Companions will kill this game

Parasaurolophus

This is what I just thought ... But the companions will probably not be able to pick up loot from mobs and chests. And it would be very unpleasant for me if I use the group search tool in a certain dungeon in order to get sets, and there will be 2 bots in the group. It will be sad.

robertthebard

arena25 wrote: »

Let me let y'all in on a little secret:

This companion system ESO is going for was "stolen" directly from EA's and BioWare's SWTOR, a Star Wars themed MMO.

And the reason I know this is because I am currently taking a break from ESO to play SWTOR, and the way Zeni's dev team describes the companion system they're trying to build sounds exactly like SWTOR's companion system.

Now whether ESO is actually stealing SWTOR's ideas for a companion system or not, I can attest that SWTOR, while a great idea for a Star Wars themed MMO in theory, is suffering from bad mismanagement by EA. I imagine that if ESO's new companion system is in fact an idea taken from SWTOR, they're essentially saying to SWTOR's players "Guys, you and I both know SWTOR is suffering from bad mismanagement, here's a game which you might actually enjoy."

If in fact Zeni stole the idea from SWTOR, this is exactly what I and several others warned about in regards to ESO developing its own deal rather than trying to steal and copy ideas from other games. ESO is NOT going to take the King of MMO Mountain title from World of Warcraft by copying ideas from other games. ESO needs to develop its own deal if it wants to outlast World of Warcraft. The more unique ESO becomes in the MMORPG world, the more likely it is WoW refugees will rush over here and stay here the next time Blizzard angers their players (which apparently is happening on a regular basis in recent years).

Because there's never been a TES game that had companions...

On the flip side, I hope they're about 60% as efficient as swtor comps are, because if they are, and I'm in a group where someone is being rude, I can vote kick 'em, and replace them with the comp. I've done it in swtor a lot of times. It's hilarious to respond to indignant, or enraged whispers with "we did just fine, we replaced you with an NPC".

jircris11

ereboz wrote: »

with the addition of companions, the game is basically just a solo game now with other people doing their thing. PUGS will no longer exist because people can make their own groups with companions, also the dps will be if anything better with a companion, thus forcing 'pet' builds on everyone for best dps. I don't see any part of this that will work out well in an online game

Dude most mmorpgs are solo play now days lol

jircris11

robertthebard wrote: »

arena25 wrote: »

Let me let y'all in on a little secret:

This companion system ESO is going for was "stolen" directly from EA's and BioWare's SWTOR, a Star Wars themed MMO.

And the reason I know this is because I am currently taking a break from ESO to play SWTOR, and the way Zeni's dev team describes the companion system they're trying to build sounds exactly like SWTOR's companion system.

Now whether ESO is actually stealing SWTOR's ideas for a companion system or not, I can attest that SWTOR, while a great idea for a Star Wars themed MMO in theory, is suffering from bad mismanagement by EA. I imagine that if ESO's new companion system is in fact an idea taken from SWTOR, they're essentially saying to SWTOR's players "Guys, you and I both know SWTOR is suffering from bad mismanagement, here's a game which you might actually enjoy."

If in fact Zeni stole the idea from SWTOR, this is exactly what I and several others warned about in regards to ESO developing its own deal rather than trying to steal and copy ideas from other games. ESO is NOT going to take the King of MMO Mountain title from World of Warcraft by copying ideas from other games. ESO needs to develop its own deal if it wants to outlast World of Warcraft. The more unique ESO becomes in the MMORPG world, the more likely it is WoW refugees will rush over here and stay here the next time Blizzard angers their players (which apparently is happening on a regular basis in recent years).

Because there's never been a TES game that had companions...

On the flip side, I hope they're about 60% as efficient as swtor comps are, because if they are, and I'm in a group where someone is being rude, I can vote kick 'em, and replace them with the comp. I've done it in swtor a lot of times. It's hilarious to respond to indignant, or enraged whispers with "we did just fine, we replaced you with an NPC".[/quote
Ikr I could do group content solo and not have to worry about fake tanks or healers XD]

ThorianB

Jacozilla wrote: »

Alurria wrote: »

Jacozilla wrote: »

Klad wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

"NeeScrolls wrote: »

ThorianB wrote: »

So not only are they gatekeeping but they literally ruin the gameplay for REAL gamers. .

... i'd be careful about using that ^ type of verbiage

How many times do you think casual players have been told they aren't real gamers because they don't play the way the elitists do?
And that they need to "git gud"?
And that they are ruining the game for the elitists by not meeting their standards?
And that if they don't play the way the elitists do they shouldn't even be playing an MMO?

That goes both ways.

Bingo

It's that kind of privileged gatekeeping that makes causal players ask for something like companions in the first place. Elitist players should have zero control over casual players...right now that just isn't reality .

