ESO PVP vs other games

Larcomar

Kind of interested what other MMOs/games PVP'rs play and if there are any you've found that have similar PVP to ESO - a big strategic map, large scale battles around keeps / objectives etc, lots of build variety - and how they compare? Are there any other games that manage to do what ESO does without the performance issues (and how?).

Talking Cyro obviously - I imagine there are lots of games with BG style combat, but afaik Cyro style gameplay is pretty unique. But then I may be out of touch. Does any other game come close, and if so, what do they do that's better than ESO / ESO could pick up on, what is it that ESO does that other's don't etc?

Mitaka211

The only one i can think of that is somewhat like ESO but not really is Guild Wars 2. I used to play it a lot , had a ton of fun of it but switched to ESO due to me not liking how combat worked. As far as performance i can not remember having any trouble no matter what scale of content i was doing. Massive pvp battles, huge world bosses , performance never suffered for me.
The Cyro pvp over there is called world vs world and it is really really similar to eso. From what i remember they had a very natural way of forming large groups. Basically you could unlock a commander badge if you were really dedicated to pvp. All the players on your side can see that badge on the map so the commander would accumulate a large group naturally just by activating the badge and coordinating the zergs was easy. You could jump in and follow the commander as a mindless drone, let him do the thinking and you would still have a blast. You have objectives you can capture, have large scale battles pretty much like in ESO.
Aside from ESO and GW2 i can not think of another example. Both games have their strenghts and weaknesses in my opinion it depends if the player likes the much more casual way of GW2 , where you can literally jump in and feel useful from the get go. Their BG system is pretty cool too, they have a buffer zone , where you have access to all your skills, set bonuses and such so you can have characters just for bgs.
For me ESO is a lot better. The main issue i have with it is performance , like GW2 can turn into a complete ****show with all the effects and hundreds of players but performance would never go down, that's the one thing i find it does better, just smoother experience when you have a lot of players doing something.

Alucardo

IMHO there is nothing quite like ESO with its fast paced and fluid combat (when it works). I tried GW2 but it just felt sluggish in comparison. Not a bad game by any means, but I couldn't see myself ever replacing ESO with it, and I doubt I'd ever play GW2 again.
And that's the problem I have. No matter how upset I am with ESOs performance or extended maintenances, there's no where to run to. There's no competition that offers the combat it has. Most MMOs I've tried have these stupid long animations that play out before you can perform another action, and that bothers me a lot. You can't pop a heal then cancel the animation with a roll. They also have very little regard for PvP (FF14 I'm looking at you).
Will NW turn the tides? I guess we'll find out tomorrow. I'm particularly interested in the pvp flagging system, allowing you to pvp while levelling up and questing. PvP also plays a major role in the world, allowing you to enter war and take territories to give your entire faction a buff. It's not just some side line mode - it actually matters, and because it matters you know they will focus on it a lot, unlike ESO. Not gonna lie, pretty excited.

Mitaka211

Alucardo wrote: »

IMHO there is nothing quite like ESO with its fast paced and fluid combat (when it works). I tried GW2 but it just felt sluggish in comparison. Not a bad game by any means, but I couldn't see myself ever replacing ESO with it, and I doubt I'd ever play GW2 again.
And that's the problem I have. No matter how upset I am with ESOs performance or extended maintenances, there's no where to run to. There's no competition that offers the combat it has. Most MMOs I've tried have these stupid long animations that play out before you can perform another action, and that bothers me a lot. You can't pop a heal then cancel the animation with a roll. They also have very little regard for PvP (FF14 I'm looking at you).
Will NW turn the tides? I guess we'll find out tomorrow. I'm particularly interested in the pvp flagging system, allowing you to pvp while levelling up and questing. PvP also plays a major role in the world, allowing you to enter war and take territories to give your entire faction a buff. It's not just some side line mode - it actually matters, and because it matters you know they will focus on it a lot, unlike ESO. Not gonna lie, pretty excited.

When it comes to combat no MMO beats ESO , I personally never understood how the majority of mmo players dismiss ESO's combat as slow and clunky (The first time i started hearing people say it was around the time when big streamers played it but never really gave it a chance), in my opinion it dominates all other games and it's the reason i don't play anything else anymore. I have played quite a few and i don't see myself switching to be honest.

