What is the direction of this game, will PVP always be the limiting aspect of this game?

Dev

@ZOS_RichLambert, @ZOS_GinaBruno: If you could review this and perhaps advise us as to what the general direction will be.

Impact statement: The constant attempts to balance do little other then cause churn among the entire player base. Constant changes to abilities/gear/ect fail to meet the mark needed, and is evidenced by the constant posting for even more PVP changes.

Problem to solve: There is cause of concern as it seems that the enjoyment of the game for everyone is limited on what is considered 'OK' for PVP. The changes requested by PVP players are often at a level in which all players are impacted, because changes to gear and abilities have impact outside of the PVP zones. It is even rumored that a stamina equivalent of the 'witch mother's brew' could not be released for PVP reasons.

So the question is:
Should all the players of the game continue to be limited based on what the PVP audience feels we can have?
IE: Do we really need the constant changes across everything and balance everything based on PVP?

Please choose the answer you mostly identify or agree with.

Altercator

Stupid poll.

Delta1038

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

Personally I could care less what they do to PvP, TES to me will always be a single player franchise with a focus on story and roleplaying. Both of which I can do just fine in the game, if they want to make changes to PvP or not it really makes no difference to me. I only go to Cyrodiil for shards out in the world and delves within my alliances held territory and even as such if I get attacked I usually just get killed and respawn someplace and continue on my merry way.

Elsonso

I don't even consider this to be a PVP game. It is PVE, with hobby/casual PVP.

Agobi

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

pvp always screws up a good game

I would pay 10 times the sub for a decent mmo with no hint of pvp whatsoever

idk

Altercator wrote: »

Stupid poll.

I agree. @Dev clearly built a tainted poll.

Wifeaggro13

I already quit, canceled my sub, stopped buying at the cash store, and just like trolling the forums.

I quit at Tam one. Resubbed yesterday to see if any of the dumbing down and removal of roles had been addressed in group content. Ran pledges and made up my mind Eso will not be a game I enjoy ever now.

Though I don't troll the forums I will continue to post and interact with the community. I had several thousand crowns saved as I have always subbed to ESO. Sampled the crown gem ridiculousness. Even Tor had it figured out that you needed to have those elite items like mounts drop rarely in end game.

The game is now marketing to a player base that does not actually play MMO'S for the second M in MMOs. I am not that player base. They have definitely heading towards pay to win with changes to riding skills. Devaluing what you get with your sub. They are definitely in milk mode. I am disheartened in the new MMO market. Games that have been out for 12 years have managed to crank out pay for expansions. Enrich expand, add clsses, improve AA systems balance pve. Increase diffculty while keeping it fun .

All of this was done in a 24 month cycle post launch with much smaller budgets and way smaller player bases. Either Zos is working on another online project or they think the current design has longevity. Which it does not a massive portion of launch players have not ever returned and wont. They are churning the population and that won't last 5 years +. If they intend to run this model they had better start following more of the Tor model. Which has 3x the group content raids and casual barbie doll content then this does and does it way faster.

Drdeath20

Doesnt matter, this game has gone so far downhill that it is too late to fix it. i am here for my friends and the game is just background activity.

What we wanted in pvp
-giant battles-
-meaningful fights-
-build diversity-
-tactics-

What we got
-horse simulator 2000-
-meta-
-AP farming-
-seige-

Wollust

Your poll is bad

Wifeaggro13

I already quit, canceled my sub, stopped buying at the cash store, and just like trolling the forums.

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Altercator wrote: »

Stupid poll.

I agree. @Dev clearly built a tainted poll.

It is slightly tainted I do agree it's not entirely fair to the PvP population. But it is why PVE is so incredibly bad in this game for the most part.

Dev

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

Altercator wrote: »

Stupid poll.

Actually it is an actual business model for soliciting requirements in Agile projects. (dot voting in a way)

Basically you give a yes/no/both/indifferent option to see where the stakeholder would be on the level of interest. in the case of this poll, i added a second 'indifferent' as there are two very distinct reasons to be impartial: External motivation vs lost customer.

The reason i wanted this poll is to see where the game will head. While i like the game and would prefer to see it succeed, the reality is there is no enjoyment when the product keeps changing for a vocal minority.

If the management of the game wants to enforce PVP limitations on everyone, then there is no point for any non-pvp player to bother.

