The Cyrodiil plans = "yep"

loosej

Erickson9610 wrote: »

If a shooter game adds new guns, does that count as PvP content? I would think so. It's not a new map or a new gamemode, but it is still content to be used in PvP.

In this case, ESO adds new effects with item sets. A lot of new gear is released, with some of it being sourced from PvP activities. I think it's a fair comparison to make, because like new weapons in a shooter game, they add new ways to play PvP.

Are we complaining about a lack of guns (gear)? [snip]

[edited for baiting]

Ocelot9x

LadyGP wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Ok, just going to throw this out there... It seems that the devs feel that in PVE, they provide the content and story lines that the players play through and in PVP Cyrodiil, the players provide the content to play through. Is that reasonable? I can see, on the dev side, that being a reasonable position. As a player, I can also see how something new would be fun...

To be honest... I think the overwhelming majority of PvPers would be okay with zero content moving forward in exchange for just fixing the performance issues that have been plaguing it for many years.

Give this ol' beater of a car a little tune up - ya know what I mean?

Well, compared to few years ago the game is at least playable, we had times where it was literally unplayable (crashes, lag etc) i would prefer something new to do in cyro after 7 years tbh

LadyGP

Ocelot9x wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Ok, just going to throw this out there... It seems that the devs feel that in PVE, they provide the content and story lines that the players play through and in PVP Cyrodiil, the players provide the content to play through. Is that reasonable? I can see, on the dev side, that being a reasonable position. As a player, I can also see how something new would be fun...

To be honest... I think the overwhelming majority of PvPers would be okay with zero content moving forward in exchange for just fixing the performance issues that have been plaguing it for many years.

Give this ol' beater of a car a little tune up - ya know what I mean?

Well, compared to few years ago the game is at least playable, we had times where it was literally unplayable (crashes, lag etc) i would prefer something new to do in cyro after 7 years tbh

I'd love new content but content doesnt matter to me if I spend more time crashing than actually being able to play the game.. which based on this thread is happening to most people. https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/658253/zos-massive-spike-in-ping-lag-in-recent-days-what-gives#latest @ZOS_Kevin

Erickson9610

loosej wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

If a shooter game adds new guns, does that count as PvP content? I would think so. It's not a new map or a new gamemode, but it is still content to be used in PvP.

In this case, ESO adds new effects with item sets. A lot of new gear is released, with some of it being sourced from PvP activities. I think it's a fair comparison to make, because like new weapons in a shooter game, they add new ways to play PvP.

Are we complaining about a lack of guns (gear)? [snip]

The argument being made is that players want "Cyrodiil updates". I assume that means "Cyrodiil content", as in new features that can be marketed to bring in new players to Cyrodiil, like the siege weapon and repair kit QoL changes. You can't advertise that the game is getting bug fixes and server performance upgrades because those are both not interesting enough to an outside player and those are also to be expected of a live service video game.


My point in mentioning the new Cyrodiil-sourced PvP sets being added is that this is the sort of thing you'd expect to be marketed to outside players in similar games. Brand new ways to play the same PvP. This is a content update. All the bug fixes happen in the background and are never the primary focus of an update.


What many people in this thread seem to want instead are bug fixes and server performance upgrades, rather than content updates. Those will come with time — you just shouldn't expect an entire update dedicated to fixing bugs.

[edited to remove quote]

LadyGP

Erickson9610 wrote: »

What many people in this thread seem to want instead are bug fixes and server performance upgrades, rather than content updates. Those will come with time — you just shouldn't expect an entire update dedicated to fixing bugs.

Do you remember the "Year of Performance"?

Honestly, Cyro has been a disaster filled with lag and dsync issues for over 5 years now with next to zero acknowledgment from ZOS.

This is where the... "we just want it to work" comments come from.

Zos said like 3 years ago they weren't adding new content to Cyro until they fixed the issues but they haven't done anything that has had a positive impact on the servers/performance.

The best day to play cyro is the same day they restart the servers... then it's all down hill from there.

