Zeni, can we get a timeframe for new soloable content?
-
Martinus72✭✭✭✭I'm near vet5 at this moment and with my pace it'll take months yet to get to vet10 but I have to admit I am bit concerned about hitting the wall of fruitless and endless searching for groups to continue questing in Craglorn.
Don't get me wrong I do love group play and making groups very often for public dungeons/world bosses/anchors, have done all 4man dungeons before in normal mode but I am aware that because of this heavy phasing system it is really tricky to find group of people being on exactly same stage of given quest. I know they are working on improving this system to make it easier to synchronise your quest with others so hopefully when I will get there it will be a different story because for now there is no alternative above vet10 unless pvp.0 -
SantieClaws✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Perhaps they could introduce a sort of "leave me alone and I'll leave you alone I'm a solo player" mode so solo folks can go into Cyrodiill and do the PvE quests there without having to bother about getting killed by the PvPers? Let those who want to PvP do it and allow everyone else to access the potentially solo content that is currently out of bounds by being located geographically in the PvP zone. I know this would have issues of "solo marked" players being potentially spies on enemy ground but there must be some way round this.Shunrr's Skooma Oasis - The Movie. A housing video like no other ...
Find it here - https://youtube.com/user/wenxue2222
Clan Claws - now recruiting khajiit and like minded others for parties, fishing and other khajiit stuff. Contact this one for an invite.
PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
https://www.imperialtradingcompany.eu/1 -
Unmai✭✭✭@Rune_Relic I agree about wanting to know how dangerous a boss or monster is before I engage them. I got owned at a Dolmen just yesterday simply as I was severely underpowered to take them on. A quick yell in the zone soon got me some help but it would have been nice to know I needed the help before taking the dolmen on. I'm sure some would argue that that is part of the excitement and risk. You engage monsters and bosses not knowing so you either brave it solo or play safe and get help either from passers bye or group forming. I see pro's and con's to both arguments."Wonderful! Time for a celebration... Cheese for everyone! Wait, scratch that. Cheese for no one. That can be just as much of a celebration, if you don't like cheese. True?" - Sheogorath0 -
Pangnirtung✭✭✭✭✭As the original poster and going through four pages of comments, it never fails to surprise me how poor many peoples reading skills are.
I have decided to let my subscription lapse. Nowhere on this thread or any other that I can find has Zenimax made a comment about when to expect more content for the solo player. That says lots to me.
Note that I am NOT denying group players their grouping. They could get one hundred times the content solo players do if only I could find content that can keep my happily occupied.
I have NOTHING against group play. NOTHING. I also have nothing against others whose sexual preferences are different than mine. That doesn't mean that I share theirs. It only means that mine are different. That is what seems to be lost on a small number of bashers on this thread.
Thanks for contributing to this thread. I will not be re-visiting it as I doubt that there will be anything new that hasn't already been covered.2 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭wenxue2222b16_ESO wrote: »Perhaps they could introduce a sort of "leave me alone and I'll leave you alone I'm a solo player" mode so solo folks can go into Cyrodiill and do the PvE quests there without having to bother about getting killed by the PvPers? Let those who want to PvP do it and allow everyone else to access the potentially solo content that is currently out of bounds by being located geographically in the PvP zone. I know this would have issues of "solo marked" players being potentially spies on enemy ground but there must be some way round this.
Surprisingly I do find myself disagreeing with this.
The idea is to introduce PVE players to PVP.
Its like a feeder bar to the nightclubs.
I know its no everyones cup of tea....but I can see why its there.Anything that can be exploited will be exploited0 -
yiasemi✭✭✭✭Wen, I love you. As always. I'd love to look at Cyrodil. Do a bit of shopping. Go home. PvP, hey, go to it. I'm a tourist, limited access. Noooo worries.1 -
SantieClaws✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I just think Cyrodiil is such a large area - even if you made it so it was "solo mode" only within areas currently held by your alliance or something like that. It's a landmass that is already there, already has quests that solo players need and yet they have to risk getting hammered by other players in order to do them. There must be some way of using that existing content to keep solo, group, PvP, and PvE players all happy.
Or maybe they could just give us one nice big new zone, equivilent size to Cyro where all alliances can party together in peace (multi alliance guilds really need just one area for this for guild events) and solo players can PvE and pick flowers and shoot bunnies and fish and dance and wear costumes and fluff about just as much as we please. Because just fluffing about sometimes makes people happy. Never underestimate the power of fluffing about - solo or with freinds.Shunrr's Skooma Oasis - The Movie. A housing video like no other ...
