Straight from the Director

Lysette · March 2016

sadownik wrote: »

@Lysette Im sorry but i would like to see the stats you are basing your estimate on. Is it you? Do you judge hundrests of thousands of people by your play time? And no. 7h is not rushing. In fact on PTS i went through them in less than 4 - listening to all lines and all.

Life experience, Sadownik - be in a relationship have a family or kids or both - and then play more than 40 hours per month - you will have the hell on earth, because your spouse will feel neglected and not helped - you simply cannot do that, or your life will be miserable, if you have a family.

Edit: on the positive side of it, you will have time to play again, once you get a divorce - but then again, you might have to work more than ever before, to support your divorced ex-spouse and your children - no, normal people do not have more than 40 hours per month and that is already nearly too much to bear with for a spouse, who deserves attention as well and support.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

@RinaldoGandolphi

Another great post. Matt Firor should be looking at your posts

@Lysette
Unless you have statistics that show how casual people complete content I wouldn't speak for most. I play maybe 8 hours a week right now and speed through content. That's exploring, looting and listening to quest givers.

TG is very very very short. Even Matt Firor says it is 8+ hours of content. Even if you extrapolate that 8 hours over 3-4 months - the content is still short.

And what about the dailies and stuff - this is content as well - and takes time to do. Sightseeing and really appreciate it takes time, have you seen all under different lighting conditions and do you know the city like your pockets? - I guess you don't, but that is content too. Not just the quests.

Edit: to me the statement "this game has easily 40 hours of content" - means to me, it will take me at least 40 WEEKS and I will not have seen most of the details, but just done most of the quests - it depends how you play and how much attention you dedicate to details. Let's take Fallout 3 as an example here - Megaton - I guess not many figured out how diverse the relationships are between the citizens in this town - you won't get this, if you just play through the quests, but I am interested in such details - and Bethesda has put in these details for those interested to be discovered - there is an amazing amount of content, most will never get to. But that is what I like with these types of games.

Everyone's ability to absorb the information around them is different.

TG content is 8 hours average worth of content. That's tiny amount of content to expect players to play through that have already completed the rest of the game. For a game that is geared towards "online RPG" this doesn't offer much in replayability.

Lysette · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

@RinaldoGandolphi

Another great post. Matt Firor should be looking at your posts

@Lysette
Unless you have statistics that show how casual people complete content I wouldn't speak for most. I play maybe 8 hours a week right now and speed through content. That's exploring, looting and listening to quest givers.

TG is very very very short. Even Matt Firor says it is 8+ hours of content. Even if you extrapolate that 8 hours over 3-4 months - the content is still short.

And what about the dailies and stuff - this is content as well - and takes time to do. Sightseeing and really appreciate it takes time, have you seen all under different lighting conditions and do you know the city like your pockets? - I guess you don't, but that is content too. Not just the quests.

Edit: to me the statement "this game has easily 40 hours of content" - means to me, it will take me at least 40 WEEKS and I will not have seen most of the details, but just done most of the quests - it depends how you play and how much attention you dedicate to details. Let's take Fallout 3 as an example here - Megaton - I guess not many figured out how diverse the relationships are between the citizens in this town - you won't get this, if you just play through the quests, but I am interested in such details - and Bethesda has put in these details for those interested to be discovered - there is an amazing amount of content, most will never get to. But that is what I like with these types of games.

Everyone's ability to absorb the information around them is different.

TG content is 8 hours average worth of content. That's tiny amount of content to expect players to play through that have already completed the rest of the game. For a game that is geared towards "online RPG" this doesn't offer much in replayability.

Ok, for you it is 8 hours - then it will be most likely 8 weeks for me at least - we are different - let's agree to disagree, I need to get some things done here in the office and have no time for this - it's tedious - I said my thing, you said your's, so be it.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

@RinaldoGandolphi

Another great post. Matt Firor should be looking at your posts

@Lysette
Unless you have statistics that show how casual people complete content I wouldn't speak for most. I play maybe 8 hours a week right now and speed through content. That's exploring, looting and listening to quest givers.

