Do people not realise this game is a MMO foremost?

Nemesis7884

while i enjoy the mmo aspects of the game at times...i think in certain aspects the game might have become too much a generic mmo and would do well to move the needle back again a bit towards being an elder scrolls game...

Narvuntien

I am also a bit of an introvert. I joined a bunch of guilds (trader guild originally) and I really enjoyed myself chatting in-game and of course, finding people to run dungeons and trails etc.

however, I hate going onto discord while I am in-game, having people chattering in my ear while I play sounds awful. I will only go on discord for trails.

Tigerseye

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

Ohtimbar wrote: »

I have a lot of problems with the game, but I appreciate being free to group or not when and if I choose. I'd like to see it taken much further, actually. It's based on the bloody Elder Scrolls after all, a formerly premiere single player arpg, so no surprise a lot of lone wolves are roaming about.

At the end of the day if people only want to play alone then just play any of the older games (or new solo player games). If they don't put group content in this game what is the actual purpose to have it be an online game where others are around? I never get the argument of "the older games were all single player" because that argument can be used about most games that turn to mmo. Final fantasy put out 10 games before ff11 online released and still continue to put out solo games.

What if they enjoy the social aspect of seeing other players around them and/or of being in guilds, but they don't enjoy the social pressure of doing group content?

Even if the devs did still see this as an MMO, that wouldn't have to mean people are forced to do group content to play it.

MMO just means Massively Multiplayer Online game.

No part of that definition says, or implies, people are forced to group up.

Personally, I like grouping up, sometimes, especially with random people - my favourite part of WoW was LFR - but, not everyone is like that.

Langdon64

MMO=Me.Myself.Only.?

Anotherone773

VaranisArano wrote: »

My gripe is that putting a connected storyline (even tangentially) behind DLC dungeons that don't unlock until level 45 makes it impossible for new players to do the storyline chronologically. The Prologue quests do the same thing - Elsweyr Prologue was terrible for anyone who started as a new player with the Chapter, cutting them out of the literal reason for the main conflict of the Chapter.

The practice of making a new tutorial for the newest Chapter is a great marketing strategy, but its awful in the context of a Year-Long Story.

The Q3 DLC dungeons did it right - "these are stories that happen at the same time as the Chapter, but have no connection to the plot".


Just because this is an MMO doesn't negate the fact that its also an RPG. I wish ZOS took greater care with its story.

Edited: there's already a big, active thread discussing this. I'm not sure why we needed another one. https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/508529/my-biggest-gripe-about-dark-heart-story-in-group-dlc

Except....
1) Its very possible to get above level 45 in a weekend, even for a new players and in a couple of weeks definitely.
2) Nothing says you have to start the chapter story before the DLC story if the chapter story is released.
3) I would hope a logical person would do what i do and have a character specifically for playing through storylines. I only play on that character if im in the mood to listen to dialogue and have the mental capacity to follow stories. All other characters i play practically leveling skill lines i need blowing through dungeons and quests for skill points and other such things.


I think the problem is people cant logically problem solve on their own anymore and expect everything to be spoonfed to them.

haelene wrote: »

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

At the end of the day if people only want to play alone then just play any of the older games (or new solo player games).

I like having options, including solo'ing. Sometimes I want to play this game solo - other times with my wife, other times with a larger group. I think an MMO that offers options that fulfill all of those moods and player types is ultimately more successful anyways because it can draw in more people and keep those people playing longer. More people spending more valuable time in game means a more financially stable game, which is - at the end of the day - better for everyone.

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

Narvuntien wrote: »

I am also a bit of an introvert. I joined a bunch of guilds (trader guild originally) and I really enjoyed myself chatting in-game and of course, finding people to run dungeons and trails etc.

however, I hate going onto discord while I am in-game, having people chattering in my ear while I play sounds awful. I will only go on discord for trails.

I to hate having to listen to people on voice while im playing. Its one thing i hated about my time in Eve Online. Having to listen to people nonstop talking on the mic, or yelling or screaming at other people, or trying to act like they were some 4 star general. I dont see a need for it outside of PVP though, so i refuse to use voice in PVE. NPCs do the same things all the time, so no need for voice in trials/raids... unless you just like to hear people talk... or yourself.

Olauron

iiYuki wrote: »

would you even be playing it if it wasn't called The ELDER SCROLLS Online

Short answer: definitely not.
Long answer: why would I even care to look at it if it wasn't called The Elder Scrolls?