Find it here - https://youtube.com/user/wenxue2222
Clan Claws - now recruiting khajiit and like minded others for parties, fishing and other khajiit stuff. Contact this one for an invite.
PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
https://www.imperialtradingcompany.eu/2 -
LonePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭LonePirate wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »cgipervert wrote: »Pangnirtung wrote: »Please DO NOT take this as being anything against group content because it isn't. More power to those that enjoy doing it.
This post is only asking about when we can expect new soloable content. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@magnusnet, thank you for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
I just fail to understand why people ask for solo content in an MMORPG
because this game will lose 50% of the players w/o solo content? You can ask how many of the players are MMO players or TES players.
I would think more like 90+%.
LOL to both of you, I'm a TES player, then again, if I wanted to play a solo game I'd play Skyrim or wait for the next release of a TES game by Bethesda. Mark my words, if you think this is just an other TES solo game with a Multiplayer side to id, you will end up being extremely disapointed. This game was created for persons who wanted an MMO out of TES, not to be TES 6.DragonLane555 wrote: »Pangnirtung wrote: »Please DO NOT take this as being anything against group content because it isn't. More power to those that enjoy doing it.
This post is only asking about when we can expect new soloable content. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@magnusnet, thank you for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
I just fail to understand why people ask for solo content in an MMORPG, do you like the idea to pay a monthly subscription to play a solo game? You still paid the game ~60 bucks and will have paid much more than 60 bucks when more "solo content" comes out. This means you'll have paid for more than 2 full games to have one full game with a small addition (equivalent of a DLC) to it.
Do you still not see why this discussion shouldn't even happen in an MMOG? This game is not aimed to solo players, no MMORPG is, especially the paying ones.
@magnusnet If I like the game I would totally pay $15 a month for a solo game! The thing about MMOs is they never end, unlike most solo games where you play till the end then its over. So yeah if this game was 100% solo I would still be paying sub.
To be honest if more solo content doesn't come out soon I may cancel. I like to quest alone, and run Dungeons in groups. I hate having to quest/Level as a group!
Well if you like being riped off it's your choice
. You're paying 120+ dollars for something other games sell for 80. GG. And it's only gonna get worse for you m8. Solo content won't come as often as group content.
Actually what the TES players wanted was TES on line or TES with friends. Your opinion on what and how much of TESO should be TES and how much MMO is simply that....an opinion.
Stamping your feet and finger pointing makes no difference. Stating TESO should be 'like this MMO' is just a strawman. TESO is not a clone of another MMO and should not be....or what the point of its existence. Plenty others MMOs about if you don't like that.
(see what I did there)
You did nothing, what the tes players wanted was an MMO based on TES lore. Nothing else. Nothing about friends or anything, they wanted an MMO.
Solo play is not MMORPG. End of story. PLenty of other solo games about if you don't like that
Omg I did it to! I feel so smart
Link to poll ?
I could ask the same thing from you. ZOS seems to agree in any case since they aren't releasing solo content until that new zone (where solo players will also find something to cry about i'm sure).
Ask them for polls
Link to ZOS stating they agree with you ?
And yes you could ask the same as me to provide a poll. How does that detract from your strawman argument ?
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/127711/pts-patch-notes-v1-4-0/p1 <== See anything about solo content?
Didn't think so. Cleary, ZOS feels there is enough solo play content and that new zones are only for people who play grouped
There is new solo content 1.4, it just didn't make the Patch Notes, either due to an oversight or the fact the content is not close to being bug free right now. There are nine new quests which every player can complete without being required to group with other players. Three of the quests are repeatable so those players looking for more XP/VP have an option besides being told to go to Craglorn where it is almost impossible to find three other people to quest with there, let alone finding three people on a regular basis.
Forced group questing in Craglorn may be the biggest bust yet of all the new content released since launch day. Unfortunately ZOS doesn't learn from their own mistakes and they are shoving more forced group questing down our throats with update 1.4. It makes me wonder why ZOS is so out of touch with their player base or why they hate their player base as much as they do.
They learn't from SWTOR's mistakes which went F2P because end-game was a flop and people just stopped playing since they had nothing left to do. SWTOR tried to please the solo-players, as a result the game went F2P (which is one of the worst things that can happen to a subscription game since it means the game's original setup failed and they are just trying to milk the cow a bit longer by making a pay 2 win game).