TG is very very very short. Even Matt Firor says it is 8+ hours of content. Even if you extrapolate that 8 hours over 3-4 months - the content is still short.

And what about the dailies and stuff - this is content as well - and takes time to do. Sightseeing and really appreciate it takes time, have you seen all under different lighting conditions and do you know the city like your pockets? - I guess you don't, but that is content too. Not just the quests.

Edit: to me the statement "this game has easily 40 hours of content" - means to me, it will take me at least 40 WEEKS and I will not have seen most of the details, but just done most of the quests - it depends how you play and how much attention you dedicate to details. Let's take Fallout 3 as an example here - Megaton - I guess not many figured out how diverse the relationships are between the citizens in this town - you won't get this, if you just play through the quests, but I am interested in such details - and Bethesda has put in these details for those interested to be discovered - there is an amazing amount of content, most will never get to. But that is what I like with these types of games.

Everyone's ability to absorb the information around them is different.

TG content is 8 hours average worth of content. That's tiny amount of content to expect players to play through that have already completed the rest of the game. For a game that is geared towards "online RPG" this doesn't offer much in replayability.

Ok, for you it is 8 hours - then it will be most likely 8 weeks for me at least - we are different - let's agree to disagree, I need to get some things done here in the office and have no time for this - it's tedious - I said my thing, you said your's, so be it.

You understand what an average is right?

From a recent interview:
How much game time can players expect from the new story content?

MF: About 8-10 hours of story quests, but the DLC quickly introduces you to Larceny Quests, which are repeatable and take you back to older areas of the game to complete missions. This includes Heists, the new type of daily quest where you sneak to avoid detection and steal from warehouses and other locations in Tamriel.

http://www.mmogames.com/gamearticles/elder-scrolls-online-thieves-guild-interview-matt-firor/

Lysette · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

@RinaldoGandolphi

Another great post. Matt Firor should be looking at your posts

@Lysette
Unless you have statistics that show how casual people complete content I wouldn't speak for most. I play maybe 8 hours a week right now and speed through content. That's exploring, looting and listening to quest givers.

TG is very very very short. Even Matt Firor says it is 8+ hours of content. Even if you extrapolate that 8 hours over 3-4 months - the content is still short.

And what about the dailies and stuff - this is content as well - and takes time to do. Sightseeing and really appreciate it takes time, have you seen all under different lighting conditions and do you know the city like your pockets? - I guess you don't, but that is content too. Not just the quests.

Edit: to me the statement "this game has easily 40 hours of content" - means to me, it will take me at least 40 WEEKS and I will not have seen most of the details, but just done most of the quests - it depends how you play and how much attention you dedicate to details. Let's take Fallout 3 as an example here - Megaton - I guess not many figured out how diverse the relationships are between the citizens in this town - you won't get this, if you just play through the quests, but I am interested in such details - and Bethesda has put in these details for those interested to be discovered - there is an amazing amount of content, most will never get to. But that is what I like with these types of games.

Everyone's ability to absorb the information around them is different.

TG content is 8 hours average worth of content. That's tiny amount of content to expect players to play through that have already completed the rest of the game. For a game that is geared towards "online RPG" this doesn't offer much in replayability.

Ok, for you it is 8 hours - then it will be most likely 8 weeks for me at least - we are different - let's agree to disagree, I need to get some things done here in the office and have no time for this - it's tedious - I said my thing, you said your's, so be it.

You understand what an average is right?

From a recent interview:
How much game time can players expect from the new story content?

MF: About 8-10 hours of story quests, but the DLC quickly introduces you to Larceny Quests, which are repeatable and take you back to older areas of the game to complete missions. This includes Heists, the new type of daily quest where you sneak to avoid detection and steal from warehouses and other locations in Tamriel.

http://www.mmogames.com/gamearticles/elder-scrolls-online-thieves-guild-interview-matt-firor/

I do not need the link, I have posted quotes from this already several days before this thread even appeared - just read it, there is a lot of replayable content, I would say, if you don't see it as content, that is your problem not mine.

