Maintenance for the week of December 30:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 30
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 30
Population shrinking, PLEASE do something
-
WitchyKiki✭✭✭✭✭AngryPenguin wrote: »MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »Yesterday prime time arround 30-40 people online in my 500 people guilds and i lacked for 1h to find someone for the pledges so i stopped.
Maybe you need to find a new guild? I've had many guilds die over the years. People leave, people come, guilds can go away, new guilds can happen.
Im not speaking about one guild im speaking about 4 lol
Exactly. There are no guilds that I am currently in that I was in at launch, except for my own guild. Guilds turn over just the same as players do.
The player and guild churn right now is far, far higher now than it has ever been in the past. What's happening now is not normal by any measure.
Someone says something very similar to that every time this subject gets discussed seriously. Tea leaves and entrails, signs and portents, mixed with a healthy dose of cognitive bias. People often over estimate the importance of things and ideas they hold dear.
I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
Yup! I'm sure they are reading these posts carefully, and will turn around next year. I have a positive outlook, either way, best time to buy stuff on the market is now!Context is for kings -Captain Gabriel Lorca2 -
MorganaLaVey✭✭✭✭I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!13 -
WitchyKiki✭✭✭✭✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
Games like FFXIV and WoW are a good example of steering around. Even GW2 has done major changes and attracted bigger populations as of late, and thats a 11yr old game.Context is for kings -Captain Gabriel Lorca5 -
Stafford197✭✭✭✭✭I don't know why people are leaving ESO, but as one of those who left, I can explain why I did.
For context, I have about 7,500 hours in the game, 13 fully geared and leveled-up characters (one stamina and one magicka variant for each class, plus a dedicated healer). Every character is fully leveled with all the skill points, Mages Guild, Fighters Guild, Psijic Order, and so on, and I have a ton of golded sets.
I’ve done a lot of hard mode DLC dungeons and veteran trials, but I’m by no means a hardcore PvE player.
I’ve also spent a lot of time in PvP in Cyrodiil/Imperial City, but again, I wouldn’t call myself a hardcore PvP player either.
I’m more of an "average Joe"—not particularly great at any specific aspect of the game, but enjoying it by casually switching from questing to RvR to small-scale PvP to mid-endgame PvE.
I haven’t played for about a year now, and today I’m casually browsing the forums because I felt a bit nostalgic and wanted to check out the current state of things.
So, why did I leave the game? Here are the main reasons that come to mind:
I got fed up with the fact that, after the painful grind to get weapons and sets—after spending weeks or months getting what you needed to set up a build—the sets could be completely obliterated (not just slightly adjusted, but completely obliterated to the point of being useless) overnight with no warning and often for no real reason other than to "shake up the meta." This happened multiple times until one day I just said, "enough is enough."
Constant class, racial, and skill changes that were handled with a sledgehammer. I play other games, and when something is OP, it's usually adjusted over 1, 2, or 3 iterations in small steps, until it’s balanced with other items in the game. Take Warzone as an example (a different game but very popular): OP weapons are slightly adjusted between patches, so they’re no longer OP but still usable and competitive. In ESO, there was no middle ground. Either a class or skill was completely broken for a while, or it became utterly useless. This ties back to point 1: it felt like a way to force players into the endless grind cycle, making them level up new characters, classes, or playstyles.
When new classes were introduced (this happened with the Warden and the Arcanist), they deliberately destroyed existing classes or playstyles to make room for the new ones and make them shine. Again, this was to force players back into the grind cycle.
Hybridization: a noble idea on paper, but a disastrous result in practice. It ruined one of the most fun aspects of the game—having to choose between two clear playstyles (the "warrior" or the "mage," each with its pros and cons). Now, every spec feels like the same bland hybrid warrior/mage on paper, with more options, but in reality, there’s less choice because everyone is using more or less the same builds and skills.
ESO, at its peak in some patches, was one of the best, if not the best game I’ve ever played. We had crazy playstyles and builds—some of them OP, sure, but almost every OP build had a counter (a rock/paper/scissors mechanic). PvP, when it worked, was a blast, and PvE was beautiful. But because they had to feed the endless grind cycle, they slowly killed the game, sucking out all the fun aspects and alienating their player base in the process.