Alucardo

Mitaka211 wrote: »

Alucardo wrote: »

IMHO there is nothing quite like ESO with its fast paced and fluid combat (when it works). I tried GW2 but it just felt sluggish in comparison. Not a bad game by any means, but I couldn't see myself ever replacing ESO with it, and I doubt I'd ever play GW2 again.
And that's the problem I have. No matter how upset I am with ESOs performance or extended maintenances, there's no where to run to. There's no competition that offers the combat it has. Most MMOs I've tried have these stupid long animations that play out before you can perform another action, and that bothers me a lot. You can't pop a heal then cancel the animation with a roll. They also have very little regard for PvP (FF14 I'm looking at you).
Will NW turn the tides? I guess we'll find out tomorrow. I'm particularly interested in the pvp flagging system, allowing you to pvp while levelling up and questing. PvP also plays a major role in the world, allowing you to enter war and take territories to give your entire faction a buff. It's not just some side line mode - it actually matters, and because it matters you know they will focus on it a lot, unlike ESO. Not gonna lie, pretty excited.

When it comes to combat no MMO beats ESO , I personally never understood how the majority of mmo players dismiss ESO's combat as slow and clunky (The first time i started hearing people say it was around the time when big streamers played it but never really gave it a chance), in my opinion it dominates all other games and it's the reason i don't play anything else anymore. I have played quite a few and i don't see myself switching to be honest.

It's definitely not slow and clunky, though its performance in places like Cyrodiil could probably be the reason for that particular complaint. When it's running fine, it can be verrrry smooth.

chuckythexii

Used to play one called Fallen Earth which was very similar. Wouldn't be surprised to see if some of the devs from it are actually working on ESO now or at least influenced by it. It was basically like ESO but post apocalypse fallout style. The game never really took off though and never had the amount of players ESO does. I think biggest battles were about 30-40 players total. The only major difference was you had to actually aim your attacks which made it harder but it also took rng out of crits. Body shots were normal, limbs were 75% damage, and headshots were criticals.

It was a good game dunno why it failed.

As for large scale battles without performance issues, that really isn't possible. EVE has got the record for largest MMO battles and wars, they handle it with "TiDi" time dilation which is basically intentional lag but it is at least fair since everyone is lagging at the same pace.

I think the best thing for PvP performance wise that ESO could do would be to make more PvP areas, like new dlc type lands which are also PvP zones and also adding in PvP Dungeons in existing areas with multiple entrances (so they can't be camped). The idea is to spread around PvP content so people can find more small gang fights that don't cause massive lag. PvP dungeons in normal areas could also get more PvErs interested in PvP by increasing resource drops in them. EVE does that pretty well encouraging people to go into dangerous areas because of much better rewards. I also think that non banked gold should drop or at least a portion like tel var stones.

udaba

If Zenimax fix lag and performance , ESO will thrive .
[snip]

[edited for bashing]

Alucardo

udaba wrote: »

If Zenimax fix lag and performance , ESO will thrive .
[snip]

Obviously they want their game to thrive, but pvp just isn't a big focus of theirs. I don't even think they have a dedicated employee to work on that side of things. Why put resources and money into something you don't care about.
It's sad, but I've come to terms with it.

[edited to remove quote]

starlizard70ub17_ESO

Alucardo wrote: »

udaba wrote: »

If Zenimax fix lag and performance , ESO will thrive .
[snip]

Obviously they want their game to thrive, but pvp just isn't a big focus of theirs. I don't even think they have a dedicated employee to work on that side of things. Why put resources and money into something you don't care about.
It's sad, but I've come to terms with it.

When you think about, most rpg mmo games are like this ^. They concentrate on role playing, story telling, housing, etc. , while PvP is a side option at best. Even in BDO where they say PvP is the end game, 100X more players are doing lifeskills, fishing, trading, than ever PvPed in that game LOL. . If you want hardcore PvP, you need to go to a game that is built for PvP, and anything else in game is support for PvP.

As much as people complain, (and there are many reasons to complain), PvP in ESO works surprisingly well for what it is.

[edited to remove quote]

techyeshic

Mordhau kind of has the feeling of siege warfare and I have yet to try Chivalry 2; if you want a dedicated PVP game. The problem with those is the combat is quite a bit different, and it's still matches rather than a persistent war.

I really wish a game would come out that is just like Cyrodiil in the persistent map and people coming and going. Maybe have the barracks at the bases with gear to grab, skills to select and just go.

Sylosi

Guild Wars 2 is pretty much the only game that has PvP like Cyrodil that isn't ancient (see DAoC) or dead (see Warhammer, though there is a private server).