Kendaric · March 2016

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

Elsonso · March 2016

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

How is it a subjective opinion?

Mostly because it is an opinion instead of a universal truth. You might feel it is a universal truth, but that is also subjective.

The Skyrim perk system has nothing to do with Attributes. It is an over-engineered skill system, and one that already deviates from the Elder Scrolls norm. I think it was designed to try to win UI awards and look cool rather than be functional and part of the game. It stands apart from the rest of the UI, like the Champion System UI in ESO. When you have a new UI panel that does not look like all the other UI panels, no matter how cool it looks, or how much it seems to solve the problems of the world, it is still wrong.

In any case, I think we agree on the skills in ESO, so there is not much point hashing over that. ESO deviates significantly from Elder Scrolls traditional skills. At each point where they could have put them in, or added them to the game, they have resisted. Spell System would be the first place this could happen, but at this point, Spell System does not really fit into ESO. That system really needs to be part of an overall skill system rework, one that would largely eliminate the existing skills.

The point that needs to be made about normalized characters in ESO and Skyrim is that they all start out being somewhat specialized but they don't end that way. They can be played completely differently, at least at the start. Unless they stop developing, they will eventually be normalized. Those 17 characters you had in Skyrim would be all the same if played long enough because in Skyrim it is possible to make a max level character with everything. Morrowind, Oblivion, and ESO are not really designed that way. The problem with ESO is the relatively narrow skill system that offers limited choices, so any two characters heading in the same development direction will eventually merge.

Its these little details that are missing from ESO...its the little stuff like this that all comes together as one big piece that makes an TES great...and these things are missing from ESO...yes your going to joing the Thieves Guild and be sent to rob that house...so is many other hundreds of people....imagine having to pull the Golden Glow Estate Heist or The Ultimate Heist with the Grey Fox in Oblivion in ESO world with every schmuck on the planet doing the same exact thing at the same exact time as you...it ruins it completely.

Some of that does not work well in a multiplayer environment, and yes, the Elder Scrolls series tends to be inconsistent in how it applies these little things. I still think that the Elder Scrolls direction is more along the lines of open mainstream gaming. Events that don't happen because the player does not meet a certain criteria, like with the advanced training in Oblivion, are things that are ultimately a barrier to some people.

ESO has a design philosophy that what you do in the game should not block your progress in the game. While bounties are universally bad and you can be refused service in all of the recent ES titles, there is no memory of the events once punishment is delivered. ESO adds the additional benefit that they try to make it so that being a criminal does not block progress by making various quest givers and NPCs ignore these things.

While I will agree that they could have done more to make what we do more significant, I do not want to minimize that which is there. We do get to choose whether to save people or not. People we interact with in quests show up later in the game, sometimes based on "red" decisions that we make. Even if our bounties go away by themselves, without consequences and while we are offline, there are consequences to having a bounty, while there is a bounty.

I just want to touch quickly on the "other people around" while doing what should be solo quests with no one else around. My feeling is that in any multiplayer environment (2+ players) expecting solo play is out of the realm of practicality and actually violates the meaning of multiplayer. I am a firm believer that "solo instances" should never exist in a multiplayer game, and by that, I mean that there should be no places in a multiplayer game where I should be forced to be alone. Quests and activities should be designed from the ground up so that multiple players can do the same thing, and the game should handle it in a manner that comes close to making sense. In no manner do I mean creating a special place just for the players to have some individual alone time. No solo instances.

Just as much as I believe that there should be nothing that has to be done solo, and that solo instances should not be used for this purpose, the game also has to handle the situation where there are multiple people in the area at the same time. Immersion breaking to have 15 people creeping around Sulima Mansion? That is not immersion breaking. What is wrong about this picture is that the game often treats each of these players like they are all alone, so the players play accordingly and run around like the other players are not there. A lot of games play this way, and it is harder to do take it to the next level, so I can't really blame ZOS for not making their game respond properly to multiplayer situation, but I wish that they had.

