

Nestor wrote: »

dtm_samuraib16_ESO wrote: »

Yes, and I said it before, it's a PvP game with a tad of PvE.
Hence I said: separate PvP to a different server and fix up ESO.

From my point of view, it is a PvE game with some PvP over in that zone that is not easy to get to.

Which is really the underlying magic that needs to be nurtured and developed to make this game truly legendary, in that people can play the way they want. You can play against, or with, or without, other players.

'scuse me, but what game are you playing?
I click 2 buttons, and voila, I am in PvP hell.
Not THAT hard, is it? XD

But, look at how many PvP vs how many that PvE.

Also, then entire thing is wrapped around PvP, the ENTIRE system.
EVERY "balance" change is for... PvP, EXACTLY.

So, with all due respect... come again?

Florial

Tandor wrote: »

Sorry but that is precisely what the PvP element of the Justice System (referred to in your original post) was designed to do. If anyone wanted to participate fully in the PvE part then they were going to be forced into PvP. We saw with IC how unpopular the mixing of PvP and PvE tends to be and I support ZOS announcing that they will keep both playstyles separate in future. I'm all for them adding more PvP as long as it doesn't impact adversely on PvE. There's plenty of scope in the game for both, but they should be kept separate.

Absolutely agree with you 100%. Mixing of two playstyles just leads to angst and hard feelings. I'm all for improving PvP and adding more content, cleaning up lag, etc. Please don't impact my PvE game play. I just want to play in peace and not have to look over my shoulder or wonder what mischief the griefers have in store for me.

There are plenty of PvP focused games out there. As much as I crave a sandbox game, non consensual PvP isn't my thing. If you want to see a train wreak in progress, go over and read the Black Desert forums. As much as I enjoyed the life skills in that game, the whole PvP element left me with a sour taste. Right now the mass slaughtering of players who just want to horse train or fish in peace isn't my idea of fun. The big controversy right now is over no exp loss when you are PKed. The amount of drama in that game is over the top. That is why I'm back to playing ESO. (Plus the absolutely vile toxic community in BDO).

If ZOS indeed mixed the two elements to a large extent hampering my enjoyment in the game, I would jump ship. Not signed up to a PvP game although I do PvP on occasion---at my own pace.

Vercingetorix

PvE is the actual game. PvP is side-dish content and is frequently associated with toxic, childish whining about nerfs and changes - all without regard to its impact on the majority of the game. PvP should be removed from ESO.

Competitive multiplayer always ruins games in the long run because it is human nature (sadly) to hate, destroy, and revel in the misery of others. Cooperative Multiplayer is far more friendly and encourages the very opposite of PvP - teamwork: helping each other to collectively achieve a goal, instead of tearing each other apart like bratty children over a f*** percentage.

Junipus

Dubhliam wrote: »

According to pcgamer.com, ESO has one of the best PvP in MMOs.

PC Gamer, the only site that rates games based on pre-beta cinematic footage.

I'd rather trust a PvP review from the Onion.

Phinix1

Dubhliam wrote: »

Nobody here is "forcing" anything.

Typhoios wrote: »

Chasing trendy PvP gimmicks?

I don't know if you remember, but a year or so back the whole concept of a "justice system" became one of those trendy marketing hooks for a while. Every new MMO coming out was blurbing about it on their con booths.

Know what happens almost universally when introducing PVP integration into open PVE environments (with the exception of SEPARATE PVP servers where people CHOOSE to play there)? It flops. Want to know why? PEOPLE RUIN IT.

It is a sad fact that a lot of people simply live to find new and even illegal (to the TOS) ways to grief and cheat other players. It's the whole reason they play. It gives them a thrill somehow. I don't pretend to understand WHY people are like that, but the end result is always the same. The game goes to hell.

If a system can be exploited griefers WILL exploit it. Look at Cyrodil Look at any game where no-choice (didn't say forced!) open world PVP is a thing. People with time to grind or credit card ultimates to spam gain a ridiculous unfair advantage then set about camping PVE content like quest givers and crafting hubs and kill defenseless lowbies all day, preventing them from accessing and enjoying content they pay for.