I won't compare the actual combat style, because it is basically pointless, whether someone likes a style of combat is largely down to individual preferences and subjective views. Which is why be it ESO, GW2, BDO or whatever, you will find people claiming that game has the "best" combat in an MMORPG, when really what they mean is, its the one that suits their personal preferences best. There is no "best".

As for a comparison, large scale is better in GW2 because there is more to it (boon strips, stability rather than hard CC immunity, etc) and cooldowns help make it less obnoxious. There is no horse riding simulator because the maps are smaller, so you get a higher up-time of action. Which overall is why despite it being 2 years older and GW2 apparently having less players than ESO overall, world vs world (GW2's Cyrodil) has more players, more guilds, etc than Cyrodil does.

It's also generally more organised, on a decent server it is typical that to join PUG groups you have to join Discord / TS, run specified builds, etc. ESO is way more casual, way more PvE, which I guess can be a good thing for some.

For smallscale ESO is probably better, the small maps in GW2 mean it is too easy for zergs or 25 man guild groups to just wipe roamers / smallgroups. But then on the other hand I have never played a PvP game where "good" players avoid fighting each other so much, which makes for rather boring PvP.

If you are person that cares about the score, then ESO is better, not because of any meaningful difference in mechanics, they are both utterly flawed in that regard, but simply because you will be less likely to be told to go back to PvE in chat or told no one cares if we lose the keep we are having a 60 vs 60 open field fights, etc.

But then on the other hand, it has been far more common for me to log into Cyrodil to see a map that is 80% one colour than in GW2, so maybe for people bothered about score that is dull?

For performance GW2 is better, but then it has less players on the map (it instead has 4 maps per match). The only times there are generally issues is when 3 blobs fight each other (50+ people, on discord, running in a tight ball, bombing when commander tells the to, etc), outside of that GW2 performance actually got better from the start of the game when it had culling problems (player models being rendered late).

Outside of that they both suffer from the same fundamental issues, they are contrary to the delusions of some utterly impossible to balance, this is not Zenimax's or Anet's fault, it is the players inability to understand what is required for even vaguely decent balance and that these game modes can not provide what is required.

But the biggest flaw is these games basically don't work as a competitive PvP games, because they lack meaningful mechanisms to produce anything competitive.

Which results in games where "winning" the match is basically meaningless to anyone but role-players and where most of the fights end up being low skilled, one sided and generally unappealing to anyone actually interested in decent PvP.

Hence despite online PvP games having millions or in some cases tens of millions of players, realm vs realm just fails miserably in every game that tries it and it has nothing to do with poor performance or bad balance, it is just a flawed game mode, that produces largely bad, low skiled PvP that appeals more to roleplayers than PvP gamers.

gamma71

Daoc and eso probably the most similar since devs like matt frior from daoc came over from daoc to develop eso. In daoc you had darkness falls Wich you gained access by controlling a number of keeps here we have imperial city instead. This going back a long ways but it was fun getting access to DF and cleaning out all the enemies players out of it.

GW2 was fun but I never liked you could only put up seige in pre designated areas. Warhammer was ok. I liked Daoc classes a lot better there was a lot of variety. I laugh at people in this game who act or say I invented ball groups lol I remember running my manna chanter ball group back in early Daoc and they were more deadly there because you could use a /stick and your group would auto follow you Wich made stacking your aoes on your enemy's a lot easier.

Overall though Eso is still the best.

Alucardo

One of the best PvP games I ever played was sadly a p2w clown fiesta, where the devs abused players and even banned them for no reason. But its pvp was pretty well done, I must say.
There were 3 factions, and each faction would have a strongholds containing a gem. Taking the gems to their wall and placing them would call forth your factions dragon, who would fly across the map and land at the gate, helping you break it down and trample defenders. Once inside, you were essentially in the pve zone and could kill pvers if you wished. You got bonus "AP" for killing their nobles in the main cities (NPCs).
The primary focus, however, was to claim their special gems scattered across the land. If you were fortunate to capture the other 2 realms gems, you were able to unlock a portal to the golden dragon who granted one wish. Everyone inside the portal was able to vote.
The wishes were things like extra experience which could obviously benefit everyone on the faction, or something more selfish which granted one player incredible power (basically emperor with volendrung). In the hands of someone decked to the brim with p2w gear and strong jewellery that was removed from the loot table, this was really broken lol
It's a shame the game was just a cash grab, because that is the kind of pvp I'm down for.

Biro123

Not really aware of any currently, aside from GW2.