The entire Franchise is not heading in the direction of ESO, the single player franchise is headed in the same direction as Fallout 4 and vice versa and it doesn't even remotely resemble ESO, its based on a open sandbox world with real repercussions for your actions, player decisions effecting their worlds and relationships with the people in it, and making a very immersive world...all things ESO doesn't and can't do.

Fallout should be a different beast. Elder Scrolls and Fallout should not be anywhere near the same direction. Fallout has the idea that there are multiple paths that can be taken by the player, some more respectable than others, and that the ultimate end of the game changes significantly based on these decisions. Elder Scrolls is based on the idea that there is an ultimate outcome that needs to happen and the player is the one that makes it happen. In this respect, Fallout 4 is much more like an Elder Scrolls game than it should be, and I blame it on BGS being in an "Elder Scrolls rut". This is one of the reasons that Fallout 4 failed to hold my attention long enough to even finish the game. On my axis of what should be, ESO is far closer to Elder Scrolls than Fallout 4 is to Fallout.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Kendaric wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

I think the occuring population drop is an indication of the exact opposite of what you think.

WoW has been successful with "hardcore" PvE and PvP content for how long now?

You can have hardcore PvE and PvP and balance their other goals too. They're trying to do a bit of both and not doing both very good so hopefully they take a close look at this.

Lysette · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

I think the occuring population drop is an indication of the exact opposite of what you think.

WoW has been successful with "hardcore" PvE and PvP content for how long now?

You can have hardcore PvE and PvP and balance their other goals too. They're trying to do a bit of both and not doing both very good so hopefully they take a close look at this.

What population drop?- There are no official numbers about this - it is all just opinion and very subjective. To take an assumption for the truth is bad.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · March 2016

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

I think the occuring population drop is an indication of the exact opposite of what you think.

WoW has been successful with "hardcore" PvE and PvP content for how long now?

You can have hardcore PvE and PvP and balance their other goals too. They're trying to do a bit of both and not doing both very good so hopefully they take a close look at this.

What population drop?- There are no official numbers about this - it is all just opinion and very subjective. To take an assumption for the truth is bad.

I agree if anything there are more people around not less.

Kendaric · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

I think the occuring population drop is an indication of the exact opposite of what you think.

WoW has been successful with "hardcore" PvE and PvP content for how long now?

You can have hardcore PvE and PvP and balance their other goals too. They're trying to do a bit of both and not doing both very good so hopefully they take a close look at this.

I'm pretty sure WoW has plenty of solo content as well and I'm sorry, but turning ESO into a "group only" game as suggested by @RinaldoGandolphi will not work in today's market.
WoW's population has been in a decline for years, it's a general problem with MMORPGs. WildStar attempted to be a game for the hardcore crowd and look how that turned out.
I'm not saying everything needs to be soloable, but neither should everything require a group. Also, despite being a mostly solo player, I despise the forced solo instances in the base game.

ADarklore · March 2016

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

Single player solo instances like Maelstrom Arena have no place in an MMO, especially not locking end game gear behind it...folks have an internet connection and an MMO to group with their friends, if they wanted a single player game, they would buy a single player game.

The entire Franchise is not heading in the direction of ESO, the single player franchise is headed in the same direction as Fallout 4 and vice versa and it doesn't even remotely resemble ESO, its based on a open sandbox world with real repercussions for your actions, player decisions effecting their worlds and relationships with the people in it, and making a very immersive world...all things ESO doesn't and can't do.

In Skyrim or ESO you murder innocents, and your followers such a Mjoll will flatout turn on you and attack you or leave your service...in Fallout 4 you shoot an innocent with Piper as your partner and she will turn on you and start shooting you...your actions and choices have benefits and consequences....

