rager82b14_ESO wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »
Really? Because I looked it up, and did not see them saying that. I saw At this time, but things can and will change. So I feel like with the console version out and how much feedback was giving about a global ah over the years. Players have a good chance on getting it changed.
rager82b14_ESO wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »
Really? Because I looked it up, and did not see them saying that. I saw At this time, but things can and will change. So I feel like with the console version out and how much feedback was giving about a global ah over the years. Players have a good chance on getting it changed.
lordrichter wrote: »rager82b14_ESO wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »
Really? Because I looked it up, and did not see them saying that. I saw At this time, but things can and will change. So I feel like with the console version out and how much feedback was giving about a global ah over the years. Players have a good chance on getting it changed.
This is what ZOS says when they say "No" about topics like these:
Leavey: "It's not something that we plan on considering. While global auction houses would be convenient, they're not ideal for the economy of the game, so it's not something that we're planning to do."
Bruno: "Nope, sorry."
Leavey: "That was the nicest way I could say it."
Bruno: "Just to put it to rest."
Leavey: "Yeah, we are not planning on it."
This was an "end of discussion" type of statement.
rager82b14_ESO wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »rager82b14_ESO wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »
Really? Because I looked it up, and did not see them saying that. I saw At this time, but things can and will change. So I feel like with the console version out and how much feedback was giving about a global ah over the years. Players have a good chance on getting it changed.
This is what ZOS says when they say "No" about topics like these:
Leavey: "It's not something that we plan on considering. While global auction houses would be convenient, they're not ideal for the economy of the game, so it's not something that we're planning to do."
Bruno: "Nope, sorry."
Leavey: "That was the nicest way I could say it."
Bruno: "Just to put it to rest."
Leavey: "Yeah, we are not planning on it."
This was an "end of discussion" type of statement.
And things like that can still change, what Developers say now does not mean they won't have a change of heart in the future. We seen it happen before as mmos get older and things can change. There is no end of discussion when it comes to the nature of mmo, and what players desires. A developer can close his or her ears and chant la la la all they want with that feedback, but that does not mean that players should not talk, and still ask for it. As it is a huge matter when it comes to mmos and I would go as far as to say hinders some end game elements for players.
So I take with ZOS says right now with a grain of salt. As any developer worth a cent in today market will be willing to listen to feedback and change thing base off that feedback. They won't get far with a hard headed stance. As we warned them in the beta. (and a lot of it came true.) They are getting a big second chance, so this feedback be it good or bad is key for a better future.
lordrichter wrote: »And things like that can still change, what Developers say now does not mean they won't have a change of heart in the future. We seen it happen before as mmos get older and things can change. There is no end of discussion when it comes to the nature of mmo, and what players desires. A developer can close his or her ears and chant la la la all they want with that feedback, but that does not mean that players should not talk, and still ask for it. As it is a huge matter when it comes to mmos and I would go as far as to say hinders some end game elements for players.
So I take with ZOS says right now with a grain of salt. As any developer worth a cent in today market will be willing to listen to feedback and change thing base off that feedback. They won't get far with a hard headed stance. As we warned them in the beta. (and a lot of it came true.) They are getting a big second chance, so this feedback be it good or bad is key for a better future.
I seriously doubt that they will be rolling out an auction house any time over the next several quarters (or years). For all intents and purposes, the guild traders are here to stay and there will not be an auction house. There is simply too much new content to develop and they are not going to want to spend money to do an auction house when they have so much content that they can sell for money. People would not be very tolerant of such a decision, especially if it delays some new zone.
You can use all the salt you want, if it makes you happy while you play the game.
rager82b14_ESO wrote: »I kinda figure you had a smartass remark with how you did your post You proved it with that last remark. Since I know your types so well, and you think things will always go your way, or that they won't make a change that would get supported by many players who been asking for it for years. Heck even a website was made at one point design to give it to players if you think that it could not be changed at all. I got one thing to say for you. Welcome to ignore, because me getting the last word, I know your type really hates that. Have that extra salt buddy.
rager82b14_ESO wrote: »rager82b14_ESO wrote: »Auction house will destroy guild trader system - shouldn't happen.
Don't mind small scale pvp, but only if ZOS isn't going to balance classes around small scale pvp. Otherwise - no.
Couldn't care less for DB and Thieves guild.
So losing the guild trader system a bad thing for the game?
I believe it is.
Could you explain why? Some people might not like the change, but would people quit over a system that is more user friendly? If someone is willing to hate the game because of this change, I question what about the many other things the game offers?
AFrostWolf wrote: »
usmcjdking wrote: »The sooner ZOS just abandons PVP the better.
PVPers are narcissists in the broader scope and will never, ever, lobby for anything that isn't detrimental towards 99% of the rest of the players in the game.
Want to see your game die? Focus on PVP.
Suicidal_Godot wrote: »usmcjdking wrote: »The sooner ZOS just abandons PVP the better.
PVPers are narcissists in the broader scope and will never, ever, lobby for anything that isn't detrimental towards 99% of the rest of the players in the game.
Want to see your game die? Focus on PVP.
...sure. Like Counter Strike, Battlefield,...
OK, on a more serious spin:
For one, PvP is an attempt to bring the Egoshooter kids to the MMO boat. This can work out. And it needs some focus. PvP as a mere afterthought stitch-on doesn't float...
Next, PvP (-balancing) at significant cost for the PvE community will alienate many a PvE-player. Difficult to ride the ragged edge of disaster, but IMHO not impossible...
Third, PvP as an obligatory part of the game, irreplaceably necessary for top notch gear and char progression, will lead to even more alienation. There are certain compromises that are possible - getting through a PvP zone to PvE objectives e.g. - but you shouldn't force it upon PvE players to get good at PvP. This can be a matter of ISP quality, hardware, preference or age that makes people refrain from PvP, and not respecting that will only lead to people not staying. Also you shouldn't treat kills acquired in the PvEer-ganking the same as full-fledged PvP-fight kills.
On the other hand, overly focussing on PvE will lead to PvP where exploits run rampant, the bully gangs will form, and push many a hopeful out of PvP entirely. It does need some oversight to keep the balance...
...just coming from a game where both parts went to shambles...
lordrichter wrote: »
WhiskeyRiver.AZub17_ESO wrote: »Scyantific wrote: »
Quite toxic PvP crowd here as well.
rager82b14_ESO wrote: »
Arthur_Spoonfondle wrote: »AFrostWolf wrote: »
It is high time we had a global auction house. Most of the players who don't want one are likely to be the small minority successfully exploiting the current system for huge financial gain and hogging the best trader sites. A global AH puts everyone on an equal footing and makes it a great deal easier to find things when you want to buy something, especially rare items. As for the prices that items sell for in an AH, simple supply and demand will dictate that.
kevlarto_ESO wrote: »What about the middle of the road, we keep the guild vendors but have a way to see what all vendors are offering in one place, yes this not perfect, because vendor location would no longer mean anything, but having a central spot or two around the map to view what is offered, they could do it game wide or regional, I think this would at least give the feel of an auction house, let the trade guilds still have their vendors, without completely having a traditional AH. I doubt ZOS is going to make any changes, in fact I think I have heard say nothing is planned.
lordrichter wrote: »
It's already been confirmed thieves guild is first. They said so at the end of their latest meet the character article on the front page.
Money please