ZOS please make companion quests SOLO!

WhyMustItBe

This is the second time my opening quest with Mirri was ruined by literally a dozen other people with Mirri clones in there smashing switches and competing over the boss.

This completely ruins immersion when you see a dozen other Mirri's in what should be your first bonding mission with YOUR new companion.

Also, the first time this happened people spawn killing the boss led to missing that you were supposed to kill it (since it wasn't there), which ended up getting Mirri's brother killed. This can ruin the entire relationship with your companion for people that care about stuff like that. It is also super easy to miss when people are spawn camping it, if you didn't know it was supposed to be there (IE first time through).

There is no reason not to have these quests solo instanced and every reason to do so. Making them public is really putting a damper on the whole personal relationship aspect of the companion system which seems totally counter what you were shooting for.

@ZOS_GinaBruno

Darkstorne

I really think the future of story-driven "MMOs" like ESO will be to analyze when it's favourable to phase in other players around you, and when the game is objectively better without them. I'd put hard money on overland in a potential ESO2 being mostly solo. So world bosses, public dungeons, group events like dolmens etc you'd still see other players, but dungeons and quests and exploration you wouldn't.

The benefits go far beyond immersion. It's not just that quest NPC saying "you're my only hope!" when a dozen other players swarm around them. Designing dungeons and overland 100% solo means:

• No need to have a plethora of mobs standing around as XP piñatas. You can now have far fewer of them, and have them legitimately sandbox and interact with the world.
• No need for those mobs to respawn out of thin air every 30 seconds. Once you've cleared a dungeon, it's cleared.
• Set piece events in dungeons like a bridge collapsing as you cross can be a thing.
• Actual change in the world can happen. For example, in ESO's Betnikh there's an Ayleid Ruin quest I finished 7 years ago, where the ghosts here were cursed to haunt the place for eternity. I broke the curse to free them, and they said "Great, thanks! We'll just hang around a little while longer to gather our thoughts, then be off outta here!" Still there to this day...

You'd still be able to group with friends and guildmates to quest together. You just wouldn't run into randoms all the damn time. The solo content would be much better for it, and you'd still have all the group content you'd expect from an MMO. The vast majority of players already spend the vast majority of their time in modern MMOs like ESO and FF14 playing solo, so it makes sense to improve those aspects of these games to single player game quality.

I think what holds this change back currently is an issue with this genre where too many think "but this is how previous MMOs functioned, so this is how all MMOs have to function!" And you'll probably see people replying with similar logic below ("If you don't like MMOs go play Skyrim!!1!1!LOLOL"). But that belief is steadily changing now. You're not alone in wanting better solo experiences in MMOs, and contrary to what some people might think it doesn't conflict with the nature of MMOs either. It reflects how most people play MMOs and games in general these days. We like investing more time in fewer games, and expect those games to cater to a wide variety of playstyles as a result. We want MMOs to be single player when we want to relax and engage in the story, and multiplayer when we engage in group content.

Fennwitty

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

Also, the first time this happened people spawn killing the boss led to missing that you were supposed to kill it (since it wasn't there), which ended up getting Mirri's brother killed.

I agree it should be solo but I've run through several times, where the boss was alive or dead already. Only thing that influences the outcome is whether you destroy the two side pillars first.

WhyMustItBe

Fennwitty wrote: »

I agree it should be solo but I've run through several times, where the boss was alive or dead already. Only thing that influences the outcome is whether you destroy the two side pillars first.

If that is the case then there is clearly another problem. It could be that other people hitting the crystal pillars plays the animation and sound like when you do it, so when a dozen others with their clone Mirri's are all mashing them, it LOOKS like you actually did it, and SOUNDS like you actually did it, but her brother dies because someone ELSE was the one that did it.

This also raises the issue of whether these pillars have a cooldown, such that if someone clicks it in front of you and you click it while it is still animating from their click, will it block activation so you don't get credit?

I think something like the above is what happened to me because the first time I definitely went to them both and clicked.

Darkstorne

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

Fennwitty wrote: »

I agree it should be solo but I've run through several times, where the boss was alive or dead already. Only thing that influences the outcome is whether you destroy the two side pillars first.

If that is the case then there is clearly another problem. It could be that other people hitting the crystal pillars plays the animation and sound like when you do it, so when a dozen others with their clone Mirri's are all mashing them, it LOOKS like you actually did it, and SOUNDS like you actually did it, but her brother dies because someone ELSE was the one that did it.

This also raises the issue of whether these pillars have a cooldown, such that if someone clicks it in front of you and you click it while it is still animating from their click, will it block activation so you don't get credit?

I think something like the above is what happened to me because the first time I definitely went to them both and clicked.

Yep, it's so frustrating. If you're going to have other players doing the exact same quest at the exact same time, then at least write the quest to accommodate that, so that their actions affect your completion status, and the writing reflects that you aren't the only hero around. Easily one of my biggest pet peeves with MMO design ("pretend everything else going on around you isn't actually happening at all").

Olauron

Fennwitty wrote: »

WhyMustItBe wrote: »

Also, the first time this happened people spawn killing the boss led to missing that you were supposed to kill it (since it wasn't there), which ended up getting Mirri's brother killed.

I agree it should be solo but I've run through several times, where the boss was alive or dead already. Only thing that influences the outcome is whether you destroy the two side pillars first.

I have done this quest just one time and alone, so the following is just an assumption, but there are two possibilities:
1. Another person has already done the pillars and is finishing a boss now. You enter the room, the pillars are not destroyed for you, but another player kills the boss before you can interact with pillars. The death of the boss moves your quest too (sometimes with quest bosses you don't have to damage them to progress the quest, just to watch them die). The result is boss being killed without the pillars destroyed for the newcomer.
2. Another person didn't bother with pillars at all (on purpose or not). You enter the room, your pillars are not destroyed, another player kills the boss progressing your quest as well.