Past games, I've played were DAOC and Warhammer Online. To compare those two with eso would involve looking at soo many aspects. So ill have a go at a couple of sentences.

DAOC was the granddaddy of 3 faction open world with sieges. Had loads of very different classes, but unfortunately whole classes were very pidgeon-holed or even not wanted for PVP. Very dated now an the reliance on /stick and /follow etc was a terrible mechanic imho.

WAR had the open world, but failed with an unbalanced 2-faction campaign alongside terrible lag on go-live and while trying to compete with WOW in its heyday, the initial lag, I think drove many new players back to wow. They did fix the worst of the lag, but it was too late. However their scenarios (Battlegrounds) were fantastic. I loved how the roles fit together, especially their PVP tanking mechanics. Biggest downside there was the vertical progression. A bit like a PvP-only CP system which also ties to vertical gear progression. Power imbalances for new vs vet players was nasty.

fred4

chuckythexii wrote: »

Used to play one called Fallen Earth which was very similar. Wouldn't be surprised to see if some of the devs from it are actually working on ESO now or at least influenced by it. It was basically like ESO but post apocalypse fallout style. The game never really took off though and never had the amount of players ESO does. I think biggest battles were about 30-40 players total. The only major difference was you had to actually aim your attacks which made it harder but it also took rng out of crits. Body shots were normal, limbs were 75% damage, and headshots were criticals.

It was a good game dunno why it failed.

As for large scale battles without performance issues, that really isn't possible. EVE has got the record for largest MMO battles and wars, they handle it with "TiDi" time dilation which is basically intentional lag but it is at least fair since everyone is lagging at the same pace.

I think the best thing for PvP performance wise that ESO could do would be to make more PvP areas, like new dlc type lands which are also PvP zones and also adding in PvP Dungeons in existing areas with multiple entrances (so they can't be camped). The idea is to spread around PvP content so people can find more small gang fights that don't cause massive lag. PvP dungeons in normal areas could also get more PvErs interested in PvP by increasing resource drops in them. EVE does that pretty well encouraging people to go into dangerous areas because of much better rewards. I also think that non banked gold should drop or at least a portion like tel var stones.

Isn't IC the PvP dungeon? It has it's dedicated fanbase (including me), but I have the impression that PvEers hate it and that the majority of PvPers go to Cyrodiil, despite the lag. Don't know why, but am at least thankful that IC is not prone to lagging out.

Thraben

Larcomar wrote: »

Kind of interested what other MMOs/games PVP'rs play and if there are any you've found that have similar PVP to ESO - a big strategic map, large scale battles around keeps / objectives etc, lots of build variety - and how they compare? Are there any other games that manage to do what ESO does without the performance issues (and how?).

Talking Cyro obviously - I imagine there are lots of games with BG style combat, but afaik Cyro style gameplay is pretty unique. But then I may be out of touch. Does any other game come close, and if so, what do they do that's better than ESO / ESO could pick up on, what is it that ESO does that other's don't etc?

If you speak of Cyrodiil PvP, the only other active game like this is Planetside 2.

Differences:

1) PS2 is a First Person Shooter.
2) PS2 won against the lag: In fact, you will still find huge 300- person open field battles there like the ones that pulled us once to ESO.
3) PS2 has no significant build variety compared to ESO.
4) You can teleport into a contested "keep".
5) You can only take border "keeps" (which was not in the game originally)

fred4

Sylosi wrote: »

I have never played a PvP game where "good" players avoid fighting each other so much, which makes for rather boring PvP.

Hahahaha! You're talking about ESO, right? I agree. It's something that's bothered me a great deal, because when you see snapshots of ESO PvP on YouTube it distorts the reality of how 1vXs happen. I got kicked from a small PuG in IC once, because I did not play that way. I attacked every opposing player and that was not acceptable to them.

I can understand the psychology of how this happens. Especially if you've just stalemated with someone in a duel, that tends to breed mutual respect and you're not going to zerg down that player, at least not immediately aftewards. The PvP community is not that big. The good players learn to recognise each other after a while and, while there may be rivalries, there are also cross alliance friendships or just plain mutual respect. There are three things that bother me about that:

1. The sheer expediency. You're not attacking the strong, because you know you won't win. You may not attack obvious noobs or PvEers (in IC), but you may have no problem attacking mediocre players. Yeah, it's just a game, but it doesn't feel morally right sometimes.
2. The division this creates between some good players and so-called zerglings or potatoes. Good players may despise the latter for zerging, but I find it hard to say who has the higher ground.
3. You're not role-playing the game anymore. You're not playing the objectives and you're not playing against the opposing alliance players when you see them. Instead you're playing with and against social groups that are invisible to the casual observer. Not having in-game objectives, be they taking the Cyrodiil map or be they as simple as making a living for your characters by collecting Tel Var, means you're just playing in a pissing contest really.