So, in the end, from my perspective, the lesson is this: you can only frustrate and disrespect your customers up to a point. Even if your game is great, sooner or later, they’ll get fed up and say, "enough is enough," and they’ll leave.I've tried to get friends into the game. they don't stick around, overland is boring, they said, all the rewards are in the store there is no feeling of progression or incentive to get better or ingame resources to learn the game as you go. Many sets are just plain bad and the grind to cp160 didn't feel good. There is no reason to be in a guild as you can tackle most of the game solo with just 2 braincells. It also makes quests that they actually liked doing less impactful because all the npc die in 2 hits.. Oh and the limited bagspace issue was another deal-breaker. This is the feedback that I can share from friends who tried and left the game. And you what I agreed with them. I log in less frequently these days too because I'm bored currently and don't want to risk burning out because of it.
These two posts perfectly describe my experience with ESO, as well as why I now rarely log.
It did used to be an incredible game… rip.16 -
Pelanora✭✭✭✭✭
✭I tried to get my son to play, I thought it would be fun to play together. I bought him a horse and he got on it and couldn't keep up with me. We couldn't go anywhere together.
Almost nothing I could do about that, reasonably speaking.
So that was pretty much that.
I really do think, zos, that you should
re-think mount speed levelling. Is it really necessary? Do you really earn that much from it? It has to be one of the biggest barriers in the game for no real gaming reason.
Edited by Pelanora on October 12, 2024 8:53AM18 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived and you may not have have started the game in 2017. They were allowed to do this because Zenimax Media, specifically Robert Altman, apparently gave them the room to do it. ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game. The question I have is whether their new overlords will have the same mentality that Altman had to let ZOS do what needs to be done, or if they are just going to tell ZOS to make do with what they have.
The community.
"Everyone" is an expert and they know what is best for the game. More people saying it does not make it true, it just makes it popular. Streamers saying it does not make it true, either. Streamers showing spreadsheets and power points does not make it a great idea, it does mean they put a lot of work into it. "Everyone" likes what Game A is doing but that does not mean Game B fails for not doing it. The community is a great place to go for ideas, but not all of them are good ideas that should be implemented, even if they are popular.
"ZOS doesn't listen" and "ZOS doesn't care" is rhetoric. It is designed, intentionally or not, to guilt ZOS into doing something. The idea is to get ZOS to do something just to prove that they do listen, or do care. Not just anything, but specific things. If ZOS does something other than what is suggested, "ZOS didn't listen". I expect ZOS to be smarter than that. When I see ZOS do something that the community was hammering for, in the back of my mind I have to ask myself whether it was really the best for the game that they did this thing, or if they were just trying to appease.
6 -
manukartofanu✭✭✭✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived and you may not have have started the game in 2017. They were allowed to do this because Zenimax Media, specifically Robert Altman, apparently gave them the room to do it. ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game. The question I have is whether their new overlords will have the same mentality that Altman had to let ZOS do what needs to be done, or if they are just going to tell ZOS to make do with what they have.
The community. "Everyone" is an expert and they know what is best for the game. More people saying it does not make it true, it just makes it popular. Streamers saying it does not make it true, either. Streamers showing spreadsheets and power points does not make it a great idea, it does mean they put a lot of work into it. "Everyone" likes what Game A is doing but that does not mean Game B fails for not doing it. The community is a great place to go for ideas, but not all of them are good ideas that should be implemented, even if they are popular.
"ZOS doesn't listen" and "ZOS doesn't care" is rhetoric. It is designed, intentionally or not, to guilt ZOS into doing something. The idea is to get ZOS to do something just to prove that they do listen, or do care. Not just anything, but specific things. If ZOS does something other than what is suggested, "ZOS didn't listen". I expect ZOS to be smarter than that. When I see ZOS do something that the community was hammering for, in the back of my mind I have to ask myself whether it was really the best for the game that they did this thing, or if they were just trying to appease.
Having a position in a company doesn't automatically make your opinion more expert. Yes, people who play a game for days on end often know what the game needs, rather than those who simply come to the office to work. This is precisely why top-level experts in any company always conduct research among their audience.14 -
MISTFORMBZZZ✭✭✭✭✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived and you may not have have started the game in 2017. They were allowed to do this because Zenimax Media, specifically Robert Altman, apparently gave them the room to do it. ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game. The question I have is whether their new overlords will have the same mentality that Altman had to let ZOS do what needs to be done, or if they are just going to tell ZOS to make do with what they have.