Faulgor

My trouble with this is, MMOs should offer content for any group size, even 1.
But all we get are 4 player group instanced dungeons when the ones we have are already deserted most of the time.

I can't count the number of times where we couldn't get a full group together for a dungeon (and the GF didn't help), or the group was already full and somebody (usually me) was left behind. That is not a fun "multiplayer" experience.

Why can't they make endgame PvE content for 1-3 or 5-11 people?

TX12001rwb17_ESO

It may be an MMO but it is also an Eder Scrolls game.

What comes first in the name? Elder Scrolls or Online?

jcm2606

Dusk_Coven wrote: »

Yes it is an MMO. And like another successful MMO, Path of Exile, all story content must be PvE SOLO-able.
It's not a new idea. SWTOR has been doing it for years. ZOS is obviously doing it all wrong, completely behind the times.

Only traders need the Massively Multiplayer part on all the time, to swindle other players with overpriced goods that can be bought more cheaply from an NPC vendor. Without a huge population of suckers, they can't make their millions.

Except Path of Exile is not an MMO, it's an online action RPG.

Ohtimbar

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

Ohtimbar wrote: »

I have a lot of problems with the game, but I appreciate being free to group or not when and if I choose. I'd like to see it taken much further, actually. It's based on the bloody Elder Scrolls after all, a formerly premiere single player arpg, so no surprise a lot of lone wolves are roaming about.

At the end of the day if people only want to play alone then just play any of the older games (or new solo player games). If they don't put group content in this game what is the actual purpose to have it be an online game where others are around? I never get the argument of "the older games were all single player" because that argument can be used about most games that turn to mmo. Final fantasy put out 10 games before ff11 online released and still continue to put out solo games.

It’s not a difficult concept. Group or not, as you please. Many do both at different times. It’s no different from drop-in multiplayer in countless other titles across several genres. Seems to me some folks simply cannot fathom that others have different tastes than themselves.

Iccotak

perhaps once ZOS gets a larger crew they can release more than two zones per-year and/or extend the year long story to two years instead of one (but I think one year is fine)

If dungeon DLCs were included with story zones allowing both New & Vet players to experience a full story - Vets just get extra juice.

mague

I have nothing against dungeons. I dont like the social hickups an the materialism connected to them, but it doesnt matter to me really.

However, MMO is not MGO (Massive Grouping Online). MMO just means you share the world with others.

SirAxen

Dusk_Coven wrote: »

Yes it is an MMO. And like another successful MMO, Path of Exile, all story content must be PvE SOLO-able.
It's not a new idea. SWTOR has been doing it for years. ZOS is obviously doing it all wrong, completely behind the times.

Only traders need the Massively Multiplayer part on all the time, to swindle other players with overpriced goods that can be bought more cheaply from an NPC vendor. Without a huge population of suckers, they can't make their millions.

The day they introduce story mode dungeons and trials is the day you know ESO is now in maintenance mode and should move on.

LadyNalcarya

I'm surprised how many people are not even willing to give group content a try.
When I bought ESO, I thought I would just play it for the story and won't talk to other people. Ended up meeting a lot of amazing people and clearing dlc vet hardmode stuff. I mean, this might be not for everyone, but cooperating with a couple of likeminded people is not so hard, there's a lot of lore fans and roleplayers who would not just rush through the dungeon.

LadyNalcarya

VaranisArano wrote: »

My gripe is that putting a connected storyline (even tangentially) behind DLC dungeons that don't unlock until level 45 makes it impossible for new players to do the storyline chronologically. The Prologue quests do the same thing - Elsweyr Prologue was terrible for anyone who started as a new player with the Chapter, cutting them out of the literal reason for the main conflict of the Chapter.

Incorrect. Lvl 45 thing only applies to group finder, and if you want to listen to the quest, using it would not be a good idea anyway.
Also, to do storyline chronologically you'd have to do at least the main quest (to meet Lyris).

haelene

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

LadyNalcarya

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

EIGHTS

Not everyone plays ESO speaks in English. We can't read English as fast as native speakers.
Do you really want to wait someone takes very long time to understand the stories in the dungeons?

I think ESO needs difficult setting. Give people the option to play by themselves or join a group.

haelene

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

What are you talking about? Everything but pieces of the main quest can be done in a group. Having a story mode does not mean getting rid of regular dungeon mode or creating less options for people who like multiplayer. It would still be there for you to group up. It does not have to be one or the other, it can be both?