ZOS is clearly trying to avoid a SWTOR-like fiasco and introducing end-game content in a game that was 100% solo content at release date. Loosing a couple of solo-players who would eventually have unsubbed anyways is not a great loss as long as they keep motivated end-game players on board. ZOS get's it.
As for "being out of touch with their player base": Unhappy people are always the noisier people, the level of rant you see about solo content is insignificant compared of the amount of rant you'd have if there was no challenging end-game content being released. Majority probably doesn't want/care for solo-game. If it was the case, ZOS would be acting on it 8).
What's it like to live in a bubble that is insulated from facts but rife with so many delusions?
At launch, this game had the following group content that over 95% of the player base could not solo:
-- 15 group dungeons
-- 6 veteran dungeons
-- 63 dark anchors
-- 96 world bosses
-- 16 group challenges in the public dungeons
-- dozens of elite bosses in the public dungeons
-- pretty much all PVP content in Cyrodiil
Then you also had the 10 VR zones for each faction which ZOS specifically recommended people group with other players to complete.
How in the world does all of that group content come anywhere close to making this game having100% solo content at launch like you said? I look forward to your explanation on that inane and demonstrably false statement of yours.
Then there was the Craglorn release about seven weeks after launch day which was 100% group content. The only content the vast majority of solo players could complete was the introductory travel to and learn what was happening quest. Three months later, this zone is widely viewed as a colossal failure apart from the Trials as very, very few people play the content.
There is no one who thinks Craglorn (apart from the two Trials) is a success. Well, except for three or four people like you and the exceptionally dense, unobservant and unaware people at ZOS. There are not enough facepalms in human history to do justice to the idiocy of releasing another zone just like Craglorn but with an arena option to distract people from the insanity that is the rest of the zone's non-Trials content.
2 -
yiasemi✭✭✭✭I'm fine with fluffing. Far too much warfare already. As an ex-soldier myself I do like fluffing. It would improve the general atmosphere too.0
-
leandro.800ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭Trials should only open after completing all zones quests and above all these quests should give better rewards. Or else VR below 12 will only grind and VR 12 will only do trials
The idea of group zones i believe is great but the implementation lacks insentive0 -
TehMagnus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭LonePirate wrote: »LonePirate wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »cgipervert wrote: »Pangnirtung wrote: »Please DO NOT take this as being anything against group content because it isn't. More power to those that enjoy doing it.
This post is only asking about when we can expect new soloable content. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@magnusnet, thank you for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
I just fail to understand why people ask for solo content in an MMORPG
because this game will lose 50% of the players w/o solo content? You can ask how many of the players are MMO players or TES players.
I would think more like 90+%.
LOL to both of you, I'm a TES player, then again, if I wanted to play a solo game I'd play Skyrim or wait for the next release of a TES game by Bethesda. Mark my words, if you think this is just an other TES solo game with a Multiplayer side to id, you will end up being extremely disapointed. This game was created for persons who wanted an MMO out of TES, not to be TES 6.DragonLane555 wrote: »Pangnirtung wrote: »Please DO NOT take this as being anything against group content because it isn't. More power to those that enjoy doing it.
This post is only asking about when we can expect new soloable content. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@magnusnet, thank you for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
I just fail to understand why people ask for solo content in an MMORPG, do you like the idea to pay a monthly subscription to play a solo game? You still paid the game ~60 bucks and will have paid much more than 60 bucks when more "solo content" comes out. This means you'll have paid for more than 2 full games to have one full game with a small addition (equivalent of a DLC) to it.
Do you still not see why this discussion shouldn't even happen in an MMOG? This game is not aimed to solo players, no MMORPG is, especially the paying ones.
@magnusnet If I like the game I would totally pay $15 a month for a solo game! The thing about MMOs is they never end, unlike most solo games where you play till the end then its over. So yeah if this game was 100% solo I would still be paying sub.
To be honest if more solo content doesn't come out soon I may cancel. I like to quest alone, and run Dungeons in groups. I hate having to quest/Level as a group!
Well if you like being riped off it's your choice. You're paying 120+ dollars for something other games sell for 80. GG. And it's only gonna get worse for you m8. Solo content won't come as often as group content.