Tcholl

The issue is not if there are new sets that can be used in PvP or not. This is a good example of how far are the devs and pvp players.

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

This is valid for this update (BG), but also to the class changes on every patch, server problems, in combat bug, tank/healing meta and more. Even the explanation in the patch notes feels cringe and shows they have no idea of what is going on.

I believe it is pretty obvious: those devs do not play PvP in their own game.

Ocelot9x

Tcholl wrote: »

The issue is not if there are new sets that can be used in PvP or not. This is a good example of how far are the devs and pvp players.

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

This is valid for this update (BG), but also to the class changes on every patch, server problems, in combat bug, tank/healing meta and more. Even the explanation in the patch notes feels cringe and shows they have no idea of what is going on.

I believe it is pretty obvious: those devs do not play PvP in their own game.

I mean, have you heard about the lead combat designer pvp build? Ive lost all my hopes when I've heard that

Lumsdenml

LadyGP wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Ok, just going to throw this out there... It seems that the devs feel that in PVE, they provide the content and story lines that the players play through and in PVP Cyrodiil, the players provide the content to play through. Is that reasonable? I can see, on the dev side, that being a reasonable position. As a player, I can also see how something new would be fun...

To be honest... I think the overwhelming majority of PvPers would be okay with zero content moving forward in exchange for just fixing the performance issues that have been plaguing it for many years.

Give this ol' beater of a car a little tune up - ya know what I mean?

Yeah, I hear that. I assume that most people who say that play GH? I'm in Ravenwatch and almost never have any performance issues...

Tcholl

Ocelot9x wrote: »

Tcholl wrote: »

The issue is not if there are new sets that can be used in PvP or not. This is a good example of how far are the devs and pvp players.

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

This is valid for this update (BG), but also to the class changes on every patch, server problems, in combat bug, tank/healing meta and more. Even the explanation in the patch notes feels cringe and shows they have no idea of what is going on.

I believe it is pretty obvious: those devs do not play PvP in their own game.

I mean, have you heard about the lead combat designer pvp build? Ive lost all my hopes when I've heard that

I have not heard, please tell me so at least I can have a laugh! hehe

Erickson9610

Tcholl wrote: »

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

ZOS has been working on those issues. And further, ZOS is supposed to make changes no one asked for — that's called new content. ZOS wanted to change Battlegrounds to appeal to a new audience, and they wanted to create the Infinite Archive to draw in fans of the Roguelike genre. Both of these can be easily marketed to outside audiences.

LadyGP wrote: »

Do you remember the "Year of Performance"?

The performance updates were secondary to the Chapter/DLC release schedule, which were the primary focus of marketing campaigns.

Tcholl

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Tcholl wrote: »

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

ZOS has been working on those issues. And further, ZOS is supposed to make changes no one asked for — that's called new content. ZOS wanted to change Battlegrounds to appeal to a new audience, and they wanted to create the Infinite Archive to draw in fans of the Roguelike genre. Both of these can be easily marketed to outside audiences.

LadyGP wrote: »

Do you remember the "Year of Performance"?

The performance updates were secondary to the Chapter/DLC release schedule, which were the primary focus of marketing campaigns.

@Erickson9610 do you play PvP? If so, which kind? Which campaign? Do you play in any groups?

Jaraal

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Elsonso

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

There was speculation that it would be a queue system for duels. I never bought into that being anything other than a joke, but it is a testimony to the vague nature of the information from ZOS prior to August.

Erickson9610

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Tales of Tribute is Player versus Player, unless you play against the NPCs. Though, I personally thought "non-Cyrodiil" meant some brand new mode, like a FFA or something larger than Battlegrounds.

spartaxoxo

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Yup they describe the following as PvP:

Cyrodiil
Imperial City
Battlegrounds
Player vs Player Tales of Tribute matches
Dueling

Not Cyrodiil only eliminated one of the five. We also know they specify PvP Tales rather than just PvP, when it comes to tribute. So, that could be safely eliminated as well.