The community. "Everyone" is an expert and they know what is best for the game. More people saying it does not make it true, it just makes it popular. Streamers saying it does not make it true, either. Streamers showing spreadsheets and power points does not make it a great idea, it does mean they put a lot of work into it. "Everyone" likes what Game A is doing but that does not mean Game B fails for not doing it. The community is a great place to go for ideas, but not all of them are good ideas that should be implemented, even if they are popular.
"ZOS doesn't listen" and "ZOS doesn't care" is rhetoric. It is designed, intentionally or not, to guilt ZOS into doing something. The idea is to get ZOS to do something just to prove that they do listen, or do care. Not just anything, but specific things. If ZOS does something other than what is suggested, "ZOS didn't listen". I expect ZOS to be smarter than that. When I see ZOS do something that the community was hammering for, in the back of my mind I have to ask myself whether it was really the best for the game that they did this thing, or if they were just trying to appease.
Okay so basically we are all wrong and the game is in a perfect state and everything good and we all shouldnt give out our opinion and suggestion xDmanukartofanu wrote: »MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived and you may not have have started the game in 2017. They were allowed to do this because Zenimax Media, specifically Robert Altman, apparently gave them the room to do it. ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game. The question I have is whether their new overlords will have the same mentality that Altman had to let ZOS do what needs to be done, or if they are just going to tell ZOS to make do with what they have.
The community. "Everyone" is an expert and they know what is best for the game. More people saying it does not make it true, it just makes it popular. Streamers saying it does not make it true, either. Streamers showing spreadsheets and power points does not make it a great idea, it does mean they put a lot of work into it. "Everyone" likes what Game A is doing but that does not mean Game B fails for not doing it. The community is a great place to go for ideas, but not all of them are good ideas that should be implemented, even if they are popular.
"ZOS doesn't listen" and "ZOS doesn't care" is rhetoric. It is designed, intentionally or not, to guilt ZOS into doing something. The idea is to get ZOS to do something just to prove that they do listen, or do care. Not just anything, but specific things. If ZOS does something other than what is suggested, "ZOS didn't listen". I expect ZOS to be smarter than that. When I see ZOS do something that the community was hammering for, in the back of my mind I have to ask myself whether it was really the best for the game that they did this thing, or if they were just trying to appease.
Having a position in a company doesn't automatically make your opinion more expert. Yes, people who play a game for days on end often know what the game needs, rather than those who simply come to the office to work. This is precisely why top-level experts in any company always conduct research among their audience.
This tbh. We play the game everyday we see whats going on and what problems are and are entitled to give suggestions.
And yes Zos doesnt listen most of the time.
Its just what time has shown.
They dont have to listen its their company and their game.
But the community only takes so and so much.
The actual decreasing of the population is the best indicator for the current strategy is not working.Edited by MISTFORMBZZZ on October 12, 2024 1:19PM6 -
MISTFORMBZZZ✭✭✭✭✭Hi all, just wanted to follow up here with a quick acknowledgement. We have seen this thread and have passed it on to ZOS leadership. The conversation for the most part has been a good one about things you would like to see, even in comparison to other games currently on the market or soon to be on the market. Our goal is always to provide a fun and engaging experience for you and your friends/family.
We are working on a few things right now, but we're too early in the process to chat about any of it yet. But that also means we're early enough to see how we can incorporate some of your feedback. So please continue to share positive elements you would like to see in ESO or what you have seen in other games that entice you & your friends/family to further engage with that game.
Also to answere on the comment a bit avove by Elonso:
Im glad aparently they take to consideration to react on the chainging mood in the community.
I hope its a fast reaction because its urgent.
While you may still have a good game on your server, other servers suffer and the decrease of the population is really really strong noticeable.Edited by MISTFORMBZZZ on October 12, 2024 1:27PM1 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭manukartofanu wrote: »
Having a position in a company doesn't automatically make your opinion more expert. Yes, people who play a game for days on end often know what the game needs, rather than those who simply come to the office to work. This is precisely why top-level experts in any company always conduct research among their audience.