How are they gatekeepers if all they do is prevent you from being in their groups? Genuinely curious.

If you are saying because you can’t complete that content without those same elitists, then yes they are gatekeepers but you would also be saying you can’t do that content without those same elitists (e.g. need their carry)

If you say no, don’t need those elitists in your group to complete any given content, then they are by definition not gatekeepers.

Pick which one, can’t have it both ways.

They are gate keeps if you are in a pug with someone who kicks you because you don't have the gear or cp then having to reque because someone just kicked you from group. Or not allowing you to speak to quest npcs by rushing because they have 18 other characters to run through dungeons. Or even the streamers who say you have to have this build to complete content then all the streamer fanboys echo that. There have been those who consider themselves elite throughout all the games I've played and they can be obnoxious. I would rather be with a newer player than to be in a group of elitists. So I just don't group I solo. This type of toxic behavior is the reason I am glad there will be companions in game.

Then call them toxic, which is a subjective personal opinion and can’t be right or wrong - it’s your opinion so right from your POV and debatable by others. They could very well think the same, e.g. you are toxic.

But fair enough, both sides think wasting each other’s time.

However, can’t be gatekeepers unless you are saying can’t complete whatever content without their help. A gatekeeper literally blocks you from going beyond that point.

If you don’t need them to pass beyond that content checkpoint, they can be any subjective adjective you care to describe them as, but gatekeeper holding casuals back can’t be it.

You are trying to argue semantics instead of the problem. They are gatekeeping in DF PUGs because they try to control who plays with them in a random group. This leads them to either become toxic and completely ruin a persons experience or to try to vote kick them from the PUG. There are other ways they do this as well. Such as running by all the trash and leaving the lower levels down players and having to deal with the trash while the gatekeeper kills all the bosses and the people left behind get no credit for any of it. I was on my low level healplar once and got 3 trial guild players that blitz FG2. They skipped all the trash and just killed the bosses and they were all stam players so i got stuck way behind on a low level in LA and set up to heal. I only got credit for the first boss. I can give you dozens of examples like this from my own experience that happened to me or others in PUG DF groups and i don't do that many dungeons because of this type of behavior.

These people gatekeep people in DF PUGs. When you join through DF you agree to take what group members you get and do your role and the best job you can with that group. If you are unhappy with the group, then YOU level not try to kick everyone else. But these players refuse to leave the group and move on and instead try to boot players that don't meet their personal requirements. THAT is gatekeeping . The term that is used does not need your approval.

All of this has been explained 7 ways to Sunday over and over again until we are blue in the face and we get the same tired arguments and strawmans every single time. So we pushed for other options. ZOS came up with this and now maybe we don't need to have this conversation every.single.week.

Casuals have more options to play the game the way they want without someone else trying to force them to play a certain way in order to access content. The elites, gatekeepers, and toxic players don't need to bother as much with the casuals interfering in their playstyle. It is a win/win. If those elites, gatekeepers, and toxic players are afraid they wont have enough warm bodies to play with when companions come out, then maybe they should of thought about that years ago when we were complaining about it.

NeeScrolls

ThorianB wrote: »

You are trying to argue semantics instead of the problem. They are gatekeeping in DF PUGs because they try to control who plays with them in a random group.

Re-read your sentence... The very definition of "random" is exactly why this myth narrative of "control" is so easily dismissed.

How can you control something that is random? ( hint: You can't. All you can control is your reaction to said randomness; including whether or not the 'queue' places you with a nice respectful courteous player....or the opposite. )

---

ThorianB wrote: »

These people gatekeep people in DF PUGs. When you join through DF you agree to take what group members you get and do your role and the best job you can with that group. If you are unhappy with the group, then YOU level not try to kick everyone else. But these players refuse to leave the group and move on and instead try to boot players that don't meet their personal requirements. THAT is gatekeeping . The term that is used does not need your approval.

No, but it does need someone's experience.

For example: i've never been "gate-kept" from any group in 7+ years of ESO. Except once: for a normal 'Sunspire' Trial , when i just simply wasn't ready yet (gear wise & mechanics wise) as the rest of the group. So, i got *kicked* . Did i goto forums and QQ about it though? Or ask for 11 ai companions to finish the Trial quest? No & no.

Instead, i decided to practice and gear-up and grind-up and study my Class skills and, eventually, do the same Trial with my guildmates. Only THEN, after all that, did i go back and 'pug' that same Trial. And wouldn't ya know it, this next time i not only wasn't kicked but i also led the group and helped guide the so called "newbs" to become better at the fights.

Go figure.