Actually what the TES players wanted was TES on line or TES with friends. Your opinion on what and how much of TESO should be TES and how much MMO is simply that....an opinion.
Stamping your feet and finger pointing makes no difference. Stating TESO should be 'like this MMO' is just a strawman. TESO is not a clone of another MMO and should not be....or what the point of its existence. Plenty others MMOs about if you don't like that. (see what I did there)
You did nothing, what the tes players wanted was an MMO based on TES lore. Nothing else. Nothing about friends or anything, they wanted an MMO.
Solo play is not MMORPG. End of story. PLenty of other solo games about if you don't like that
Omg I did it to! I feel so smart
Link to poll ?
I could ask the same thing from you. ZOS seems to agree in any case since they aren't releasing solo content until that new zone (where solo players will also find something to cry about i'm sure).
Ask them for polls
Link to ZOS stating they agree with you ?
And yes you could ask the same as me to provide a poll. How does that detract from your strawman argument ?
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/127711/pts-patch-notes-v1-4-0/p1 <== See anything about solo content?
Didn't think so. Cleary, ZOS feels there is enough solo play content and that new zones are only for people who play grouped
There is new solo content 1.4, it just didn't make the Patch Notes, either due to an oversight or the fact the content is not close to being bug free right now. There are nine new quests which every player can complete without being required to group with other players. Three of the quests are repeatable so those players looking for more XP/VP have an option besides being told to go to Craglorn where it is almost impossible to find three other people to quest with there, let alone finding three people on a regular basis.
Forced group questing in Craglorn may be the biggest bust yet of all the new content released since launch day. Unfortunately ZOS doesn't learn from their own mistakes and they are shoving more forced group questing down our throats with update 1.4. It makes me wonder why ZOS is so out of touch with their player base or why they hate their player base as much as they do.
They learn't from SWTOR's mistakes which went F2P because end-game was a flop and people just stopped playing since they had nothing left to do. SWTOR tried to please the solo-players, as a result the game went F2P (which is one of the worst things that can happen to a subscription game since it means the game's original setup failed and they are just trying to milk the cow a bit longer by making a pay 2 win game).
ZOS is clearly trying to avoid a SWTOR-like fiasco and introducing end-game content in a game that was 100% solo content at release date. Loosing a couple of solo-players who would eventually have unsubbed anyways is not a great loss as long as they keep motivated end-game players on board. ZOS get's it.
As for "being out of touch with their player base": Unhappy people are always the noisier people, the level of rant you see about solo content is insignificant compared of the amount of rant you'd have if there was no challenging end-game content being released. Majority probably doesn't want/care for solo-game. If it was the case, ZOS would be acting on it 8).
What's it like to live in a bubble that is insulated from facts but rife with so many delusions?
At launch, this game had the following group content that over 95% of the player base could not solo:
-- 15 group dungeons
-- 6 veteran dungeons
-- 63 dark anchors
-- 96 world bosses
-- 16 group challenges in the public dungeons
-- dozens of elite bosses in the public dungeons
-- pretty much all PVP content in Cyrodiil
Then you also had the 10 VR zones for each faction which ZOS specifically recommended people group with other players to complete.
How in the world does all of that group content come anywhere close to making this game having100% solo content at launch like you said? I look forward to your explanation on that inane and demonstrably false statement of yours.
Then there was the Craglorn release about seven weeks after launch day which was 100% group content. The only content the vast majority of solo players could complete was the introductory travel to and learn what was happening quest. Three months later, this zone is widely viewed as a colossal failure apart from the Trials as very, very few people play the content.
There is no one who thinks Craglorn (apart from the two Trials) is a success. Well, except for three or four people like you and the exceptionally dense, unobservant and unaware people at ZOS. There are not enough facepalms in human history to do justice to the idiocy of releasing another zone just like Craglorn but with an arena option to distract people from the insanity that is the rest of the zone's non-Trials content.
- 15 group dungeons <= You can solo at the very least 10 of them when you're VR.
-- 63 dark anchors <= They scale to the #of players destroying them so you can solo them, I know I have solo'd most of them.
-- 96 world bosses <= Again, most are soloable.
-- 16 group challenges in the public dungeons <= Reward achievement aka Dye, aka useless.
-- dozens of elite bosses in the public dungeons <= Once again soloable most of them.