We recently saw them do a poll about guilds, after talking to some players about guilds at one of the gatherings. Not sure which one as it seems to take a long time for communications, like polls, to get through committee. This is one of those things that ZOS should have known all about, but apparently they feel the need to know more.
Their general approach to communication makes it hard to understand what they are doing, although Kevin is a distinct improvement.4 -
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I tried to get my son to play, I thought it would be fun to play together. I bought him a horse and he got on it and couldn't keep up with me. We couldn't go anywhere together.
Almost nothing I could do about that, reasonably speaking.
So that was pretty much that.
I really do think, zos, that you should
re-think mount speed levelling. Is it really necessary? Do you really earn that much from it? It has to be one of the biggest barriers in the game for no real gaming reason.
The reason is that ZOS wants to give you a reason to log in every day on every one of your characters for six months to max mount training. It's the same reasoning behind daily log in rewards, and daily endeavors. They create artificial roadblocks to progress to force you to log in every 24 hours, if you wish to go fast / get the shinies.
And personally, if my son couldn't keep up with me, I'd make a new character and make myself the same speed/skill level, and just use my game knowledge and experience as a teaching tool. But I totally get where you're coming from. It shouldn't have to be that way. Unfortunately, video games are more about the bottom line than providing the most efficient service out of the gate. The grind is introduced to promote measured engagement, in just small enough increments to keep players logging in without making most of them rage quit because progress is too slow.6 -
OtarTheMad✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived and you may not have have started the game in 2017. They were allowed to do this because Zenimax Media, specifically Robert Altman, apparently gave them the room to do it. ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game. The question I have is whether their new overlords will have the same mentality that Altman had to let ZOS do what needs to be done, or if they are just going to tell ZOS to make do with what they have.
The community. "Everyone" is an expert and they know what is best for the game. More people saying it does not make it true, it just makes it popular. Streamers saying it does not make it true, either. Streamers showing spreadsheets and power points does not make it a great idea, it does mean they put a lot of work into it. "Everyone" likes what Game A is doing but that does not mean Game B fails for not doing it. The community is a great place to go for ideas, but not all of them are good ideas that should be implemented, even if they are popular.
"ZOS doesn't listen" and "ZOS doesn't care" is rhetoric. It is designed, intentionally or not, to guilt ZOS into doing something. The idea is to get ZOS to do something just to prove that they do listen, or do care. Not just anything, but specific things. If ZOS does something other than what is suggested, "ZOS didn't listen". I expect ZOS to be smarter than that. When I see ZOS do something that the community was hammering for, in the back of my mind I have to ask myself whether it was really the best for the game that they did this thing, or if they were just trying to appease.
A million percent this.
I would hope that someone higher up the chain would do the same thing as Altman did years ago if needed. Players love TES franchise so it wouldn’t surprise me.
Also, definitely think ZOS listens to us but just because they didn’t implement everything we said, that doesn’t mean they weren’t listening. I have a picture my head of how Winterhold Hold should look if we ever went to that area and I’ve shared that. If ZOS doesn’t do it I am not going to think they didn’t listen, they just went down a different path they and BGs thought was better.
I think ZOS reads our feedback and suggestions but a lot of factors go into whether they implement it or not.
3 -
CatoUnchained✭✭✭✭OtarTheMad wrote: »MorganaLaVey wrote: »I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
I think the problem is, that history shows, that many/ most games do not steer around. Once the decline started, it's just a question of time and how long players are willing to cope and put up with it. The sooner you do something the greater the chance to stop the decline. When i started the game in 2017 most if not all the problems people here talk about, where already there. Not as bad, not as obvious but there. For exemple: In 2017 i saw a video of someone talking about the devs puting nonsense on PTS, then a big streamer or whatever complaines about it and starts a movemend against it and it gets changed to make sense and everyone is happy. BUT other nonense things do not get changed even if there is great and detailed feedback on the PTS forum. But the devs did change based on outcry not on feedback. His question was: "What if the devs stop caring about the outcry and just push stuff on live ?" Back then, few people wanted to hear about it but where are we today ? Back then, 3 years after release, we might have been able to get the developers to make it a practice to listen to feedback rather than outcry. But now ? 10 years after release... ? Where they have not cared about the outcry for 5 years or longer ? Puh... So yea we can wait and hope to steer around, it just gets more and more unlikely and it already is most unlikely now imho!
ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived and you may not have have started the game in 2017. They were allowed to do this because Zenimax Media, specifically Robert Altman, apparently gave them the room to do it. ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game. The question I have is whether their new overlords will have the same mentality that Altman had to let ZOS do what needs to be done, or if they are just going to tell ZOS to make do with what they have.
The community. "Everyone" is an expert and they know what is best for the game. More people saying it does not make it true, it just makes it popular. Streamers saying it does not make it true, either. Streamers showing spreadsheets and power points does not make it a great idea, it does mean they put a lot of work into it. "Everyone" likes what Game A is doing but that does not mean Game B fails for not doing it. The community is a great place to go for ideas, but not all of them are good ideas that should be implemented, even if they are popular.
"ZOS doesn't listen" and "ZOS doesn't care" is rhetoric. It is designed, intentionally or not, to guilt ZOS into doing something. The idea is to get ZOS to do something just to prove that they do listen, or do care. Not just anything, but specific things. If ZOS does something other than what is suggested, "ZOS didn't listen". I expect ZOS to be smarter than that. When I see ZOS do something that the community was hammering for, in the back of my mind I have to ask myself whether it was really the best for the game that they did this thing, or if they were just trying to appease.
A million percent this.
I would hope that someone higher up the chain would do the same thing as Altman did years ago if needed. Players love TES franchise so it wouldn’t surprise me.
Also, definitely think ZOS listens to us but just because they didn’t implement everything we said, that doesn’t mean they weren’t listening. I have a picture my head of how Winterhold Hold should look if we ever went to that area and I’ve shared that. If ZOS doesn’t do it I am not going to think they didn’t listen, they just went down a different path they and BGs thought was better.
I think ZOS reads our feedback and suggestions but a lot of factors go into whether they implement it or not.
I haven't heard of anyone or seen any posts from anyone requesting a new BG mode. On the other hand, I've seen and heard people screaming about making improvements to performance and Cyrodiil for years and years and years. In other words, ZOS didn't listen to player feedback. They did what was easier, less of an investment on their part, and the new BG mode will not be used any more than the old BG mode was, and maybe even less. It's kinda like ordering a turkey, bacon club sandwich at a restaurant but they serve you a grilled cheese instead.18 -
Onomog✭✭✭✭CatoUnchained wrote: »I haven't heard of anyone or seen any posts from anyone requesting a new BG mode.
I think he meant Bethesda Game Studio (BGS) and not BattleGrounds
1 -
OtarTheMad✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭CatoUnchained wrote: »I haven't heard of anyone or seen any posts from anyone requesting a new BG mode.
I think he meant Bethesda Game Studio (BGS) and not BattleGrounds
Yeah I meant Bethesda, didn’t want to type it all out lol.
0 -
ThelerisTelvanni✭✭✭Loosing the zone in Q4 was a big hit. And honestly having one year filled with major qol update and bug fixes is ok. But they were not that major and the missing content is a problem. Also the quallety of this years chapter sadly had some problems in regards to some Aylied & Ithelia related story and art choices. I curretly barly log in and I am thinking a lot about renewing or canceling my sub.
What I do when I log in are daily chores. They are not fun that holds me in the game. And honestly I can not think of anything I want to do in the game at the moment. The Aylied cosmetics and storys I wanted for this chapter, I did not get. I did not get a nice new Aylied home to furnish.
Now the next golden chore with a breese of fomo is added...
Also my inventory is a full mess I do not want to deal with.... No space and to much items I can not get from one character to another since there is no bank space.
Why I have not canceled my sub is honestly hard to tell at the moment. The game is currently not offering what I want for my money.10 -
twev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭AngryPenguin wrote: »MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »Yesterday prime time arround 30-40 people online in my 500 people guilds and i lacked for 1h to find someone for the pledges so i stopped.
Maybe you need to find a new guild? I've had many guilds die over the years. People leave, people come, guilds can go away, new guilds can happen.
Im not speaking about one guild im speaking about 4 lol
Exactly. There are no guilds that I am currently in that I was in at launch, except for my own guild. Guilds turn over just the same as players do.