I do not spend money on this game to be constantly nerfed, to be limited on items, to have everything turned upside down, and to have the devs work non-stop on balance issues instead of content. Seriously the last content we got was Dark Brotherhood. Shadows of the hist, 1T and the proposed housing update have done nothing for net new content.

i feel that it is time to either tell us if this is how it will always be, or if at some point the devs can get back to working on content.

Wifeaggro13

I already quit, canceled my sub, stopped buying at the cash store, and just like trolling the forums.

Dev wrote: »

Altercator wrote: »

Stupid poll.

Actually it is an actual business model for soliciting requirements in Agile projects. (dot voting in a way)

Basically you give a yes/no/both/indifferent option to see where the stakeholder would be on the level of interest. in the case of this poll, i added a second 'indifferent' as there are two very distinct reasons to be impartial: External motivation vs lost customer.

The reason i wanted this poll is to see where the game will head. While i like the game and would prefer to see it succeed, the reality is there is no enjoyment when the product keeps changing for a vocal minority.

If the management of the game wants to enforce PVP limitations on everyone, then there is no point for any non-pvp player to bother.

I do not spend money on this game to be constantly nerfed, to be limited on items, to have everything turned upside down, and to have the devs work non-stop on balance issues instead of content. Seriously the last content we got was Dark Brotherhood. Shadows of the hist, 1T and the proposed housing update have done nothing for net new content.

i feel that it is time to either tell us if this is how it will always be, or if at some point the devs can get back to working on content.

But there sure is a ton of crown store and gem items lol

NeillMcAttack

So, by 'we' and 'everyone' you mean the purely PvE crowd!!?

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

Are you suggesting to the devs that your preference in gameplay is much more important than others because..... it's elder scrolls on the title!??? What about the 'online' part of the title!?

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?

Also, changes to abilities, sets, races and classes are to be expected in any game that runs for an extended period of time.

I enjoy all aspects of ESO. PvE, PvP, questing, dungeons, trials, group or solo content it's all ESO to me. And I appreciate the effort made towards balance and bringing things in line as to not have everyone running around with the exact same set-ups and abilities slotted ad-nauseam!

Betheny

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?!

No mob ever whined in the forum about being killed by a player's "clearly OP" attack.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

No, PVP changes should be made as necessary, but made in such a way that the changes only affect the abilities when used in PVP situations.

KICHZY

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

The Elder Scrolls identity is about adventure tied in with lore. I'm much more interested in that aspect of the game than a selected minority fighting over procs, skill %, nerf this buff that blah blah blah. PVP should always be an added bonus to the game...nothing more!

BuddyAces

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So, by 'we' and 'everyone' you mean the purely PvE crowd!!?

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

Are you suggesting to the devs that your preference in gameplay is much more important than others because..... it's elder scrolls on the title!??? What about the 'online' part of the title!?

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?

Also, changes to abilities, sets, races and classes are to be expected in any game that runs for an extended period of time.

I enjoy all aspects of ESO. PvE, PvP, questing, dungeons, trials, group or solo content it's all ESO to me. And I appreciate the effort made towards balance and bringing things in line as to not have everyone running around with the exact same set-ups and abilities slotted ad-nauseam!

It's because things get nerfed because pvp people are the single largest whiners in any mmo. If they don't whine this much then they get ignored. From day one pve and pvp should have been 2 separate entities. How any mmo can launch without separating the two these days is beyond me. Game companies really need to look at other games that have gone through these problems and seen how they fixed this problem and take note. Pvp people need to understand that unless you are playing a game made solely for pvp you will always be on the back burner.

Drdeath20

Doesnt matter, this game has gone so far downhill that it is too late to fix it. i am here for my friends and the game is just background activity.

KICHZY wrote: »

The Elder Scrolls identity is about adventure tied in with lore. I'm much more interested in that aspect of the game than a selected minority fighting of procs, skill %, nerf this buff that blah blah blah. PVP should always be an added bonus to the game...nothing more!

Exactly! It's not even that fun to begin with. Repetitive AF with no real rewards. Really just another way to keep people grinding. AP allows you to purchase golden armor and jewelry.

AlexTech0x

lordrichter wrote: »

I don't even consider this to be a PVP game. It is PVE, with hobby/casual PVP.

