Pvp is slowly dying

LPapirius

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Its just the population dying step by step.

The PvP population isn't dying or losing interest. ZOS is restricting us from getting into the zone to play unless we log on before 9am EST.

xDeusEJRx

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

ESO PVP community:
We want new pvp content.

Also pvp community:
We need only death match.

I think both can be true. More options is better, problem is that you don't get multiple options. More new content would make every happy and more varied content will allow long term players to stick to whatever bubble they choose to.

The only issue is that pvp players don't get new content or varied options to enjoy content. Let's forget last time new content to pvp was 6 years ago and last change we got to PVP options was removing no proc from ravenwatch which is taking away options from players not adding options

Parasaurolophus

I just don't really understand what the new pvp content in eso could be. Just new locations or decorations?
I'm also pretty skeptical about battlegrounds for two teams. What's the point of finishing the match when the difference in strength is obvious?

Bammlschwamml

I just remembered an interview where one of the developers was talking about "scalability" when asked about performance issues. This dev wished they would have done something with "scalability" when they made this game. And how it was a big mistake they didn't do it.

I have no clue what exactly this was supposed to mean. But it sounded like they were aware of the performance problems that have been driving players away for many years, and still haven't done anything about it. Maybe because they can't. Maybe because they don't want to. Like with all the bugs. There is a reason why "bugthesda" jokes stopped being funny a long time ago. It's just sad at this point...

Bammlschwamml

LPapirius wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Its just the population dying step by step.

The PvP population isn't dying or losing interest. ZOS is restricting us from getting into the zone to play unless we log on before 9am EST.

I bet you are playing on PC and/or NA server where most of the diehard players went after their platform died (xbox eu and playstation eu etc. don't look so good).

loosej

Bammlschwamml wrote: »

I just remembered an interview where one of the developers was talking about "scalability" when asked about performance issues. This dev wished they would have done something with "scalability" when they made this game. And how it was a big mistake they didn't do it.

I have no clue what exactly this was supposed to mean. But it sounded like they were aware of the performance problems that have been driving players away for many years, and still haven't done anything about it. Maybe because they can't. Maybe because they don't want to. Like with all the bugs. There is a reason why "bugthesda" jokes stopped being funny a long time ago. It's just sad at this point...

My guess would be, being able to distribute server load between multiple physical servers. The Megaserver is most likely a pool of different machines, each running a certain amount of zones, shards within zones, or instances. When you say they mentioned scalability, I assume you mean for Cyro specifically. It would make sense that assigning two different machines to run one instance of Cyrodiil is not something built into their architecture, and that that ends up being the limiting factor. It would also make sense that enabling that would basically mean rewriting the entire server code from the ground up, which would be a big investment.

That being said... If they knew 10 years ago that Cyrodiil couldn't scale and never would with the server code they had, they could have made the business decision to assign some resources to doing that rewrite, and let it take however long it takes. By now they probably would have been able to present some new server architecture that does scale. Instead it appears that they've been frantically searching for the cheapest possible solution, and probably wasted a lot of money in the progress. All while continuing to sell us the dream of large, working siege battles.

Of course, those are educated guesses at best...

Synapsis123

This could just as easily be a thread from 2018. I've heard this sort of thing since forever.

Quackery

I've played this game almost since release (started on Xbox); I've played it on Xbox, PS and PC, so it's safe to say that I'm without a shadow of a doubt, one of their best customers. The amount of money I've spent throughout the years is over 10k dollars, and it would have been more if Cyrodiil hadn't been this broken.

Everything about Cyrodiil is broken, and I'm just at the point where I feel like ZOS doesn't deserve my money. They've slaughtered the population caps, introduced and keep introducing sets that break pvp. They incentivise groups of 3-4 players to wreck the purpose of what Cyrodiil was supposed to be: large scale AvAvA battles.

I have now uninstalled the game, and I don't foresee myself ever returning to ESO. It would take a miracle for it to happen. The worst part is that ZOS has more than enough money to fix ESO once and for all, but choose not to. Ah well, their loss. I suspect I won't be the only one; DC alliance is barely playing Cyrodiil as it is.

Rkindaleft

Pelanora wrote: »

I see eso has dropped out of the top 100/top sellers for Steam, Xbox, Sony....I hope something good happens this and next year.

I’d wager the majority of people buy the game during new expansion releases when there’s tons of advertising. Since there isn’t any Q3/4 DLC anymore the only thing left that generates large amounts of game purchases is when the game is on sale.

I for one have pretty much lost all hope that PvP is going to get the update it deserves that might actually boost participation.

FelisCatus

I don't think the new pvp update will save the game.

JustLovely

Synapsis123 wrote: »

This could just as easily be a thread from 2018. I've heard this sort of thing since forever.

Point of fact, a thread that matches this one almost exactly and started in 2018 was just locked. So ya, like you said.