So, "not Cyrodiil" could have been BGs, IC, dueling, or something entirely new.

CatoUnchained

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Tales of Tribute is Player versus Player, unless you play against the NPCs. Though, I personally thought "non-Cyrodiil" meant some brand new mode, like a FFA or something larger than Battlegrounds.

No, ToT is a card game; a mini game. If there is no combat involved then it's not PvP.

Elsonso

CatoUnchained wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Tales of Tribute is Player versus Player, unless you play against the NPCs. Though, I personally thought "non-Cyrodiil" meant some brand new mode, like a FFA or something larger than Battlegrounds.

No, ToT is a card game; a mini game. If there is no combat involved then it's not PvP.

While it wasn't the best choice of terms for them to use, ToT is player vs player (aka PVP). Combat is a sort of PVP, but not everything has to be actual combat. Just competing against another player is enough.

Jaraal

CatoUnchained wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Tales of Tribute is Player versus Player, unless you play against the NPCs. Though, I personally thought "non-Cyrodiil" meant some brand new mode, like a FFA or something larger than Battlegrounds.

No, ToT is a card game; a mini game. If there is no combat involved then it's not PvP.

ZOS begs to differ.

https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/62561

Ocelot9x

Tcholl wrote: »

Ocelot9x wrote: »

Tcholl wrote: »

The issue is not if there are new sets that can be used in PvP or not. This is a good example of how far are the devs and pvp players.

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

This is valid for this update (BG), but also to the class changes on every patch, server problems, in combat bug, tank/healing meta and more. Even the explanation in the patch notes feels cringe and shows they have no idea of what is going on.

I believe it is pretty obvious: those devs do not play PvP in their own game.

I mean, have you heard about the lead combat designer pvp build? Ive lost all my hopes when I've heard that

I have not heard, please tell me so at least I can have a laugh! hehe

1 piece oakensoul
5 maras balm
5 hist sap

spartaxoxo

CatoUnchained wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Tales of Tribute is Player versus Player, unless you play against the NPCs. Though, I personally thought "non-Cyrodiil" meant some brand new mode, like a FFA or something larger than Battlegrounds.

No, ToT is a card game; a mini game. If there is no combat involved then it's not PvP.

All Player vs Player content is PvP. That's an industry standard use of the term and you'll see it with other card games. PvP literally stands for Player vs Player. PK is exclusively combat. PvP is not.

Tcholl

Ocelot9x wrote: »

Tcholl wrote: »

Ocelot9x wrote: »

Tcholl wrote: »

The issue is not if there are new sets that can be used in PvP or not. This is a good example of how far are the devs and pvp players.

They come up with changes and updates NO ONE HAS ASKED FOR and do not matter to the majority of players, while neglecting issues that have been appointed for several years now.

This is valid for this update (BG), but also to the class changes on every patch, server problems, in combat bug, tank/healing meta and more. Even the explanation in the patch notes feels cringe and shows they have no idea of what is going on.

I believe it is pretty obvious: those devs do not play PvP in their own game.

I mean, have you heard about the lead combat designer pvp build? Ive lost all my hopes when I've heard that

I have not heard, please tell me so at least I can have a laugh! hehe

1 piece oakensoul
5 maras balm
5 hist sap

OMG! cringe hehe

Twohothardware

If you actually want to support PvP your focus should be on Cyrodiil where the majority of actual PvP players are at.

Battlegrounds is mostly PvE players in there just to get the Daily XP reward from their first match.

CatoUnchained

Jaraal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The one thing we do want to note is that we have tried to make it clear for months now that this update would be Battlegrounds focused.

The only thing I saw was that it was PvP oriented, part of Q4, and then later that it wouldn't be Cyrodiil. I was actually anticipating something entirely new until fairly recently like ranked dueling. If it was your intent all year to make it known it was a Battleground update, then y'all needed to be direct and say that.