Because %90 of the time PvP relies on Numbers, not skill.

Dev

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So, by 'we' and 'everyone' you mean the purely PvE crowd!!?

Not quite, i meant everyone but the pure pvp player

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

Before i can really answer this, can you explain a little more?
In what ways have PVP players had to suffer?
If you mean that you have to level / get CP, that you might have to get some abilities or pieces of gear from PVE, or make build changes based on net new gear (aka not nerfs but new content): then yes, i feel those are parts of the game where everyone 'suffers'.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Are you suggesting to the devs that your preference in gameplay is much more important than others because..... it's elder scrolls on the title!??? What about the 'online' part of the title!?

Online does not equal PVP. It means that there will be internet access required and that the game is hosted in a server environment. There are plenty of online games without PVP aspects, so i am not seeing the relation.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?

While i cannot speak for every PVE player that does this, i can advise on my opinion. I prefer the 'unbalanced sets' as they allow me to PVP without having to respec. I do not want to spend x thousands of gold to respec when or if i want to PVP.

Its not a perfect system but until they release a PVE version of Cyrodil/IC, i will want something to offset the differences between a PVE build and a PVP build. I am even willing to bet that is the reason for the proc sets.

Tandor

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

Although I have no interest in it, I have no problem at all with PvP being a part of the game - as long as it does not impact on PvE through balancing changes which where required for PvP should be limited to PvP (just as the PvPers would ask for changes required for PvE no doubt) and it is preferably restricted to PvP areas or else subject to a total and unconditional opt-out in the game settings where encroaching on PvE areas and without in any way being "added" to PvE content.

Bandit1215

Maybe both? I play both equally or simply dont care what happens.

I play both but I care VERY much what happens. Right now I think pve is in a WAY better state than pvp and don't see why having ZOS focus on fixing pvp is such a bad idea for pve players. Pve gets content updates EVERY patch including ALL dlcs being pve oriented. I would disagree that pvp is a "vocal minority", because I think there are about the same amount of people who play pvp as pve.

NeillMcAttack

Betheny wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?!

No mob ever whined in the forum about being killed by a player's "clearly OP" attack.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

No, PVP changes should be made as necessary, but made in such a way that the changes only affect the abilities when used in PVP situations.

You assume that the only reason devs make changes is because people "whine". What if I told you that devs actually seek balance all by themselves. Because they have a sense of pride and accomplishment. That devs make changes for many reasons not just feedback from players. They use data and tools that can track issues down to the milliseconds to a million decimal places.

How do you feel when they Nerf challenging content? Did you complain when some dungeons were made easier? And was it due to whining? And did you know that they also buff things! Sometimes they buff things that people never even mentioned on these forums.

Your bias is showing, and PvP is the scapegoat in these arguments. If you answer one question, let it be this. Do you think the devs want balance in all aspects of the game they created and should there be consistency for players of all those aspects??

BuddyAces wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So, by 'we' and 'everyone' you mean the purely PvE crowd!!?

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

Are you suggesting to the devs that your preference in gameplay is much more important than others because..... it's elder scrolls on the title!??? What about the 'online' part of the title!?

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?

Also, changes to abilities, sets, races and classes are to be expected in any game that runs for an extended period of time.

I enjoy all aspects of ESO. PvE, PvP, questing, dungeons, trials, group or solo content it's all ESO to me. And I appreciate the effort made towards balance and bringing things in line as to not have everyone running around with the exact same set-ups and abilities slotted ad-nauseam!

It's because things get nerfed because pvp people are the single largest whiners in any mmo. If they don't whine this much then they get ignored. From day one pve and pvp should have been 2 separate entities. How any mmo can launch without separating the two these days is beyond me. Game companies really need to look at other games that have gone through these problems and seen how they fixed this problem and take note. Pvp people need to understand that unless you are playing a game made solely for pvp you will always be on the back burner.

I wouldn't say PvP players are always on the back burner because the game isn't solely PvP. I would say it's because balance patches are harder to schedule and implement because they can not be sold. And selling the product is what provides the devs their livelihoods.

And I'm not a fan of separating the two. Firstly because I don't believe that PvP is the only reason the devs feel the need to change stuff. But mainly because I really like running any combination of sets and abilities in any parts of the game I enjoy (which is most of it) and have them perform similar. I like consistency! If every ability change was made strictly to one part of the game and not the other, you may as well have sold them both seperately. And that just wouldn't work!!

