What if PvE we could all play together regardless of faction?

phaneub17_ESO · June 2014

No matter what faction you're on, EP DC or AD, you could play along side each other in Craglorn+ content and any Group Dungeons and Trials? PvP in Cyrodiil would still lock you to the faction you chose, but everything else in between that is purely PvE let people join cross-faction grouping for instanced areas and any new zones going forward since they will be the same VR status for everyone.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO · June 2014

We'd have a far better game without factions, period, I was really sad when ESO was announced with this feature, made worse because of three factions rather than the more usual two.

Spiritreaver_ESO · June 2014

I honestly thought, way back in beta, that after we finished the our alliance we'd be free to do that in PvE. Of course then VR content was explained to me by a helpful guildie who quit months ago....

Raash · June 2014

Agreed. I think they should open up all alliances so all can choose where and with who to play, just make it possible to tag along or attack the other alliance members. I dont see any good reasons for people being separeted like this

zora_dbb16_ESO · June 2014

How would you PvP if there's no enemy? PvP is 50% of why I play this game. Three realms is vastly preferable to two, because the two underdog realms can focus on the most successful realm and restore balance, and fights are less predictable - more interesting.

The idea of being able to play veteran content together might be OK, if the writers could set it up in a way that didn't undermine the faction war; temporary ceasefires to achieve a particular goal, perhaps.

AreoHotah · June 2014

Would be uber awesome. Vr7 zone is deserted for me. Takes me half a day to find people for dolmens and world bosses.

phaneub17_ESO · June 2014

zora_dbb16_ESO wrote: »

The idea of being able to play veteran content together might be OK, if the writers could set it up in a way that didn't undermine the faction war; temporary ceasefires to achieve a particular goal, perhaps.

The fact Cadwell masks our appearance to show as an ally to those other factions we get to experience, that doesn't count? He's that powerful, why wouldn't it also affect other players as well, the illusion that we're all friends in the PvE areas. PvP stays PvP, it doesn't change what faction you play on and who you fight against since it's all restricted to one giant zone. It's not like you couldn't just make an alt on the other 2 factions and still talk with them directly or trade stuff you find, it's not game breaking.

Fyrakin · June 2014

A good example would be STO, there are too 3 factions (well originally that game had only 2, later one more was added with expansion) that may or may not agree with each other. PvE game is not limited to a single faction (especially group content), while PvP is strictly faction based.

For ESO I would at least suggest to make unrestricted faction grouping available in Craglorn and for all of the group dungeons. That could make sense.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO · June 2014

zora_dbb16_ESO wrote: »

How would you PvP if there's no enemy? .

The game didn't need PVP and would better without it.

Merlin13KAGL · June 2014

zora_dbb16_ESO wrote: »

How would you PvP if there's no enemy?

phaneub17_ESO wrote: »

PvP in Cyrodiil would still lock you to the faction you chose, but everything else in between that is purely PvE let people join cross-faction grouping for instanced areas and any new zones going forward since they will be the same VR status for everyone.

Open world was one of the original defining factors behind TES. You could go anywhere (you could physically get to) regardless of if you were leveled enough to handle it or not. There was more enjoyment in exploration that way (there was no guarantee you were stepping into a warm safe place because you were in a Level X limited zone).

Happening to be in an Alliance zone should not automatically mean you are loyal to nor agree with that Alliance's politics. Fighter's guild is neutral...Mage's guild is neutral...

Your character, in the beginning, is proposed to be new in the world, so to speak, somewhat ignorant (or at least naive and unaffected) by these larger-than-life events taking place around them...

Are each of us branded by our respective Alliances to ID us to the others and are thus obligated, in non-PvP situations, to attack the other onsite?

If your house is on fire, do you care that the guy with the bucket is supposed to be your enemy because your leaders ordained it?

End game, non-PvP, it shouldn't matter... You go to all three zones after saving the free world as we know it, shouldn't you be met with appreciation? If the anti-faction theme continues, would every individual in another zone not automatically attack you on sight?

(Temporary Alliances would be interesting in some cases, though I'm not sure how easy it would be to implement...in a case of war, is not the enemy of my enemy my friend?)

Dungeons, as well. You travel to other zones to conquer these group dungeons as Undaunted, would you not have that common bond and interest and therefore, that ability to team up for that reason alone?

What's the worst case scenario? You wonder into the still-feuding other Alliance (like you can do in Cyrodiil) and get met with hostility, as would be expected?

There should be neutral zones. I realize why they separated areas (programming-wise), and the load screen would be tell-tale that you have left one area and entered another, but grey areas would allow you the possibility to wonder into the 'enemy' without Cyrodiil being the only place for this to occur.

D&D (original and video games alike) had the right idea in that your actions and choices dictated your alignment and alliance more than the somewhat arbitrary initial placement of your character...) Some food for thought...