I'm not saying a PVP system has to support that, which is why I believe it should ALWAYS be kept separate from PVE, especially in a ROLE PLAY-centric game like the Elder Scrolls franchise.

And before someone trots out that old cliche about how "PVP people are forced to PVE" let me explain the difference. NPC's don't grief you and camp you at quest and crafting hubs and spawn gank you. PVE content doesn't conspire to prevent you from enjoying the content you paid for. It doesn't because they are robots not people, and unless programmed to, robots don't have that psychological need to be a jerk to other people.

I agree that ZOS should continue perma-banning exploiters, improve detection to do so, and generally resolve the many outstanding issues in Cyrodil (lag, balance, etc.) If that is the suggestion than of course I support it. I doubt anyone would argue "no, those PVP players deserve to suffer, make Cyrodil even worse!" All aspects of the game deserve to be maintained and expanded upon.

So long as that expansion doesn't encroach on the PVE experience. I have had enough of bored kids with too much time on their hands grinding out overpowered characters to grief lowbies.

Let that cancer die a quick and silent death on some grindy pay-to-win Korean MMO.

Luigi_Vampa

Phinix1 wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

Nobody here is "forcing" anything.

Typhoios wrote: »

Chasing trendy PvP gimmicks?

I don't know if you remember, but a year or so back the whole concept of a "justice system" became one of those trendy marketing hooks for a while. Every new MMO coming out was blurbing about it on their con booths.

Know what happens almost universally when introducing PVP integration into open PVE environments (with the exception of SEPARATE PVP servers where people CHOOSE to play there)? It flops. Want to know why? PEOPLE RUIN IT.

It is a sad fact that a lot of people simply live to find new and even illegal (to the TOS) ways to grief and cheat other players. It's the whole reason they play. It gives them a thrill somehow. I don't pretend to understand WHY people are like that, but the end result is always the same. The game goes to hell.

If a system can be exploited griefers WILL exploit it. Look at Cyrodil Look at any game where no-choice (didn't say forced!) open world PVP is a thing. People with time to grind or credit card ultimates to spam gain a ridiculous unfair advantage then set about camping PVE content like quest givers and crafting hubs and kill defenseless lowbies all day, preventing them from accessing and enjoying content they pay for.

I'm not saying a PVP system has to support that, which is why I believe it should ALWAYS be kept separate from PVE, especially in a ROLE PLAY-centric game like the Elder Scrolls franchise.

And before someone trots out that old cliche about how "PVP people are forced to PVE" let me explain the difference. NPC's don't grief you and camp you at quest and crafting hubs and spawn gank you. PVE content doesn't conspire to prevent you from enjoying the content you paid for. It doesn't because they are robots not people, and unless programmed to, robots don't have that psychological need to be a jerk to other people.

I agree that ZOS should continue perma-banning exploiters, improve detection to do so, and generally resolve the many outstanding issues in Cyrodil (lag, balance, etc.) If that is the suggestion than of course I support it. I doubt anyone would argue "no, those PVP players deserve to suffer, make Cyrodil even worse!" All aspects of the game deserve to be maintained and expanded upon.

So long as that expansion doesn't encroach on the PVE experience. I have had enough of bored kids with too much time on their hands grinding out overpowered characters to grief lowbies.

Let that cancer die a quick and silent death on some grindy pay-to-win Korean MMO.

Isn't everything you mentioned nullified by a toggle option? Want to quest and steal in peace? Keep PvP toggled off (it should be off by default). Tired of robbing and killing predictable and wimpy npcs, toggle PvP on and see how good of a criminal you are.

If we add these things there shouldn't be a problem. For one, you shouldn't be attacked unless you have a bounty, and two, if you have PvP toggled off you can enjoy the justice system in peace. No one of any importance from ZOS ever mentioned open world PvP where you could kill anyone for no reason. It was always tied to Enforcers vs Criminals. No bounty; no PvP. And a toggle option for those that don't want PvP.