Tandor

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

Bandit1215 wrote: »

I play both but I care VERY much what happens. Right now I think pve is in a WAY better state than pvp and don't see why having ZOS focus on fixing pvp is such a bad idea for pve players. Pve gets content updates EVERY patch including ALL dlcs being pve oriented. I would disagree that pvp is a "vocal minority", because I think there are about the same amount of people who play pvp as pve.

I don't think you'll find too many PvEers complaining at the concept of some love being shown towards PvP, as long as the resulting changes don't impact on PvE.

The experience with most PvE/PvP games is that the majority of people are PvEers, and there's no evidence of that not being the case here - unless you know of any, of course.

FearlessOne_2014

There is another option OP made sure to not include in his pool. Let the unbalanced sets thrive in PvE. However make the proc sets follow the Battle Spirit debuff like all of our abilities do, while in Cyrodiil or in duels.

Another option is the just get rid of Battle Spirit from reducing damage, heals, shield abilities from players. This is so player abilities can hit just as hard as the proc sets. In this case ZOS can leave the proc sets alone.

If you don't want to PvP did just don't.

News flash when I brought this game in 2014 ZOS wasn't marketing it with PvE, but with PvP. The reason is their are some of us that would love to PvP in the TES setting. There are many TES titles that are PvE in-case, just the small amount of PvP being in this game is a complete turn off for all of you PvP haters. TES V Skyrim Special Edition just released. Go play that if you are completely bothered by other players PvPing on a different map in the game you play.

There problem solved.

Wifeaggro13

I already quit, canceled my sub, stopped buying at the cash store, and just like trolling the forums.

FearlessOne_2014 wrote: »

There is another option OP made sure to not include in his pool. Let the unbalanced sets thrive in PvE. However make the proc sets follow the Battle Spirit debuff like all of our abilities do, while in Cyrodiil or in duels.

Another option is the just get rid of Battle Spirit from reducing damage, heals, shield abilities from players. This is so player abilities can hit just as hard as the proc sets. In this case ZOS can leave the proc sets alone.

If you don't want to PvP did just don't.

News flash when I brought this game in 2014 ZOS wasn't marketing it with PvE, but with PvP. The reason is their are some of us that would love to PvP in the TES setting. There are many TES titles that are PvE in-case, just the small amount of PvP being in this game is a complete turn off for all of you PvP haters. TES V Skyrim Special Edition just released. Go play that if you are completely bothered by other players PvPing on a different map in the game you play.

There problem solved.

Lol it was marketed as a game for everyone . They had a pvp trailer and a pve trailer. And just so your clear no one got to beta test Cyrodiil for a loooooong time.

Dev

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

@NeillMcAttack

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Do you think the devs want balance in all aspects of the game they created and should there be consistency for players of all those aspects??

In all seriousness: No, and not for any rude or insulting reasons. Work and play are different, and that is not how software development works.

The long version:

More to the point, i think

1. the developers (ie coders) want to close as many items in the product backlog as they can at roughly 30-35 hours of capacity per 40hr week (based on company structure, culture and meeting frequency, it could be less) This allows more stable development without added risk of burnout.
   
2. The Dev team lead / PrgM (IE: service or program owner) wants to manage the backlog based on priority, most likely based on data in spreadsheets and reports with charts. These reports are created by their BI team which probably hasn't seen a single line of the code, and may not even know which of the many internal projects the report is for.
   
   Please keep in mind that when someone asks for a report is it normally something like:
   "let me get this KPI from table 'x' and these fields from tables 'y', measured against an 'z' threshold for Red/Green on a dashboard, with or without outliers removed. also correlated for 30/60/90/180 day outlooks. Oh and by the way, i needed it last week"
   
3. The architect is looking at the big picture, and would be the most likely person to 'want' a perfect game. He is also the most likely person to have the executives asking him/her the money questions like: "What is going to the ROI, and the EVM for this, and what can you do to get it better?"
   
4. The management above that is going to be concerned with more then just the one game, and would look at this as any other program, and have only one trend of questions: Is this making me money, what can be done to have it make more, and what can we do less to reduce the current costs?
   