-- pretty much all PVP content in Cyrodiil <= PVP, hint, player Versus Player hint, not made to be soloable. I bet you're one of those who whish they could go to Cyro without being attacked by enemy players
So the only thing you actually can't solo are the Veteran dungeons and a couple of group dungeons and bosses. How many hours of gameplay does that represent compared to the main storyline & Caldwell's silver and gold? 1%? So yeah, 99% of the game was/is soloable and allows you to get to VR10 easily.
As for the 10 VR zones, they where soloable, I know I solo'd them and the issue wasn't the fact you needed to group, it was the fact there was nobody to group with. So yeah, at launch, there was No Endgame, 100% solo game with a couple of things that you couldn't do without grouping but that as soon as you got a group where easy to do and didn't stop you from progressing.
As for Craglorn not being a success, if they hadn't released an end game zone, many more people would have unsubscripted and the amount of rage & cries we see comming from the 10 people currently crying for more solo content would have been ridiculous compared to the masses that where already getting angry when they got to VR10 and had nothing else to do. The only people who think that Craglorn is a failure are those who expect to find solo content always all the way.
ZOS knows, you're just blinded because of the fact things are not going the way you want them to go and you think everybody agrees with you.
Hint: they don't.Edited by TehMagnus on August 27, 2014 2:50PM2 -
LonePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Um, just because a player of a certain skill set can attempt to solo some of the group content, that doesn't mean the content is soloable. Nor does grossly outlevelling the content such as taking a VR12 into normal Spindleclutch count as soloable content. The content was not designed to be soloable at level. I am also calling BS on your claim that most of the world bosses can be completed solo at level. Again, just because a very small number of players can do it, that doesn't mean it is solo content.
I would ask if you have any videos of you soloing most of the world bosses at level, especially in the VR zones pre-nerf, but I'm guessing that claim like so many others of yours, is built on a false bravado that cannot withstand any scrutiny.
My statement stands that 95% or more of the player base could not complete the group content solo - especially at the level for which it was designed. Your claims that some players can do it is completely irrelevant.2 -
DragonLane555✭✭✭@magnusnetWell if you like being riped off it's your choice. You're paying 120+ dollars for something other games sell for 80. GG. And it's only gonna get worse for you m8. Solo content won't come as often as group content.
Allow me to break it down for you.
Let's start with solo games.
1. Most solo games advertise eight to about 80 hours of gameplay. Most people actually finish them in about half that time.
2. Once you complete it a solo game it's over. Sure, you could go back and replay the game but then you're not continuing the adventure of your character you're playing the same adventure over and maybe trying something different.
3. If you're lucky, the company may release 1 to 3 DLCs at $15 a pop. These will range anything from horse armor to another advertised 15 hours of gameplay, that again most players will finish in about half that time.
Okay, now let's look at MMOs
1. Most MMOs take at least a month to quest your way to max level. Doing so only take you through part of the content, and there's still a lot that can be done at this point, including but not limited to, all the endgame dungeons.
2. An MMO is never over. There's always something more to do always a new way for you to adventure with your character.
3. While it is true that an MMO has a monthly $15 subscription fee, for that you usually get monthly updates. These updates add new content and that content is normally much much larger in scope than the content of single player DLCs that also cost about $15.
So tell me again how I would be ripped off by playing a single player game based on the MMO model? Because it really seems like a great deal!LonePirate wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »Rune_Relic wrote: »cgipervert wrote: »Pangnirtung wrote: »Please DO NOT take this as being anything against group content because it isn't. More power to those that enjoy doing it.
This post is only asking about when we can expect new soloable content. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@magnusnet, thank you for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
I just fail to understand why people ask for solo content in an MMORPG
because this game will lose 50% of the players w/o solo content? You can ask how many of the players are MMO players or TES players.
I would think more like 90+%.
LOL to both of you, I'm a TES player, then again, if I wanted to play a solo game I'd play Skyrim or wait for the next release of a TES game by Bethesda. Mark my words, if you think this is just an other TES solo game with a Multiplayer side to id, you will end up being extremely disapointed. This game was created for persons who wanted an MMO out of TES, not to be TES 6.DragonLane555 wrote: »Pangnirtung wrote: »Please DO NOT take this as being anything against group content because it isn't. More power to those that enjoy doing it.
This post is only asking about when we can expect new soloable content. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@magnusnet, thank you for your helpful contribution to this discussion.