The player and guild churn right now is far, far higher now than it has ever been in the past. What's happening now is not normal by any measure.
Someone says something very similar to that every time this subject gets discussed seriously. Tea leaves and entrails, signs and portents, mixed with a healthy dose of cognitive bias. People often over estimate the importance of things and ideas they hold dear.
I think the game is declining, and that is driven by my own personal bias. I don't think there is a crisis. It might turn into one, but we aren't even near the iceberg yet. Plenty of time to steer around it.
The last several years has already been 'Plenty of time to steer around it.".
Yet, here we are.The problem with society these days is that no one drinks from the skulls of their enemies anymore.8 -
Juomuuri✭✭✭✭I could say many things about other MMOs, but I choose not to, aside from the simple "they're not for me due to personal issues of different sorts". I really hope ESO would turn around, that we'd get quest content that wasn't badly written, a working Cyrodiil (I miss running with zergs), finished hybridisation, class kit overhauls (that aren't nerfs), etc etc etc. This game is something that keeps my days filled, it has different aspects I can focus on and I rotate my activities a lot. I don't think the game is dying, look at the revenue. But! This doesn't mean it isn't declining, and that's what I really hope things change before it's too late.PC-EU (Steam) - Roleplayer, Quester, Crafter, Furnisher, Dungeoneer - Fashion Scrolls - CP 2100+
I tank on each class, my favorite is tanksorc!7 -
Pelanora✭✭✭✭✭
✭Neither consoles list eso in their top games. Why would merging declining populations make such a difference.
If it were easy, they'd have done it.
Changing/adding to what there is to do, is what's needed.2 -
MorganaLaVey✭✭✭✭
But thats what im talking about. ZOS did One Tamriel because the players quit in droves, not because they said: "Plenty of time to steer around it" "The game is fine." "players come and go, nothing unusual." "I decorated my house the entire day and didn't get killed by bugs or lag, no clue what you PVPer's and endgamers talking about. Maybe get a better PC"ZOS has an already established history of going around the iceberg. If they had not done this, it would not have survived [...] ZOS did One Tamriel and changed their business model, and that saved the game.12 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Yup. Me, too!
You don't seem to have a different position than I do. Because all of this is nothing new, and ZOS has a history of going around the iceberg. If they need to do that, I am sure they are already thinking about it. It isn't like we need to be out here telling them. They would have noticed before we did. Edited by Elsonso on October 13, 2024 1:42AM0 -
Pelanora✭✭✭✭✭
✭MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Yup. Me, too! You don't seem to have a different position than I do. Because all of this is nothing new, and ZOS has a history of going around the iceberg. If they need to do that, I am sure they are already thinking about it. It isn't like we need to be out here telling them. They would have noticed before we did.
But we know the titanic should have rammed that iceberg, it was the attempting to go around it that meant it sliced thru the side of the ship like a tin can opener. Hitting it dead on would have pushed it away.2 -
MorganaLaVey✭✭✭✭
Well that depends. Are players quitting like before one tamriel ? Or are they just slowly draining away bit by bit because "it's fine." until it isn't anymore ? Sure, 2 years after release ZOS was very motivated to keep there new game going even if it needed big changes. But after 15 years of ESO, ZOS might just say: "Eh... Money was made, players are leaving, keep it running until it isn't profitable anymore and then shut it down." Who knows... 10 years of ESO might be the last chance we get. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Yup. Me, too! You don't seem to have a different position than I do. Because all of this is nothing new, and ZOS has a history of going around the iceberg. If they need to do that, I am sure they are already thinking about it. It isn't like we need to be out here telling them. They would have noticed before we did.6 -
vsrs_au✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
Doubtful: the iceberg that sank the Titanic weighed about 1.5 million tonnes, compared to about 50,000 for the ship.MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Yup. Me, too! You don't seem to have a different position than I do. Because all of this is nothing new, and ZOS has a history of going around the iceberg. If they need to do that, I am sure they are already thinking about it. It isn't like we need to be out here telling them. They would have noticed before we did.