---

ThorianB wrote: »

All of this has been explained 7 ways to Sunday over and over again until we are blue in the face
So we pushed for other options. ZOS came up with this and now maybe we don't need to have this conversation every.single.week.

Wait, forgive me for being slightly out-of-the-development-loop here but... Are you saying that Zenimax decided to implement 'companions' because of community vocal minority (or majority? ) complaints about having to play with other human players in a MMO?

Like, seriously i wanna know earnestly. I'm not trolling you. I honestly don't know the full history of this whole 'companions' feature (other than the recent article) .

---

ThorianB wrote: »

Casuals have more options to play the game the way they want without someone else trying to force them to play a certain way in order to access content. The elites, gatekeepers, and toxic players don't need to bother as much with the casuals interfering in their playstyle. It is a win/win.

So, i'm a casual player ( been here since beta, but still technically "casual" ) and i've been asking this question a couple times in my posts within this thread but no one has seemed to want to answer it yet: How come someone like me, an admitted casual player, hasn't ever experienced this so called "toxic gatekeeping" as much (or at all) as everyone else in this thread has?

Could it be, perhaps, that i've found ways to deal with it (or address it head-on) that certain other players haven't? Ways that i've mentioned a few posts up using the tools Zenimax provides in-game?

Why do certain players continue doing the reactions that feed the trolls & jerks, yet refuse to even attempt to TRY the things (proven things) that deny those same trolls & jerks to thrive?

ehhh, nevermind, it's a larger philosophical issue i guess.

---

ThorianB wrote: »

If those elites, gatekeepers, and toxic players are afraid they wont have enough warm bodies to play with when companions come out, then maybe they should of thought about that years ago when we were complaining about it.

I appreciate your sentiment, i really do, but....well...this whole 'companions' system is almost starting to sound like it was created out of spite. If so, that negative energy will only serve to splinter the community even more.

Vanya

And let us assume Elder Scrolls Online is not a solo game right now? The overland content,Delves,Public delves,A lot of world bosses,Public dungeons,Majority of Normal and even Veteran dungeons can/are and were taken down by a single player which is insane and absurd. Alas, I believe Companion add on will not change anything regarding your original statement "ruining of game and making it even more solo experience" When things are set in motion and added on there is no way to go back again. Certain builds, classes and the way game offers freedom of choosing and mixing skills/gear bonuses with obvious Nerf of content that past several years has made game it an unbelievably solo friendly mega-casual experience. It pretty much propelled since Tamriel Unlimited update.

Companion depending on how system is implemented can make game even more enjoyable experience meaning basically you never are truly alone. I personally more look forward to RP and social aspect with your companion, of developing deeper connection, he/she commenting on your travels, romance aspect , customization , Combat should be brought to minimal and should not be made overly potent.

No I have not watched Blackwood preview nor Intend to before original launch. I do not want any spoilers personally.

eleuthera91

linuxlady wrote: »

Ulliceta gra-Kogg is my first choice for companion, and as she is likely no longer with the psijics i'm betting she's available.

Have you ever retourned in the Temple of Ire in Orsinium (where is the Mages Guild)?

if you wanna more lore about her
https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Ulliceta_gra-Kogg

Jacozilla

ThorianB wrote: »

Jacozilla wrote: »

Alurria wrote: »

Jacozilla wrote: »

Klad wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

"NeeScrolls wrote: »

ThorianB wrote: »

So not only are they gatekeeping but they literally ruin the gameplay for REAL gamers. .

... i'd be careful about using that ^ type of verbiage

How many times do you think casual players have been told they aren't real gamers because they don't play the way the elitists do?
And that they need to "git gud"?
And that they are ruining the game for the elitists by not meeting their standards?
And that if they don't play the way the elitists do they shouldn't even be playing an MMO?

That goes both ways.

Bingo

It's that kind of privileged gatekeeping that makes causal players ask for something like companions in the first place. Elitist players should have zero control over casual players...right now that just isn't reality .

How are they gatekeepers if all they do is prevent you from being in their groups? Genuinely curious.

If you are saying because you can’t complete that content without those same elitists, then yes they are gatekeepers but you would also be saying you can’t do that content without those same elitists (e.g. need their carry)

If you say no, don’t need those elitists in your group to complete any given content, then they are by definition not gatekeepers.

Pick which one, can’t have it both ways.

They are gate keeps if you are in a pug with someone who kicks you because you don't have the gear or cp then having to reque because someone just kicked you from group. Or not allowing you to speak to quest npcs by rushing because they have 18 other characters to run through dungeons. Or even the streamers who say you have to have this build to complete content then all the streamer fanboys echo that. There have been those who consider themselves elite throughout all the games I've played and they can be obnoxious. I would rather be with a newer player than to be in a group of elitists. So I just don't group I solo. This type of toxic behavior is the reason I am glad there will be companions in game.