Ultravylence

Crowfall looks very similar to Cyrodil to me. I am a paid backer, but never took the time to play. It recently launched.

fred4

Some YouTubers describe ESO combat as "floaty". This has puzzled me for a while. Does anyone know what they mean? I have not played other MMOs and I haven't the foggiest what they mean or why that would be a bad thing. I do not associate that term with anything. I have some notion it has to do with the animations or with animation cancelling. Sometimes they talk about skills feeling weightless or not impactful. This seems very superficial to me. I have the impression they must not have learnt to PvP in ESO to any level of proficiency and they don't, perhaps, appreciate why animation-cancelling exists. IMO it exists to facilitate fast and responsive combat. That is not something I would trade away. I have a suspicion these reviewers do not appreciate the excitement, the adrenaline rush ESO can generate when the combat is working properly, the sheer speed of it. Am I wrong?

techyeshic

fred4 wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

I have never played a PvP game where "good" players avoid fighting each other so much, which makes for rather boring PvP.

Hahahaha! You're talking about ESO, right? I agree. It's something that's bothered me a great deal, because when you see snapshots of ESO PvP on YouTube it distorts the reality of how 1vXs happen. I got kicked from a small PuG in IC once, because I did not play that way. I attacked every opposing player and that was not acceptable to them.

I can understand the psychology of how this happens. Especially if you've just stalemated with someone in a duel, that tends to breed mutual respect and you're not going to zerg down that player, at least not immediately aftewards. The PvP community is not that big. The good players learn to recognise each other after a while and, while there may be rivalries, there are also cross alliance friendships or just plain mutual respect. There are three things that bother me about that:

1. The sheer expediency. You're not attacking the strong, because you know you won't win. You may not attack obvious noobs or PvEers (in IC), but you may have no problem attacking mediocre players. Yeah, it's just a game, but it doesn't feel morally right sometimes.
2. The division this creates between some good players and so-called zerglings or potatoes. Good players may despise the latter for zerging, but I find it hard to say who has the higher ground.
3. You're not role-playing the game anymore. You're not playing the objectives and you're not playing against the opposing alliance players when you see them. Instead you're playing with and against social groups that are invisible to the casual observer. Not having in-game objectives, be they taking the Cyrodiil map or be they as simple as making a living for your characters by collecting Tel Var, means you're just playing in a pissing contest really.

When I go out solo and run into another enemy player; if off to the side we fight and it goes on as a tough fight; I often will then back off if a bunch of allies come to fight them. I've had a few times where both of us backed off and dealt with the group of players that came at us, then either continued, or just stood and watched the masses fight each other.

If they are being a nuisance at an objective or they themselves are kind of picking a fight with the groups that I am with particularly aiming for newer, weaker guildies; all bets are off.

shrekt4303

Gw2 is similar and the combat used to be better. Its degraded into an aoe clown fiesta. Its large scale is better by far. Its small scale is slower so may not be as appealing as eso.

I would argue gw2 is less new player friendly than eso too

exeeter702

Most dont do the large scale nonsense, and for good reason.

The majority of people the populate pvp zones like cyrodil in eso, are players that dont actually want to pvp on a level where they are required to outplay any type of opposition. It's mainly casual players that enjoy the idea and spectacle of "being part of a big battle". Its ultimately a shallow experience and it's why most mmos that have larger scale pvp endeavors, relegate them to casual content and dont play much stock into them for anything resembling a ranked or end game format.

And this is aside from the countless techncial issues they this type of pvp system usually comes with, especially the more sophisticated your graphics engine and combat design becomes.

SkaraMinoc

ESO Cyrodiil is based on GW2 World vs World which is based on DAoC Frontiers.

ESO Imperial City is based on DAoC Darkness Falls.

SkaraMinoc

ESO Battlegrounds is poorly executed. Pretty much any other MMO is better than ESO battlegrounds.

chuckythexii

fred4 wrote: »

chuckythexii wrote: »

Used to play one called Fallen Earth which was very similar. Wouldn't be surprised to see if some of the devs from it are actually working on ESO now or at least influenced by it. It was basically like ESO but post apocalypse fallout style. The game never really took off though and never had the amount of players ESO does. I think biggest battles were about 30-40 players total. The only major difference was you had to actually aim your attacks which made it harder but it also took rng out of crits. Body shots were normal, limbs were 75% damage, and headshots were criticals.