Zer0_CooL

iiYuki wrote: »

Here's the answer. Just queue like everyone else,...

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/154869/grouping-tool[/url]

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5792966#Comment_5792966

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/258631/group-tool-is-hilarious

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/6427874#Comment_6427874

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/447529/group-tool-havent-been-working-in-half-a-year

and so on...

LadyNalcarya

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

What are you talking about? Everything but pieces of the main quest can be done in a group. Having a story mode does not mean getting rid of regular dungeon mode or creating less options for people who like multiplayer. It would still be there for you to group up. It does not have to be one or the other, it can be both?

It can be done in group, yeah, but it's very obviously balanced around one player. I can be in group with someone when doing crafting writs but it doesnt mean that crafting is a group activity.
Making solo mode for dungeons is not easy. They would need to completely rebalance the whole thing, remove group mechanics, mechanics that require tanks/healers etc. That's a lot of work, especially in the newer dlc dungeons.

LadyNalcarya

Zer0_CooL wrote: »

iiYuki wrote: »

Here's the answer. Just queue like everyone else,...

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/154869/grouping-tool[/url]

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5792966#Comment_5792966

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/258631/group-tool-is-hilarious

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/6427874#Comment_6427874

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/447529/group-tool-havent-been-working-in-half-a-year

and so on...

Guild finder is a thing... There are tons of casual/rp guilds.

drkfrontiers

Hook me up ingame @drkfrontiers (EU server) - I will me more than happy to help you complete any dungeon and give you time to enjoy the storyline found in each. Also I am happy to stay grouped while you explore any pots, chests etc in any dungeon. We are a team of adventurers after all!

haelene

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

What are you talking about? Everything but pieces of the main quest can be done in a group. Having a story mode does not mean getting rid of regular dungeon mode or creating less options for people who like multiplayer. It would still be there for you to group up. It does not have to be one or the other, it can be both?

It can be done in group, yeah, but it's very obviously balanced around one player. I can be in group with someone when doing crafting writs but it doesnt mean that crafting is a group activity.
Making solo mode for dungeons is not easy. They would need to completely rebalance the whole thing, remove group mechanics, mechanics that require tanks/healers etc. That's a lot of work, especially in the newer dlc dungeons.

Crafting is a weird and pointless example, given it's solo in every MMO. Being balanced around one player doesn't matter. It's still available to you. You are not being gated from it, period. Nothing is being taken from you. If you want more challenge in overland or whatever to make you feel like grouping up is necessary - that's a different topic, and you should make your own thread on that.

Neither you nor I know how much work that would be, considering it we don't work for ZOS - but I agree it would be work. Some dungeons would need certain mechanics removed - but for the most part, this could be solved by using scaling (that we already have in the game) to make the PC way more powerful. People are doing it for the story, and not to fight enemies, so there's no such thing as "too easy" and therefore a real traditional balancing is unnecessary.

The argument that it takes "work" is also silly. PvP takes work. Vet trials take work. And only a small portion of players take part in those. Should we say it's no longer worth it to work on either of those again? No, of course not.

I think you both underestimate the amount of people story mode would bring in, and overestimate the impact on you. The population that would use this mode (of course assuming loot is no more useful than overland) are either not doing these dungeons (and never will without story mode) or are doing them in premade groups with friends or guilds. Period. So it has no effect on the current amount of people grouping and using dungeon finder.

People who need gear, who like grouping, who like challenge - all of them would still do normal and vet dungeons.

The only real concern is the amount of instances created and the effect that would have on the server - but neither you or I can say for sure if that would be an issue - so it's a moot point until ZOS says otherwise.

curtisnewton

Maybe they could add a story mode for dlc dungeons that gives you some npc group members and / or make the dungeon much more easy to experience the story but in return wont give you great items.

That way ppl could enjoy the group oriented story content at slower pace, but it wouldnt be exploited.

LadyNalcarya

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

What are you talking about? Everything but pieces of the main quest can be done in a group. Having a story mode does not mean getting rid of regular dungeon mode or creating less options for people who like multiplayer. It would still be there for you to group up. It does not have to be one or the other, it can be both?

It can be done in group, yeah, but it's very obviously balanced around one player. I can be in group with someone when doing crafting writs but it doesnt mean that crafting is a group activity.
Making solo mode for dungeons is not easy. They would need to completely rebalance the whole thing, remove group mechanics, mechanics that require tanks/healers etc. That's a lot of work, especially in the newer dlc dungeons.