Lalothen

PvP has slowly died in just about every MMO that it has been implemented in. MMO PvPers have always been a fairly small niche demographic (regardless of how loudly some might proclaim otherwise), and perhaps one of the hardest MMO gamer demographics to satisfy for any appreciable period of time. Revitalisation attempts by other developers have tended to buoy numbers for a while, but almost never sustainably. This trend was evident with PK MUDs in the 90s, and has continued to remain so across a bunch of titles - including PvP-centric MMOs like Shadowbane, DFO, et al - over the last 25 years.

I used to be a hardcore PvPer, but I haven't taken MMO PvP seriously in the last decade - and certainly not in ESO with its borked instances, prolific ball groups, the blatant favoritism of certain classes, and silly proc-stacking gank builds. It's a shame in a way, because I love the Cyro siege mechanics - but not enough to bother playing beyond grabbing easy tiers during MYM.

huskandhunger

aurroo

Vaqual

I have too much work right now, but in a couple of weeks I will make sure the dying happens faster again

JiubLeRepenti

TDVM wrote: »

Pvp is slowly dying from lack of content, terrible balance and adding a new arena/mode(most likely) will not fix this situation. Also in pvp there is no motivation to play, for fun? And what fun can be if the balance does not change for several years and this is not to mention the balance of classes.

Correction : the whole game is slowly dying.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

It isn't that ZoS can't solve the lag in Cyrodiil. It's that ZoS can't solve how to make PVP friendly to casual players.

The time committment and frustration tolerance required to emerge from the newbie stage and have fun in PVP are higher than any other game content except maybe trial trifectas; it's no wonder the population would be small (just like the population of trial trifecta players)

Jsmalls

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

It isn't that ZoS can't solve the lag in Cyrodiil. It's that ZoS can't solve how to make PVP friendly to casual players.

The time committment and frustration tolerance required to emerge from the newbie stage and have fun in PVP are higher than any other game content except maybe trial trifectas; it's no wonder the population would be small (just like the population of trial trifecta players)

This is what I keep saying. Players that want to learn the ropes of PvP and Cryodiil have no where to go...

Under level 50 is barren (to my knowledge), BGs ques are intermittent (and the MMR system is mixed for Solo play from my experience).

Grouping in Cyrodiil is a chore and with 12 player groups harder to include everyone and people are less likely to include random into their group.

If I was a new player I would find it difficult to enjoy PvP in this game where I'm going against players that have been playing for as long as 10 years...

AngryPenguin

Sylosi wrote: »

Unless your standards are very low, it has been dead for years.

Cyrodiil is not dead, but it is being strangled to death and dying a little more and more with every update.

Sailor_Palutena

All we need is to have a PVE version of Cyrodiil, so people can quest and explore that beautiful TES IV zone without being bothered by players who only get satisfaction by killing other players.

wolfie1.0.

Pelanora wrote: »

I see eso has dropped out of the top 100/top sellers for Steam, Xbox, Sony....I hope something good happens this and next year.

Depends on how sales are tracked. But honestly concurrent players is probably a more important stat for a game as old as eso

loosej

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

It isn't that ZoS can't solve the lag in Cyrodiil. It's that ZoS can't solve how to make PVP friendly to casual players.

The time committment and frustration tolerance required to emerge from the newbie stage and have fun in PVP are higher than any other game content except maybe trial trifectas; it's no wonder the population would be small (just like the population of trial trifecta players)

Honestly, the time it takes to get from the newbie stage to the semi-competent stage where I feel I'm currently at is one of the things that kept PvP fresh for me. There's few games where you can be playing for years and still keep having new moments of insight that make things click together just a bit more on a regular basis.

AngryPenguin

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

TDVM wrote: »

Pvp is slowly dying from lack of content, terrible balance and adding a new arena/mode(most likely) will not fix this situation. Also in pvp there is no motivation to play, for fun? And what fun can be if the balance does not change for several years and this is not to mention the balance of classes.

Correction : the whole game is slowly dying.

Sailor_Palutena wrote: »

All we need is to have a PVE version of Cyrodiil, so people can quest and explore that beautiful TES IV zone without being bothered by players who only get satisfaction by killing other players.

And we need a PvP version of every PvE zone currently in the game too, right?

Vulkunne

TDVM wrote: »

Pvp is slowly dying from lack of content, terrible balance and adding a new arena/mode(most likely) will not fix this situation. Also in pvp there is no motivation to play, for fun? And what fun can be if the balance does not change for several years and this is not to mention the balance of classes.

This hasn't been a very positive day for me so let me just say, that PvP itself isn't really dying as much as its under attack.

Was on the other night and uh everything was actually going great until this ball group showed up. And that's when people started getting frustrated and pop bars started emptying out.

The PvP vision isn't bad at all, its quite good comparatively to other games. But things going unchecked like Ball Groups, Guilds being really lousy to people and not supporting them (like with the Hammer... right AD or with the Scroll... right EP?).

It's not going to go over well but actions by the players AS WELL AS an apparent lack of concern for longstanding PvP issues by ZOS together are killing the experience.