I just fail to understand why people ask for solo content in an MMORPG, do you like the idea to pay a monthly subscription to play a solo game? You still paid the game ~60 bucks and will have paid much more than 60 bucks when more "solo content" comes out. This means you'll have paid for more than 2 full games to have one full game with a small addition (equivalent of a DLC) to it.
Do you still not see why this discussion shouldn't even happen in an MMOG? This game is not aimed to solo players, no MMORPG is, especially the paying ones.
@magnusnet If I like the game I would totally pay $15 a month for a solo game! The thing about MMOs is they never end, unlike most solo games where you play till the end then its over. So yeah if this game was 100% solo I would still be paying sub.
To be honest if more solo content doesn't come out soon I may cancel. I like to quest alone, and run Dungeons in groups. I hate having to quest/Level as a group!
Well if you like being riped off it's your choice. You're paying 120+ dollars for something other games sell for 80. GG. And it's only gonna get worse for you m8. Solo content won't come as often as group content.
Actually what the TES players wanted was TES on line or TES with friends. Your opinion on what and how much of TESO should be TES and how much MMO is simply that....an opinion.
Stamping your feet and finger pointing makes no difference. Stating TESO should be 'like this MMO' is just a strawman. TESO is not a clone of another MMO and should not be....or what the point of its existence. Plenty others MMOs about if you don't like that. (see what I did there)
You did nothing, what the tes players wanted was an MMO based on TES lore. Nothing else. Nothing about friends or anything, they wanted an MMO.
Solo play is not MMORPG. End of story. PLenty of other solo games about if you don't like that
Omg I did it to! I feel so smart
Link to poll ?
I could ask the same thing from you. ZOS seems to agree in any case since they aren't releasing solo content until that new zone (where solo players will also find something to cry about i'm sure).
Ask them for polls
Link to ZOS stating they agree with you ?
And yes you could ask the same as me to provide a poll. How does that detract from your strawman argument ?
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/127711/pts-patch-notes-v1-4-0/p1 <== See anything about solo content?
Didn't think so. Cleary, ZOS feels there is enough solo play content and that new zones are only for people who play grouped
There is new solo content 1.4, it just didn't make the Patch Notes, either due to an oversight or the fact the content is not close to being bug free right now. There are nine new quests which every player can complete without being required to group with other players. Three of the quests are repeatable so those players looking for more XP/VP have an option besides being told to go to Craglorn where it is almost impossible to find three other people to quest with there, let alone finding three people on a regular basis.
Forced group questing in Craglorn may be the biggest bust yet of all the new content released since launch day. Unfortunately ZOS doesn't learn from their own mistakes and they are shoving more forced group questing down our throats with update 1.4. It makes me wonder why ZOS is so out of touch with their player base or why they hate their player base as much as they do.
They learn't from SWTOR's mistakes which went F2P because end-game was a flop and people just stopped playing since they had nothing left to do. SWTOR tried to please the solo-players, as a result the game went F2P (which is one of the worst things that can happen to a subscription game since it means the game's original setup failed and they are just trying to milk the cow a bit longer by making a pay 2 win game).
ZOS is clearly trying to avoid a SWTOR-like fiasco and introducing end-game content in a game that was 100% solo content at release date. Loosing a couple of solo-players who would eventually have unsubbed anyways is not a great loss as long as they keep motivated end-game players on board. ZOS get's it.
As for "being out of touch with their player base": Unhappy people are always the noisier people, the level of rant you see about solo content is insignificant compared of the amount of rant you'd have if there was no challenging end-game content being released. Majority probably doesn't want/care for solo-game. If it was the case, ZOS would be acting on it 8).
Id really like to know where you get this stuff from? SWTOR has the second largest subscriber base of any MMO on the market today, and yes that is subscriber base, that does not include the free to play accounts. At least it did before ESO, and Wildstar came out I'm not sure now. You're still able to solo about 90% of it, so being able to solo content is obviously not the issue. Solo players can even get end game gear by buying crafted pieces off of Raiders. Part of its success is the accessibility of the game for anyone. MMO's only start to falter when you start cutting off too much of the game from one group or another.
The reasons it went free to play were one a very bad launch full of bugs, two it out right copied wow, and a lot of people didn't like that at all, and three a money grab because, well, the parent company is EA.