Its impossible to bring the true spirit of the single player TES games to an MMO, it simply won't work and ESO has proven this BUT its very 100% possible to make an MMO in TES world, but they gotta toss the single player nonsense...Craglorn was FULL everyday when going there matter...yes you had a few people grinding toons, but doing the daily quests, the 4 man delves, exploring the harsh world where the mobs were far to strong to solo...this brought players together...some of my fondest memories of this game are from Craglorn and running around in their with freinds doing quests and dailies.....Craglorn is probably one of the best zones ever created in terms of art and such after Cyrodiil the zone is just beautiful...i got there to farm Nirncrux and it makes me sad of all the wasted potential....all the DLC they ahve released is smostly solo content, the game won't survive that way....

99% of their development focus after the level 1-50 main quest should have been on PVP and PVE Adventure Zones(Craglorn, Murkmire), and 4 man dungeons, and 12 man trials....TG, DB should have been reconned out....it would be easy to explain the DB and Morag Tong are currently fighting their Shadow War and both organizations are pretty much neutered at this time, and The Thieves Guild is currently in shambles due to the war and losing Nocturnals favor due to someone else Stealong Nocturnals Cowl a few hundred years before Emer Daeroth does effectivly rendering both organizations inert for the period ESO is in, and focus on group content that keeps longterm subs.

they totlaly dropped the ball here, ZOS needed to leave it to Bethesda to bring the single player aspects of the series to life, and let ZOS has free reign to make a real MMO with lots of good group story oriented content...trying to put the single player aspects into an MMO just leaves you with a mess....imagine the state of this game right now had Craglorn, Upper Craglorn, Imperial City, and Murkmire been the only DLC with 1 new Trial in each one, All the previous trials scaled, and Orsimium being the 3rd Adventure Zone much like Upper and Lower Craglorn and Murkmire with yet another new trial and more 4 man content.

this game is starving for group end game content that is the life blood of an MMO and ZOS keeps putting out single player DLC and PVE grinding content in a PVP zone.

I am looking at things objectively...ESO does not do what Bethesda does well in the single player games which is capture Tamriels Atmosphere, and they don't do well with the MMO part because they are too busy trying to do what Bethesda does not realizing its simply not possible in an MMO.

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

The above bolded is EXACTLY what I was talking about with outdated MMO mentality that is still stuggling to be relevant in the new age of MMOs. It's akin to, "I want life to be like what it used to be when I was a kid", people like this cannot move forward and embrace the changes in life, instead they always want to return everything backwards to 'how it used to be'. As Matt so eloquently pointed out, that is NOT the direction MMOs are moving in the current gamer era where casual players dominate and hard-core gamers are the extreme minority.

Also, just an FYI, many of us solo players play an MMO because we enjoy the variety and unpredictability that having others playing the same game can bring. I may be a solo player, but every time I am start a new character, my leveling experience is ALWAYS different and that is because of other players bringing unpredictability that a single-player game can never bring.

Further, as Matt also pointed out, they KNOW from in-game data exactly what players are doing, what they're playing, for how long, what they're buying in the Crown Store, etc, etc... so clearly they would know if the game was losing any of their majority base or if it was just the toxic, constantly complaining "hard-core" gamers that were leaving. As far as I can see, PvE PC-NA AD alliance zones are thriving, so from what I can see, the only people that are leaving are the ones that most of us aren't going to miss.

khele23eb17_ESO · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

I think the occuring population drop is an indication of the exact opposite of what you think.

WoW has been successful with "hardcore" PvE and PvP content for how long now?

Actually the nice thing about WoW is that you have multiple difficulty levels for content. You can do faceroll raids in LFG or you can do seriously challenging Mythc raids.