Crafting is a weird and pointless example, given it's solo in every MMO. Being balanced around one player doesn't matter. It's still available to you. You are not being gated from it, period. Nothing is being taken from you. If you want more challenge in overland or whatever to make you feel like grouping up is necessary - that's a different topic, and you should make your own thread on that.

Neither you nor I know how much work that would be, considering it we don't work for ZOS - but I agree it would be work. Some dungeons would need certain mechanics removed - but for the most part, this could be solved by using scaling (that we already have in the game) to make the PC way more powerful. People are doing it for the story, and not to fight enemies, so there's no such thing as "too easy" and therefore a real traditional balancing is unnecessary.

The argument that it takes "work" is also silly. PvP takes work. Vet trials take work. And only a small portion of players take part in those. Should we say it's no longer worth it to work on either of those again? No, of course not.

I think you both underestimate the amount of people story mode would bring in, and overestimate the impact on you. The population that would use this mode (of course assuming loot is no more useful than overland) are either not doing these dungeons (and never will without story mode) or are doing them in premade groups with friends or guilds. Period. So it has no effect on the current amount of people grouping and using dungeon finder.

People who need gear, who like grouping, who like challenge - all of them would still do normal and vet dungeons.

The only real concern is the amount of instances created and the effect that would have on the server - but neither you or I can say for sure if that would be an issue - so it's a moot point until ZOS says otherwise.

It's not just "too easy". There's heavy instancing: when I was helping people with quest bosses back when they used to be quite challenging, I often wasnt able to see them and they werent able to see me. And if someone runs ahead and activates quest objective, you'll essentially miss a part of the quest. This also can happen in dungeons, of course, but to much lesser extent due to how linear they are.
This is a multiplayer game and people should be encouraged to try the mutiplayer component. This game is not a very good rpg because of mmo limitations, but the experience can be greatly improved by cooperating with other players.

Kidgangster101

Tigerseye wrote: »

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

Ohtimbar wrote: »

I have a lot of problems with the game, but I appreciate being free to group or not when and if I choose. I'd like to see it taken much further, actually. It's based on the bloody Elder Scrolls after all, a formerly premiere single player arpg, so no surprise a lot of lone wolves are roaming about.

At the end of the day if people only want to play alone then just play any of the older games (or new solo player games). If they don't put group content in this game what is the actual purpose to have it be an online game where others are around? I never get the argument of "the older games were all single player" because that argument can be used about most games that turn to mmo. Final fantasy put out 10 games before ff11 online released and still continue to put out solo games.

What if they enjoy the social aspect of seeing other players around them and/or of being in guilds, but they don't enjoy the social pressure of doing group content?

Even if the devs did still see this as an MMO, that wouldn't have to mean people are forced to do group content to play it.

MMO just means Massively Multiplayer Online game.

No part of that definition says, or implies, people are forced to group up.

Personally, I like grouping up, sometimes, especially with random people - my favourite part of WoW was LFR - but, not everyone is like that.

If social pressure of a NORMAL dungeon group play to advance a story quest is too much for someone then this game really isn't for that person tbh. Not trying to sound rude but it's not hard to hit 8-10k dps and that is usually all one needs to complete a normal dungeon.

If you are wanting to be there for a story mode then state you are doing the quest at the start when you enter and 9/10 people will go threw it slow. Is it really hard to type to people using the keyboard that psn or Xbox gives you built into the system? PC has a keyboard at all times...... If PEOPLE don't want to say something in chat it is on them if people fly through the dungeon in 5 seconds.

haelene

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

What are you talking about? Everything but pieces of the main quest can be done in a group. Having a story mode does not mean getting rid of regular dungeon mode or creating less options for people who like multiplayer. It would still be there for you to group up. It does not have to be one or the other, it can be both?

It can be done in group, yeah, but it's very obviously balanced around one player. I can be in group with someone when doing crafting writs but it doesnt mean that crafting is a group activity.
Making solo mode for dungeons is not easy. They would need to completely rebalance the whole thing, remove group mechanics, mechanics that require tanks/healers etc. That's a lot of work, especially in the newer dlc dungeons.