It was a good game dunno why it failed.

As for large scale battles without performance issues, that really isn't possible. EVE has got the record for largest MMO battles and wars, they handle it with "TiDi" time dilation which is basically intentional lag but it is at least fair since everyone is lagging at the same pace.

I think the best thing for PvP performance wise that ESO could do would be to make more PvP areas, like new dlc type lands which are also PvP zones and also adding in PvP Dungeons in existing areas with multiple entrances (so they can't be camped). The idea is to spread around PvP content so people can find more small gang fights that don't cause massive lag. PvP dungeons in normal areas could also get more PvErs interested in PvP by increasing resource drops in them. EVE does that pretty well encouraging people to go into dangerous areas because of much better rewards. I also think that non banked gold should drop or at least a portion like tel var stones.

Isn't IC the PvP dungeon? It has it's dedicated fanbase (including me), but I have the impression that PvEers hate it and that the majority of PvPers go to Cyrodiil, despite the lag. Don't know why, but am at least thankful that IC is not prone to lagging out.

So the problem with IC is that it just acts like a deer feeder. its a relatively small area for gankers to hunt in. If they were to say make multiple dungeons/delves in existing areas or add regions. it would dramatically reduce the concentration of people in one area. This is the trick to a game like EVE where most of the map is a PvP area (all of it according to the CODE) because its so big even care-bears take the risk of farming in an area they could be attacked at anytime.

Stx

I have played a lot of WoW and GW2, and in my opinion, ESO's combat system has the potential to be the best, but its my least favorite of the three because of the lag, the unresponsiveness, and the imbalances that come with a build system as free as what Eso has.

In all my years playing wow, I have never once died in pvp and not known what happened to me. In Eso, it happens daily, because the visuals are cluttered, animations clip, and break free is so unreliable compared to stun breaks in guild wars or the pvp trinket in wow.

Vevvev

Star Trek Online, Elite: Dangerous, and Planetside 2. Although whether I can call Elite an MMO is.... debatable. ESO's PvP imo beats all the games I've listed but Planetside 2's gameplay, but Planetside 2 is pure PvP and lives and dies off that gameplay so it really has to keep it working.

Larcomar

Interesting stuff, thanks all. I vaguely remember trying a free trial or something for DAOC; tbh don't remember much about it except that it was pretty dark and very confusing. To be fair suspect my pc struggled to run it.

WAOR I do remember, though my recollection is that the pvp battles - at least when I was in it - were a bit like world events. One fort I thought. Had a dwarf who could send people flying with a bash; great fun playing tennis with the healers but my guild didn't stay, and we went on to vanguard I think. And wasn't that fun.....

Barring a few honourable mentions on the sci fi side, it looks like the only current contender is probably GW2; Ill check it out. I didn't like the first enough to stay past first month but it sounds like the options are ltd so why not. And ofc keep an eye on NW. Otherwise, I guess I'll be joining the exodus from Ravenwatch and try cp for a bit.

Cheers all

coletas

I love planet side 2 pvp too... Very similar to cyrodill but much more balanced, faster combats, completely free and 0 grinding... Just for Exp to get a little better stats. Is just much more casual, you enter and play, and dont have to think on "damn, i need x thing, i have to repeat the same dungeon 300 times to play a month with that thing and then it will be changed" Or level up extremely boring things like psijic skillline

temerley

Maaan, they should really fix the performance of PVP, this game is really great. When it works combat is really one of the best combat period. Most of the endgame people I know does either housing or pvp on their not trial time. And most PVPers I know buy crowns for new slots, riding training, or just plain selling them for gold (most of the crown sellers on my guilds are PVPers for god's sake)

As for the other people that I know not into PVP maybe half of them are turned off because of the performance.

Jesus man, if ZOS can just fix the damn performance PVP could be waaay larger than it currently is.

Kaysha

The only game with PvP like Cyrodiil is/was DaoC. Or to be more accurate, ESO has PvP like DaoC. Which is not surprising when you take the devs from one game (DaoC) to make a new game (ESO).

That being said...DaoC is from an other time. Internet was bad back then and it was not possible to make an action MMORGP without spell queues or auto-attack.