Lenikus · March 2016

people do realize that this is a MMORPG, right .. ?
Massively Multyplayer Online Role Playing Game... ? .... right ?
...people can't possibly believe in their right minds that an ElderScrolls title could be flagged merely as MMO, right ? .. they KNOW that this is merely a shorter way to say MMORPG, right ?

anitajoneb17_ESO · March 2016

Lenikus wrote: »

people do realize that this is a MMORPG, right .. ?
Massively Multyplayer Online Role Playing Game... ? .... right ?
...people can't possibly believe in their right minds that an ElderScrolls title could be flagged merely as MMO, right ? .. they KNOW that this is merely a shorter way to say MMORPG, right ?

You do realize that you're making absolutely no sense, right ?

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Kendaric wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

If they do that, they'd lose most of their current playerbase including myself. Hardcore PvE and PvP players are simply to small of a market to sustain ESO for any length of time.

I think the occuring population drop is an indication of the exact opposite of what you think.

WoW has been successful with "hardcore" PvE and PvP content for how long now?

You can have hardcore PvE and PvP and balance their other goals too. They're trying to do a bit of both and not doing both very good so hopefully they take a close look at this.

I'm pretty sure WoW has plenty of solo content as well and I'm sorry, but turning ESO into a "group only" game as suggested by @RinaldoGandolphi will not work in today's market.
WoW's population has been in a decline for years, it's a general problem with MMORPGs. WildStar attempted to be a game for the hardcore crowd and look how that turned out.
I'm not saying everything needs to be soloable, but neither should everything require a group. Also, despite being a mostly solo player, I despise the forced solo instances in the base game.

It's not about turning the whole game to group only.

It's about making a path to the end game they have and expand on it. End game adds replayability.

I'm all for scalable difficulty based on party size for all other content, but if the whole game goes solo, what's the point of it being online? It's not giving us a real TES experience. It's not giving us a real solo game experience.

WoW might have a dying population but over 9 million subs that past 11 years is nothing to deem a failure. It's probably declining because their game is aging graphically. Taking all the good things they do successfully and expanding upon is probably a good idea and design point.

Wildstar was utter crap.

ADarklore wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

Single player solo instances like Maelstrom Arena have no place in an MMO, especially not locking end game gear behind it...folks have an internet connection and an MMO to group with their friends, if they wanted a single player game, they would buy a single player game.

The entire Franchise is not heading in the direction of ESO, the single player franchise is headed in the same direction as Fallout 4 and vice versa and it doesn't even remotely resemble ESO, its based on a open sandbox world with real repercussions for your actions, player decisions effecting their worlds and relationships with the people in it, and making a very immersive world...all things ESO doesn't and can't do.

In Skyrim or ESO you murder innocents, and your followers such a Mjoll will flatout turn on you and attack you or leave your service...in Fallout 4 you shoot an innocent with Piper as your partner and she will turn on you and start shooting you...your actions and choices have benefits and consequences....

Its impossible to bring the true spirit of the single player TES games to an MMO, it simply won't work and ESO has proven this BUT its very 100% possible to make an MMO in TES world, but they gotta toss the single player nonsense...Craglorn was FULL everyday when going there matter...yes you had a few people grinding toons, but doing the daily quests, the 4 man delves, exploring the harsh world where the mobs were far to strong to solo...this brought players together...some of my fondest memories of this game are from Craglorn and running around in their with freinds doing quests and dailies.....Craglorn is probably one of the best zones ever created in terms of art and such after Cyrodiil the zone is just beautiful...i got there to farm Nirncrux and it makes me sad of all the wasted potential....all the DLC they ahve released is smostly solo content, the game won't survive that way....

99% of their development focus after the level 1-50 main quest should have been on PVP and PVE Adventure Zones(Craglorn, Murkmire), and 4 man dungeons, and 12 man trials....TG, DB should have been reconned out....it would be easy to explain the DB and Morag Tong are currently fighting their Shadow War and both organizations are pretty much neutered at this time, and The Thieves Guild is currently in shambles due to the war and losing Nocturnals favor due to someone else Stealong Nocturnals Cowl a few hundred years before Emer Daeroth does effectivly rendering both organizations inert for the period ESO is in, and focus on group content that keeps longterm subs.