Then call them toxic, which is a subjective personal opinion and can’t be right or wrong - it’s your opinion so right from your POV and debatable by others. They could very well think the same, e.g. you are toxic.

But fair enough, both sides think wasting each other’s time.

However, can’t be gatekeepers unless you are saying can’t complete whatever content without their help. A gatekeeper literally blocks you from going beyond that point.

If you don’t need them to pass beyond that content checkpoint, they can be any subjective adjective you care to describe them as, but gatekeeper holding casuals back can’t be it.

You are trying to argue semantics instead of the problem. They are gatekeeping in DF PUGs because they try to control who plays with them in a random group. This leads them to either become toxic and completely ruin a persons experience or to try to vote kick them from the PUG. There are other ways they do this as well. Such as running by all the trash and leaving the lower levels down players and having to deal with the trash while the gatekeeper kills all the bosses and the people left behind get no credit for any of it. I was on my low level healplar once and got 3 trial guild players that blitz FG2. They skipped all the trash and just killed the bosses and they were all stam players so i got stuck way behind on a low level in LA and set up to heal. I only got credit for the first boss. I can give you dozens of examples like this from my own experience that happened to me or others in PUG DF groups and i don't do that many dungeons because of this type of behavior.

These people gatekeep people in DF PUGs. When you join through DF you agree to take what group members you get and do your role and the best job you can with that group. If you are unhappy with the group, then YOU level not try to kick everyone else. But these players refuse to leave the group and move on and instead try to boot players that don't meet their personal requirements. THAT is gatekeeping . The term that is used does not need your approval.

All of this has been explained 7 ways to Sunday over and over again until we are blue in the face and we get the same tired arguments and strawmans every single time. So we pushed for other options. ZOS came up with this and now maybe we don't need to have this conversation every.single.week.

Casuals have more options to play the game the way they want without someone else trying to force them to play a certain way in order to access content. The elites, gatekeepers, and toxic players don't need to bother as much with the casuals interfering in their playstyle. It is a win/win. If those elites, gatekeepers, and toxic players are afraid they wont have enough warm bodies to play with when companions come out, then maybe they should of thought about that years ago when we were complaining about it.

Well now your self entitlement truly comes out. Good, masks off is the best - hiding ulterior motives behind labeling people as ‘toxic’ is a fairly transparent ploy when it’s clear you can’t see it requires both groups to be courteous instead of just one demanding from the other.

First, it takes 3 ppl, majority 75% vote to kick someone - so the one arguing semantics is yourself. Partly because you are the one incorrectly labeling those who don’t wish to cater to you as gatekeepers when it’s proven that just can’t be the case unless you admit need the carry.

But mostly because what you call ‘semantics’ is the inability to counter iron clad logic - you either need or don’t need these toxic elitists as you refer to in order to complete any particular content. If you need them, then ok they are clearly gatekeepers but you need the carry, so beggars can’t be choosers.

If you don’t need them, which is far more likely the case as I don’t think either group would argue dungeon content is so hard anything more than avg is needed, in which case by definition, not semantics, they can’t be gatekeepers and the label is simply disingenuous at best or deliberate contrivance to tar a group who simply does not wish to cater to your play style.

Self formed groups = your chosen playstle, dungeon finder = pure democracy

If you can’t get a single person to vote no and prevent the kick, and can’t get 3/4 of group to go along with your play style preference, then that is democracy at work. 75% of ppl don’t need to adapt to you, you need to adapt to them. Hurling labels clearly proven false isn’t going to change that

SilverBride

At this point in time it's a moot point why some want companions and some don't. They are already coming and it was one of the smartest moves ZoS could have made.

Klad

SilverBride wrote: »

At this point in time it's a moot point why some want companions and some don't. They are already coming and it was one of the smartest moves ZoS could have made.

Yeah it's kinda weird that some players think that ZoS will abandoned something they have obviously been working on for a while now, just because the "elites" doesn't like it.

EmEm_Oh

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

I highly doubt that the AI is good enough to really replace a competent player in anything but base game dungeons. A nice back up for sure but nothing that carries you through tough stuff. But I'll better not bet on that.

Yeah, depending how this leans on resources on server-side, this might be a better alternative for probably 40-60% of the players. I'm looking forward to trying it, but I predict we'll need more options for the companions as time goes on.

Psiion

Greetings all,

As this thread seems to have run its course, we have decided to close it down. While we understand that disagreements are natural, Baiting and Flaming are non-constructive and against the Forum's Community Rules. The forums are intended to be a place for civil, respectful discussion.

The Community Rules can be reviewed here.