5. The customer service, forum mods and other 'public' figures probably have an interest in some areas but very few people would really ever be concerned about every aspect. Even if they had a 'preference', i would not expect them to risk their jobs by going against the company policy. The simple reality is that when the company says we like 'x', everyone will either embrace it or deal with the bad comments at next review.

Short version:
For everyone involved, the work they do will be based on some form of: 'must have', 'should have', 'could have' and 'would like', and the reality is there is barely enough budget to complete the 'must haves'. We are at the time when people want healthy work/life balances, and corners will be cut.

Leandor

Wow, a biased, polemic, passive aggressive, obfuscating statement wrapped in a pseudo intellectual poll.

What an unexpected turn of events!

Vaoh

Dev wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So, by 'we' and 'everyone' you mean the purely PvE crowd!!?

Not quite, i meant everyone but the pure pvp player

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

So should the "PvP crowd" suffer imbalances and inconsistency's due to catering to the "PvE crowd"??

Before i can really answer this, can you explain a little more?
In what ways have PVP players had to suffer?
If you mean that you have to level / get CP, that you might have to get some abilities or pieces of gear from PVE, or make build changes based on net new gear (aka not nerfs but new content): then yes, i feel those are parts of the game where everyone 'suffers'.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Are you suggesting to the devs that your preference in gameplay is much more important than others because..... it's elder scrolls on the title!??? What about the 'online' part of the title!?

Online does not equal PVP. It means that there will be internet access required and that the game is hosted in a server environment. There are plenty of online games without PVP aspects, so i am not seeing the relation.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Are you not aware that often changes are made because PvE players also gravitate towards particular builds and sets because they are unbalanced!?

While i cannot speak for every PVE player that does this, i can advise on my opinion. I prefer the 'unbalanced sets' as they allow me to PVP without having to respec. I do not want to spend x thousands of gold to respec when or if i want to PVP.

Its not a perfect system but until they release a PVE version of Cyrodil/IC, i will want something to offset the differences between a PVE build and a PVP build. I am even willing to bet that is the reason for the proc sets.

Quite the solution.

Dev 1: "Hey guys! Pure-PvE players are complaining they suck too much in Cyrodiil. What do we do?"

Dev 2: "Hmm.... easy. Just add in these OP proc sets and incentivize 90% of the PvP playerbase to quit."

Dev 1: "You're a genius! Sounds like a plan."

And the saddest part is this actually happened.

Sogreth

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

Dev wrote: »

So the question is:
Should all the players of the game continue to be limited based on what the PVP audience feels we can have?
IE: Do we really need the constant changes across everything and balance everything based on PVP?

I don't really understand why this is even an issue. PvP happens in instanced places, correct?

Why can't they put in certain buffs/nerfs/whatever that are ONLY applied in those PvP zones? Why should PvE suffer all these changes? For example, Dodge Roll. There is a debuff placed on you after you roll, so if you roll again, it used even more Stamina, and from what I was told, this was added because of balancing issues in PvP.

Why not just have this debuff only applied in PvP areas?

When I think of the PvE and PvP worlds like this, the only thing I can think of is World of Warcraft. They have a system in place that when you join PvP battlegrounds and Arenas, you gain access to special PvP talents, that have no effect on your PvE play. ALSO, they have certain stat increases/decreases based on which specialization you play for PvP. Why can't ESO do something like that?

Altercator wrote: »

Stupid poll.

You sure it's the poll....?

Dev wrote: »

If the management of the game wants to enforce PVP limitations on everyone, then there is no point for any non-pvp player to bother.

One of the reasons ArcheAge didn't do as well as it should have. It's a forced PvP game. Once you hit lv30, you literally don't have a choice. You can try and avoid it, but you're always in danger of being forced into PvP, that includes members of your own faction.

QUEZ420

No, Elder Scrolls as a franchise, is PVE. It should not be limited due to a vocal minority, and PVP related changes should be limited to PVP only.

Elder Scrolls is pve, alwayz has been. If u want balanced competitive pvp look elsewhere.

Eirella

QUEZ420 wrote: »

Elder Scrolls is pve, alwayz has been. If u want balanced competitive pvp look elsewhere.

Except this is Elder Scrolls ONLINE, an MMO, and it does have PVP. PVP balances will happen whether you like it or not