But we know the titanic should have rammed that iceberg, it was the attempting to go around it that meant it sliced thru the side of the ship like a tin can opener. Hitting it dead on would have pushed it away.PC(Steam) / EU / play from Melbourne, Australia / avg ping 3903 -
Pelanora✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Doubtful: the iceberg that sank the Titanic weighed about 1.5 million tonnes, compared to about 50,000 for the ship.MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Yup. Me, too! You don't seem to have a different position than I do. Because all of this is nothing new, and ZOS has a history of going around the iceberg. If they need to do that, I am sure they are already thinking about it. It isn't like we need to be out here telling them. They would have noticed before we did.
But we know the titanic should have rammed that iceberg, it was the attempting to go around it that meant it sliced thru the side of the ship like a tin can opener. Hitting it dead on would have pushed it away.
Ahhh common it's a great stupid theory of the internet. Let us have the fun of it.1 -
jaekobcaed✭✭✭Been playing since beta (but skipped year 1 because of the subscription), the game feels no less populated on PC/NA than it did throughout the entirety of existence. The population hasn't dipped enough to warrant genuine concern, though in terms of my own grievances, I do hope future chapters go back and look at what made the first three so special; I want to see more expansion-sized chapters, not just reskins with new story.Isachar Daerenfel of Alinor, Psijic Sage, Master Wizard of the Mage's Guild and heir to the Daerenfel Trading Co.
TES megafan since Morrowind
[PC/NA]0 -
MISTFORMBZZZ✭✭✭✭✭jaekobcaed wrote: »Been playing since beta (but skipped year 1 because of the subscription), the game feels no less populated on PC/NA than it did throughout the entirety of existence. The population hasn't dipped enough to warrant genuine concern, though in terms of my own grievances, I do hope future chapters go back and look at what made the first three so special; I want to see more expansion-sized chapters, not just reskins with new story.
What kind of content do you play?
Everyone endgaming feels the difference.
Can imagine solo questers dont7 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭.MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Well that depends. Are players quitting like before one tamriel ? Or are they just slowly draining away bit by bit because "it's fine." until it isn't anymore ? Sure, 2 years after release ZOS was very motivated to keep there new game going even if it needed big changes. But after 15 years of ESO, ZOS might just say: "Eh... Money was made, players are leaving, keep it running until it isn't profitable anymore and then shut it down." Who knows... 10 years of ESO might be the last chance we get. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯MorganaLaVey wrote: »
Yup. Me, too! You don't seem to have a different position than I do. Because all of this is nothing new, and ZOS has a history of going around the iceberg. If they need to do that, I am sure they are already thinking about it. It isn't like we need to be out here telling them. They would have noticed before we did.
The only thing we really have to indicate trends is Steam Charts. Obviously, not the best source of information about ESO across all platforms. It is better and more reliable than guild mates and friends logging in, or counting characters in Daggerfall, or looking at the Cyrodiil population icon. The Steam Charts trend does show a slow decline, but we are trying to watch the movie through a pinhole from out in the lobby. Tea leaves and entrails.
From what I can see, ZOS has time.
We have to assume that ESO generates revenue, and ZOS needs to make sure that keeps happening at a level that generates profit. We don't know if ESO is currently profitable, but we can assume either way. Getting a profit from ESO is going to be easier than getting it from an unreleased New Game and then hoping it is profitable. I have to think that ZOS is motivated to generate ESO revenue that turns into profit. They can't do this if no one is playing their game and no one is buying Crowns, ESO Plus, and Chapters. If they need ESO to be making a profit, and that is at risk, then we will see them taking action.
As for the Titanic reference... obviously, the Titanic did not have time to go around the iceberg. However, my reference to the Titanic was about what happened after it hit the iceberg. 0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭FelisCatus wrote: »
However, Craglorn is much more dead (even when the events aren't on). I barely see any listings on group finder. Dungeon queue times take forever. Even now queuing as a tank or healer is taking longer than it used to. PvP is dying fast. If you play the game for its story and questing then of course you're not going to notice a decline but if you play for PvE or PvP endgame/progression, you will. Content creation for the game has declined. ESO is barely viewed on Twitch. You do see an up tick in events but it doesn't last long. People get their tickets and log out.
I haven’t even done the last couple events. I have 12 tickets and see nothing to spend them on. People talk about poor performance being an issue, but it is also the lack of rewards. This year has lackluster content, and even the events have nothing special to offer. At least, for me.11