Vaqual

Overtuned and cheesy sets and abilities as main selling strategy per update has to have drawbacks, right?

Why fix obviously broken things, guided by endless pages of player feedback, when you can just rotate another class to the top and release "current proc set"?

And who would try and create lag free PvP in 2024, when PS3 support is the price you have to pay for that?

I just hope they are not banking to much on us buying their next game and I hope they see what happens to games that nobody needs these days. They make for good news headlines, but that is about it.

Keeping ESO running appears to be the economically sound thing to do.

JiubLeRepenti

Sailor_Palutena wrote: »

All we need is to have a PVE version of Cyrodiil, so people can quest and explore that beautiful TES IV zone without being bothered by players who only get satisfaction by killing other players.

I can't agree with this. Even if I'm clearly a PvE player.

It's normal to get less accessible content in a MMO, no matter if it's due to the global difficulty, the PvP dimension of the area, the fact that the content you want to reach requires to do things we don't like to do (typically, I'm currently farming Tales of Tributes in order to get collectible furnishings, even if I'm not a big fan of PvP)...

You want to do Cyrodil and/or Imperial City quests/content? Then take some time to learn how to survive in an PvP area, stuff yourself with adapted sets and a dedicated build, and start a new progression.

And please, please, please, stop denigrating PvP players by qualifying them as people "who only get satisfaction by killing other players". It's reductive, contemptuous, and a disdainful statement. It's 100% normal, when you get into a PvP area, to take the risk to get killed. The game was made for this. The guy who'll kill you will get alliance points if he does it so, instead of taking it personally and harboring negative feeling against them, just accept the fact that you have to take the risk to get killed when you go in PvP area.

Aggrovious

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

ESO PVP community:
We want new pvp content.

Also pvp community:
We need only death match.

BG was more enjoyable when it was Deathmatch only as a "bug."

ragnarok6644b14_ESO

Vulkunne wrote: »

TDVM wrote: »

Pvp is slowly dying from lack of content, terrible balance and adding a new arena/mode(most likely) will not fix this situation. Also in pvp there is no motivation to play, for fun? And what fun can be if the balance does not change for several years and this is not to mention the balance of classes.

This hasn't been a very positive day for me so let me just say, that PvP itself isn't really dying as much as its under attack.

Was on the other night and uh everything was actually going great until this ball group showed up. And that's when people started getting frustrated and pop bars started emptying out.

The PvP vision isn't bad at all, its quite good comparatively to other games. But things going unchecked like Ball Groups, Guilds being really lousy to people and not supporting them (like with the Hammer... right AD or with the Scroll... right EP?).

It's not going to go over well but actions by the players AS WELL AS an apparent lack of concern for longstanding PvP issues by ZOS together are killing the experience.

I think though ball groups are actually sort of "well designed" and it's a difficult space to design out of.

The "dream" for games like ESO is to make gameplay of coordinated players trounce uncoordinated players. That's *good game design*. Coordinated groups working together should always beat disorganized rabble. An army of 10,000 individuals can be broken by a battalion of 500 trained, equipped, and coordinated mercenaries.

What do you do to design your way *out* of that world, once you finally design your way in?

Redguards_Revenge

Slowly dying, PVP died upon the release of oakensoul.

Wolfkeks

Cyto def needs some love. Maybe new ranks, new achievements, rewards like mounts? Something at least

Virys1967

Major_Mangle wrote: »

At this point I'd like zos to actually consider getting rid of campaigns like Blackreach and Icereach (Icereach/sub 50 has 0 purpose and is honestly just waste of pixels and server space, just remove it already. People only use it to sell emp anyway).

Have two campaigns:
* Grey Host, CP PvP without faction locks
* Ravenwatch, no CP PvP without faction locks.
Add a small cooldown on how often you can swap between alliances (once every 12-24 hours), just to prevent the most extreme faction hoppers.

The current problem is that population caps are too low and at the same time PvP doesn't have the population it used to. We also have too many campaigns which spreads out the population even more.

I agree about having two campaign instances, but no faction locks would be a mistake.
I've been in Cyrodiil, on one alliance, since 2015.
The problem now is that so many people switch to the campaign that's winning, even with having to spend real world cash, and many have multiple accounts with access to any faction at any time, so with no faction locks, we would wind up with the map one color for the most of a campaign, sitting in the base, reminiscing about how fun and competitive it used to be.
Imbalance is a real problem.
Five days into this campaign and one alliance had 10k more than the other two, and at present is 20k ahead of the other two with 21 days left in the campaign.
It was the same last month.
There's no competition, there's no surprise at who wins the campaign at the end of it like it used to be when we ran within 2-3k points of each other.
I think what might fix it is balance.
If they limit the amount of players that can get in by the population of the alliance with the least bars, we may see it even out.
Right now it's not even worth trying to siege a keep because you'll have no chance with the sheer number of zerglings that will show up.