they totlaly dropped the ball here, ZOS needed to leave it to Bethesda to bring the single player aspects of the series to life, and let ZOS has free reign to make a real MMO with lots of good group story oriented content...trying to put the single player aspects into an MMO just leaves you with a mess....imagine the state of this game right now had Craglorn, Upper Craglorn, Imperial City, and Murkmire been the only DLC with 1 new Trial in each one, All the previous trials scaled, and Orsimium being the 3rd Adventure Zone much like Upper and Lower Craglorn and Murkmire with yet another new trial and more 4 man content.

this game is starving for group end game content that is the life blood of an MMO and ZOS keeps putting out single player DLC and PVE grinding content in a PVP zone.

I am looking at things objectively...ESO does not do what Bethesda does well in the single player games which is capture Tamriels Atmosphere, and they don't do well with the MMO part because they are too busy trying to do what Bethesda does not realizing its simply not possible in an MMO.

ZOS need to focus on being an MMO and do nothing but release group content from here on out...any plans they have for any new zones should be Adventure Zones like Craglorn and should be focused on endgame group content and pvp, if folks want single player type of stuff, they can play Bethesda's single player installments...its time for ESO to be an MMO not a hybridization of 2 genres that doens't do either very well...there is so much potential here....so much they could tap with just a simple change in philosphy they could reach unimaginee heights...the hardcore PVe raid guilds have all but left, most of the hardcore PVP guilds have all but left and for the reason....no end game pve content for over a year and non pvp dlc at all for over a year....so all these people left...and it was a lot trust me....alot....the majority of the hardcore raiding and pvp guilds have left long ago not to return.....this could have been avoid by being an MMO instead of what it is currently...its a harsh reality.

Destiny sold 12 million copies on console because its an MMO...ESO sold 1.2 million copies between both consoles a month after launch.....the numbers speak for themselves...had ESO been soley an MMO in Tamriel instead of trying to be too much like a single player game, they would have never had to go B2P in the 1st place because those 700,00+ subs they had back in june-july of 2014 would still be playing the game and we would not even be having this discussion

The above bolded is EXACTLY what I was talking about with outdated MMO mentality that is still stuggling to be relevant in the new age of MMOs. It's akin to, "I want life to be like what it used to be when I was a kid", people like this cannot move forward and embrace the changes in life, instead they always want to return everything backwards to 'how it used to be'. As Matt so eloquently pointed out, that is NOT the direction MMOs are moving in the current gamer era where casual players dominate and hard-core gamers are the extreme minority.

Also, just an FYI, many of us solo players play an MMO because we enjoy the variety and unpredictability that having others playing the same game can bring. I may be a solo player, but every time I am start a new character, my leveling experience is ALWAYS different and that is because of other players bringing unpredictability that a single-player game can never bring.

Further, as Matt also pointed out, they KNOW from in-game data exactly what players are doing, what they're playing, for how long, what they're buying in the Crown Store, etc, etc... so clearly they would know if the game was losing any of their majority base or if it was just the toxic, constantly complaining "hard-core" gamers that were leaving. As far as I can see, PvE PC-NA AD alliance zones are thriving, so from what I can see, the only people that are leaving are the ones that most of us aren't going to miss.

It's the casual mentality destroying MMOs, if Matt has been catering to them then it shows why so many are leaving ESO and why it's stalling. What it has on the table right now isn't even welcoming to new players.

There is absolutely no point for ESO to exist if it really goes single-player focus. The offline single player games do it 5000% better than they can hashed as an onlineRPG. You're not even getting 20% quality of a TES game and paying for all the little things you can add via mods

Volkodav · March 2016

I hate the word "casual".
Can you guys tell me why those of us who play every day for sometimes up to 5 hours are called "casual"? Casual isnt a dedicated person,doing their thing every day.It is someone who just isnt driven or dedicated to any one thing.
Look it up.
Casual,meaning: Without definite or serious intention,done without much thought or effort.
I,for one,am not a casual player at all.
And what makes PvPers "hard core",while the rest of us are not?
Here's one definition I found online:
Hard-core definition: Unswervingly committed; uncompromising,dedicated.