Exactly. I mean, they consider the card game to be PvP, so just saying "not Cyrodiil" doesn't mean 'definitely Battlegrounds.'

Sometimes ZOS is wrong. What can I say?

Bethgael

A lot of the "technical issues" for... well... everything there're technical issues for, is for parity with the older console systems (and lower end PCs, but that's secondary).

These issues will not be dealt with--for anyone--until virtually no one is on those systems any more. We can ask until we're blue in the face but if it ain't fair for users of said systems, it ain't gonna happen. I do understand--people on the consoles paid for the game, too. I really do think ZoS needs to consider free "upgrades" for console users on the newer systems, perhaps to incentivise movement on to them (which will be useless if said console companies keep carrying on the way they are with pricing and whatnot). Or, the need to say to the older users, "hey sorry, we're not supporting these any more" which isn't going to happen (and, even as a PC user, I reckon it shouldn't; again, console players paid for the same game I did).

The other alternative would be instancing things like housing, parts of cyro, and that might work for housing (where you have a load screen anyhow) but would not work for PvP areas. Hence, the new options for smaller, instanced more detailed battlegrounds.

The real issue here is that Bethesda's ambition for a wide-scale PvP region was a bit ahead of the external tech of the day, and now that the external tech is there, their internal tech isn't.

Stafford197

I have many great memories of Cyrodiil PvP from way back, when it was genuinely amazing. I remember it as fondly as I do PvP from the old CoD or Halo games.

Seems that all good PvP eventually comes to an end though. Cyrodiil has zero chance of going back to anything nearly as fun as how it used to be.

Erickson9610

Stafford197 wrote: »

I have many great memories of Cyrodiil PvP from way back, when it was genuinely amazing. I remember it as fondly as I do PvP from the old CoD or Halo games.

Seems that all good PvP eventually comes to an end though. Cyrodiil has zero chance of going back to anything nearly as fun as how it used to be.

There's a non-zero chance that Cyrodiil will be improved in the coming months. In an interview, ZOS has said that "PvP is definitely a big part of our future."

ZOS doesn't want to completely neglect Cyrodiil. After all, they did make QoL updates specifically for Cyrodiil, and they have been working on improving the servers.

Stafford197

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Stafford197 wrote: »

I have many great memories of Cyrodiil PvP from way back, when it was genuinely amazing. I remember it as fondly as I do PvP from the old CoD or Halo games.

Seems that all good PvP eventually comes to an end though. Cyrodiil has zero chance of going back to anything nearly as fun as how it used to be.

There's a non-zero chance that Cyrodiil will be improved in the coming months. In an interview, ZOS has said that "PvP is definitely a big part of our future."

ZOS doesn't want to completely neglect Cyrodiil. After all, they did make QoL updates specifically for Cyrodiil, and they have been working on improving the servers.

In the coming months? The coming months are a BG update and in the recent livestream they had no actual plans for Cyrodiil. What are you on about lol

Erickson9610

Stafford197 wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Stafford197 wrote: »

I have many great memories of Cyrodiil PvP from way back, when it was genuinely amazing. I remember it as fondly as I do PvP from the old CoD or Halo games.

Seems that all good PvP eventually comes to an end though. Cyrodiil has zero chance of going back to anything nearly as fun as how it used to be.

There's a non-zero chance that Cyrodiil will be improved in the coming months. In an interview, ZOS has said that "PvP is definitely a big part of our future."

ZOS doesn't want to completely neglect Cyrodiil. After all, they did make QoL updates specifically for Cyrodiil, and they have been working on improving the servers.

In the coming months? The coming months are a BG update and in the recent livestream they had no actual plans for Cyrodiil. What are you on about lol

I mean in 2025, which is in the coming months.

Groterdan

Tot is the worst thing added calling it pvp is even worse 😞

Muizer

Erickson9610 wrote: »

I mean in 2025, which is in the coming months.

For that to be true, ZOS would have to have been working on two major PvP updates in parallel, which all things considered is an idea not worth entertaining.