Crafting is a weird and pointless example, given it's solo in every MMO. Being balanced around one player doesn't matter. It's still available to you. You are not being gated from it, period. Nothing is being taken from you. If you want more challenge in overland or whatever to make you feel like grouping up is necessary - that's a different topic, and you should make your own thread on that.

Neither you nor I know how much work that would be, considering it we don't work for ZOS - but I agree it would be work. Some dungeons would need certain mechanics removed - but for the most part, this could be solved by using scaling (that we already have in the game) to make the PC way more powerful. People are doing it for the story, and not to fight enemies, so there's no such thing as "too easy" and therefore a real traditional balancing is unnecessary.

The argument that it takes "work" is also silly. PvP takes work. Vet trials take work. And only a small portion of players take part in those. Should we say it's no longer worth it to work on either of those again? No, of course not.

I think you both underestimate the amount of people story mode would bring in, and overestimate the impact on you. The population that would use this mode (of course assuming loot is no more useful than overland) are either not doing these dungeons (and never will without story mode) or are doing them in premade groups with friends or guilds. Period. So it has no effect on the current amount of people grouping and using dungeon finder.

People who need gear, who like grouping, who like challenge - all of them would still do normal and vet dungeons.

The only real concern is the amount of instances created and the effect that would have on the server - but neither you or I can say for sure if that would be an issue - so it's a moot point until ZOS says otherwise.

It's not just "too easy". There's heavy instancing: when I was helping people with quest bosses back when they used to be quite challenging, I often wasnt able to see them and they werent able to see me. And if someone runs ahead and activates quest objective, you'll essentially miss a part of the quest. This also can happen in dungeons, of course, but to much lesser extent due to how linear they are.
This is a multiplayer game and people should be encouraged to try the mutiplayer component. This game is not a very good rpg because of mmo limitations, but the experience can be greatly improved by cooperating with other players.

I agree that ZOS's grouping mechanics can be a little wonky if you're not consistently grouping with one person and completing things at the same time. That however, has nothing to do with a story mode and is another topic for another thread, One I would happily take part in if you opened it, because I duo all of the story with my wife and it can certainly be a hassle.

The last statement means nothing to me, because outside of saying "it's a mutiplayer game", there is nothing there that isn't entirely based on your personal perspective and opinion. Many people have already told you it isn't improved for them by cooperating with other players and that they play it as an RPG, so.. I'm not going to waste time re-hashing things people have already said to you. And again, if we're back too "MMO = Multiplayer" and that's it, well then... there's nothing more to say because I already gave my reasoning behind why that is short sighted.

LadyNalcarya

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

haelene wrote: »

Anotherone773 wrote: »

Then you need accept the fact that you wont be able to complete and explore all parts of the game if you limit yourself to "single player mode" in a "multiplayer game".

I didn't say that I limit myself at all. In fact, if you'd bothered to read the entire post you'd know I do more than solo - but I like the option. Also, as I stated before in that same post - having options in an MMO keeps it healthy and stable. If all you've got to counter that is "MMO = multiplayer" well then... I don't think we can really have a nuanced conversation about what's best for the game overall.

There's already less options for people who like multiplayer aspect. It's not like everyone is forced to group to do anything.
Grouping 4 times per year (to do all new dungeons) is far from unreasonable.

What are you talking about? Everything but pieces of the main quest can be done in a group. Having a story mode does not mean getting rid of regular dungeon mode or creating less options for people who like multiplayer. It would still be there for you to group up. It does not have to be one or the other, it can be both?

It can be done in group, yeah, but it's very obviously balanced around one player. I can be in group with someone when doing crafting writs but it doesnt mean that crafting is a group activity.
Making solo mode for dungeons is not easy. They would need to completely rebalance the whole thing, remove group mechanics, mechanics that require tanks/healers etc. That's a lot of work, especially in the newer dlc dungeons.

Crafting is a weird and pointless example, given it's solo in every MMO. Being balanced around one player doesn't matter. It's still available to you. You are not being gated from it, period. Nothing is being taken from you. If you want more challenge in overland or whatever to make you feel like grouping up is necessary - that's a different topic, and you should make your own thread on that.

Neither you nor I know how much work that would be, considering it we don't work for ZOS - but I agree it would be work. Some dungeons would need certain mechanics removed - but for the most part, this could be solved by using scaling (that we already have in the game) to make the PC way more powerful. People are doing it for the story, and not to fight enemies, so there's no such thing as "too easy" and therefore a real traditional balancing is unnecessary.