2 -
TehMagnus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭DragonLane555 wrote: »Id really like to know where you get this stuff from? SWTOR has the second largest subscriber base of any MMO on the market today, and yes that is subscriber base, that does not include the free to play accounts. At least it did before ESO, and Wildstar came out I'm not sure now. You're still able to solo about 90% of it, so being able to solo content is obviously not the issue. Solo players can even get end game gear by buying crafted pieces off of Raiders. Part of its success is the accessibility of the game for anyone. MMO's only start to falter when you start cutting off too much of the game from one group or another.
The reasons it went free to play were one a very bad launch full of bugs, two it out right copied wow, and a lot of people didn't like that at all, and three a money grab because, well, the parent company is EA.
At Gamescon Aug 13, they claimed around 1 million players where connecting to the game every month. So it's far from 1 million subscribers nowadays. As for the game going F2P, people where unsubbing and they decided to change the business model in order to make the game live longer and get them as much doe as possible.
If you got a subscribed based game, the money you get depends on how many people are subsribed. Once you go Pay 2 win with a subscription system on top of it, not only do you have the $ from subs but you also have a whole bunch of people who wouldn't be playing otherwise and will still get you income. It's a failure because you actually need to make the game "free" to get people to come & play it and then try to push them to make in game purchases so they can compete with other players.
Everybody is saying that SWTOR is far, far from a success. No game that has gone Pay 2 Win can be called a success story. Sure, as a business model it brings good money for some time until the game eventually dies, but as far as the game, the content and the original planing is concerned, it's just a big failure.
You also get the awesome toxic underage kikolol community that comes along with free games.
SWTOR is far from being a success and what ruined it was the lack of end game content because they tried to please the solo gamers. I still remember them saying: We will not release a SWKTOR 3 RPG because the MMO will be SWKTOR 3, 4 and 5! Guess it didn't go as planed..1 -
DragonLane555✭✭✭DragonLane555 wrote: »Id really like to know where you get this stuff from? SWTOR has the second largest subscriber base of any MMO on the market today, and yes that is subscriber base, that does not include the free to play accounts. At least it did before ESO, and Wildstar came out I'm not sure now. You're still able to solo about 90% of it, so being able to solo content is obviously not the issue. Solo players can even get end game gear by buying crafted pieces off of Raiders. Part of its success is the accessibility of the game for anyone. MMO's only start to falter when you start cutting off too much of the game from one group or another.
The reasons it went free to play were one a very bad launch full of bugs, two it out right copied wow, and a lot of people didn't like that at all, and three a money grab because, well, the parent company is EA.
At Gamescon Aug 13, they claimed around 1 million players where connecting to the game every month. So it's far from 1 million subscribers nowadays. As for the game going F2P, people where unsubbing and they decided to change the business model in order to make the game live longer and get them as much doe as possible.
If you got a subscribed based game, the money you get depends on how many people are subsribed. Once you go Pay 2 win with a subscription system on top of it, not only do you have the $ from subs but you also have a whole bunch of people who wouldn't be playing otherwise and will still get you income. It's a failure because you actually need to make the game "free" to get people to come & play it and then try to push them to make in game purchases so they can compete with other players.
Everybody is saying that SWTOR is far, far from a success. No game that has gone Pay 2 Win can be called a success story. Sure, as a business model it brings good money for some time until the game eventually dies, but as far as the game, the content and the original planing is concerned, it's just a big failure.
You also get the awesome toxic underage kikolol community that comes along with free games.
SWTOR is far from being a success and what ruined it was the lack of end game content because they tried to please the solo gamers. I still remember them saying: We will not release a SWKTOR 3 RPG because the MMO will be SWKTOR 3, 4 and 5! Guess it didn't go as planed..
And what exactly would you call a success? Most MMO's never make it to 1 million subscribers.
Also have you even played the game since it went free to play? Because there's not a single pay to win item that you can purchase. That is, unless you count paying a subscription so you get all of the game, or a one hour 25% XP increase, which is the only statistical advantage item you can purchase.
Most of the stuff in the cartel market is either vanity items like pets, mounts, and armor looks. The other stuff is almost directly aimed at the Gimped free to play players so they can get something close to the advantages of being a subscriber, but even then, if you were to buy all the items you would never get close to the advantages of a subscriber.
Lastly, again I ask for you get your data that it was the solo side of Star Wars that killed it? It sounds to me like it's just your opinion and you're free to have an opinion don't get me wrong. However, having an opinion, and that opinion being right are two very different things.
2 -
Aeratus✭✭✭✭✭
I would consider the world bosses as mostly solo content, even those in the vet zones before the vet zone nerf. There are only a few world bosses that require grouping. The public dungeons are also solo content, except for maybe the group challenge bosses, but the group challenge bosses can be done just by waiting for another player to come by to form an ad hoc group (i.e., it doesn't require a large amount of grouping).LonePirate wrote: »Um, just because a player of a certain skill set can attempt to solo some of the group content, that doesn't mean the content is soloable. Nor does grossly outlevelling the content such as taking a VR12 into normal Spindleclutch count as soloable content. The content was not designed to be soloable at level. I am also calling BS on your claim that most of the world bosses can be completed solo at level. Again, just because a very small number of players can do it, that doesn't mean it is solo content.
However, the problem to me is that there is no solo endgame pve, in that it is not possible to get the endgame gear while soloing. The main reason is that the endgame pve gear is locked behind trials. At the moment, the closest thing to solo endgame is pvp, since the best pvp gears are still probably the ones that you can craft, and you can buy the bags with AP earned from solo play.
So my vision of the ideal solo zone is a new zone that is like the vet zones pre-nerf, but a little harder, that drops endgame BOP items.Edited by Aeratus on August 27, 2014 4:54PM0 -
drallar✭✭✭I am a little confused by the people who say it's an MMO - accept it and group up. EQ and EQ2 were very Group centric games but people could still level to max level without needing to group if they chose. In the case of early EQ that was partially class dependant but the concept remains.
-
People are complaining that they cannot level to the level cap without grouping which in my mind is a valid concern. I realize some people consider 50 to be the max level and the Vet levels are not actually levels but I disagree with that.1 -
apostate9✭✭✭✭✭Rune_Relic wrote: »I think a massive issue is the phasing. If that was better done or non existent then you could solo anywhere and if two players soloing arrived at a particular point together (Boss for example) they kill it and move on in their own directions. No partying up required, just open world grouping like it does now. The issue is people have to be phased in with you and that just isn't working.
Whole idea of phasing though was to spread the load on the servers.
Agree It is a massive issue with grouping though
You can team up with anyone that is passing by [except friends]
The grouping was supposed to let you bypass the phasing so you could be with those friends that aren't in your phase.
I am a soloist....but I have no problem teaming up with people on the fly to take down dolmen and world bosses when I struggle (ungrouped..we all help each other anyway).
The problem for me is we have no real knowledge of the degree of difficulty vs content. I might face a giant who is level 40 and I am level 40. However his stats will be far far superior than a level 40 player. many of the world bosses are stated as being of a level that simply has no equivalent to character level.
I would be happy if there is level 100 bosses walking around as long as I can see they are level 100 (and they directly compare to level 100 player). That way I can avoid or get 3x level 20 and 1x level 40 friend to have a drawn out battle that is 50 50 on who will win. This is the way older RPG always use to work. You looked at there level vs your own level and instantly new how badass they were. The 'this boss is in a level 40 zone so we call him level 40' ...is a deception that screws the whole group content ideal.
If I am level 10 and see loads of level 40 players around....I sneak or get my arse kicked. This is the way it should be. I wanted to instantly see exactly how lethal something is just by looking at its level.[In regard to beasts/monsters]
Mannimarco....level 40 quest. No player at level 40 will have anything like the stats and resources that mannimarco has. What level of character is he actually equivalent to ? Level 80 ? Level 100 ? Who knows.
This grading system using level, lets me know if I have taken down a level 60 monster myself at level 40...I might be able to take down a different level 60 boss. There is no such mechanism that allows this kind of instant direct comparison. Nor give you anything to brag about in the inn. At the moment I attack the boss....and after getting killed numerous times might have some vague idea of what level he is at and how many people I might need.
Basically I can not see how big a group I need...If I cant see what I am really facing....until its too late.
^ This.
Show us what level monsters really are.
0 -
apostate9✭✭✭✭✭wenxue2222b16_ESO wrote: »Perhaps they could introduce a sort of "leave me alone and I'll leave you alone I'm a solo player" mode so solo folks can go into Cyrodiill and do the PvE quests there without having to bother about getting killed by the PvPers? Let those who want to PvP do it and allow everyone else to access the potentially solo content that is currently out of bounds by being located geographically in the PvP zone. I know this would have issues of "solo marked" players being potentially spies on enemy ground but there must be some way round this.
No.
0