The argument that it takes "work" is also silly. PvP takes work. Vet trials take work. And only a small portion of players take part in those. Should we say it's no longer worth it to work on either of those again? No, of course not.

I think you both underestimate the amount of people story mode would bring in, and overestimate the impact on you. The population that would use this mode (of course assuming loot is no more useful than overland) are either not doing these dungeons (and never will without story mode) or are doing them in premade groups with friends or guilds. Period. So it has no effect on the current amount of people grouping and using dungeon finder.

People who need gear, who like grouping, who like challenge - all of them would still do normal and vet dungeons.

The only real concern is the amount of instances created and the effect that would have on the server - but neither you or I can say for sure if that would be an issue - so it's a moot point until ZOS says otherwise.

It's not just "too easy". There's heavy instancing: when I was helping people with quest bosses back when they used to be quite challenging, I often wasnt able to see them and they werent able to see me. And if someone runs ahead and activates quest objective, you'll essentially miss a part of the quest. This also can happen in dungeons, of course, but to much lesser extent due to how linear they are.
This is a multiplayer game and people should be encouraged to try the mutiplayer component. This game is not a very good rpg because of mmo limitations, but the experience can be greatly improved by cooperating with other players.

I agree that ZOS's grouping mechanics can be a little wonky if you're not consistently grouping with one person and completing things at the same time. That however, has nothing to do with a story mode and is another topic for another thread, One I would happily take part in if you opened it, because I duo all of the story with my wife and it can certainly be a hassle.

The last statement means nothing to me, because outside of saying "it's a mutiplayer game", there is nothing there that isn't entirely based on your personal perspective and opinion. Many people have already told you it isn't improved for them by cooperating with other players and that they play it as an RPG, so.. I'm not going to waste time re-hashing things people have already said to you. And again, if we're back too "MMO = Multiplayer" and that's it, well then... there's nothing more to say because I already gave my reasoning behind why that is short sighted.

I mean... This is a multiplayer game, it's not a matter of opinion. All games of this genre have a certain amount of group content, and the fact that ESO is more solo-friendly than usual doesnt mean that everything should be solo-based. It kinda defeats the purpose of being always online. There's plenty of great single-player games on the market, and most of them have better solo mechanics than ESO.

haelene

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

Tigerseye wrote: »

Kidgangster101 wrote: »

Ohtimbar wrote: »

I have a lot of problems with the game, but I appreciate being free to group or not when and if I choose. I'd like to see it taken much further, actually. It's based on the bloody Elder Scrolls after all, a formerly premiere single player arpg, so no surprise a lot of lone wolves are roaming about.

At the end of the day if people only want to play alone then just play any of the older games (or new solo player games). If they don't put group content in this game what is the actual purpose to have it be an online game where others are around? I never get the argument of "the older games were all single player" because that argument can be used about most games that turn to mmo. Final fantasy put out 10 games before ff11 online released and still continue to put out solo games.

What if they enjoy the social aspect of seeing other players around them and/or of being in guilds, but they don't enjoy the social pressure of doing group content?

Even if the devs did still see this as an MMO, that wouldn't have to mean people are forced to do group content to play it.

MMO just means Massively Multiplayer Online game.

No part of that definition says, or implies, people are forced to group up.

Personally, I like grouping up, sometimes, especially with random people - my favourite part of WoW was LFR - but, not everyone is like that.

If social pressure of a NORMAL dungeon group play to advance a story quest is too much for someone then this game really isn't for that person tbh. Not trying to sound rude but it's not hard to hit 8-10k dps and that is usually all one needs to complete a normal dungeon.

If you are wanting to be there for a story mode then state you are doing the quest at the start when you enter and 9/10 people will go threw it slow. Is it really hard to type to people using the keyboard that psn or Xbox gives you built into the system? PC has a keyboard at all times...... If PEOPLE don't want to say something in chat it is on them if people fly through the dungeon in 5 seconds.

Except that in my experience seeing others ask to do the quest - it's just not true that 9/10 people will go through it slow. Maybe 1 or 2 out of 10. Often times people will completely ignore someone asking to do the quest, kick them for asking, or the team will vote not to do the quest (which is fair). Even if the team agrees to the quest, there is undoubtedly an expectation that you should fly through the dialogue. I've never had a team (that was a team - not friends) that would allow people to explore at the pace of walking or take pictures / admire the environment.

DPS isn't really an issue here, I don't think. It's all about pace.