If you spend more than three hours a day inworld,you're a hard core player.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Everyone's definition of a casual is different. Probably one other thing the internet pop will never agree one

Lyrebon · March 2016

I'm what you'd refer to as a casual player but I certainly don't see the need to nerf things to make them easier to obtain. I understand why it takes so much time getting the rare items and feel accomplished when I do. I've been playing Guild Wars 2 for over two years and still only have one character in fully Ascended gear. There is a level of content in MMOs that every player can complete and there's content for the more driven who want a challenge. I don't think the challenging content should be removed or nerfed what-so-ever. Even a casual player can learn the mechanics and optimize his gear.

jeevin · March 2016

It's basic marketing. Just calculated questions with calculated answers that will hopefully encourage potential players that are yet to try the game. It seems to be the"please play our game because we tried to be different" approach.

MornaBaine · March 2016

I think what the article made clearest is that they have no real idea of what a "Roleplaying game"/RPG actually is. Seriously....like NONE. SIGH.

anitajoneb17_ESO · March 2016

MornaBaine wrote: »

I think what the article made clearest is that they have no real idea of what a "Roleplaying game"/RPG actually is. Seriously....like NONE. SIGH.

... and you have ?
... and your definition of "RPG" is the "universal one", or should be ... ?

.

timidobserver · March 2016

khele23eb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

I see no issues with this article. It sounds pretty like a pretty reasonable marketing pitch for an Elder Scrolls game. Should he be instead trying to insist that ESO is like every other MMO.

Why would he have to insist on something that is widely accepted as true? You dont have to insist on water being wet. Also hes not insisting ESO is unlike other MMOs hes insisting it isnt an MMO at all.

I just don't care. It's just a marketing pitch aimed to reach a different audience. I don't have any issues with him trying to reach out to an audience beyond the typical MMO crowd. There are a lot of problems to be had with this game, but I could care less about that article....

Mojmir · March 2016

i dont find hardcore players too be committed and i dont find casual gamers to not care, quite the opposite in regards to what i see.

Xsorus · March 2016

Craglorn wasn't bad content; it just failed in a few regards.

1. Having Group content tied to Questing....Don't do this...Esp if its Quest Chain content...You end up with people never being able to complete the content....It works if you're using Questing in terms of say...for example a Instanced Dungeon that's one and done on the quest...But tying it to a Quest chain causes issues. Simply look at Imperial City right now as an example..You'll never finish a lot of quests in there because it requires groups and no one is really doing it with Groups anymore....

2. Nerfing XP grinds...Don't do this... If people want to do your quest they'll do your quests..Forcing someone to run quests when they've done it 2 or 3 times already is silly...

3. Keep group content up to date....People don't do Craglorn anymore cause its bloody VR14..when the game is VR16....Keep end game group zones up to date in terms of levels if you want them done.

sadownik · March 2016

@Xsorus yup. You cant run server based base and base your dlc's on 8 h long quest story. Games that have to run on servers have to have repeatable content. All that people judging others by thier 2h a week playtime will get a nasty surprise.

On the other hand the server closing events have that bitter sweet feeling that cannot be replicated easily so there is that.

khele23eb17_ESO · March 2016

timidobserver wrote: »

khele23eb17_ESO wrote: »

timidobserver wrote: »

I see no issues with this article. It sounds pretty like a pretty reasonable marketing pitch for an Elder Scrolls game. Should he be instead trying to insist that ESO is like every other MMO.

Why would he have to insist on something that is widely accepted as true? You dont have to insist on water being wet. Also hes not insisting ESO is unlike other MMOs hes insisting it isnt an MMO at all.

I just don't care. It's just a marketing pitch aimed to reach a different audience. I don't have any issues with him trying to reach out to an audience beyond the typical MMO crowd. There are a lot of problems to be had with this game, but I could care less about that article....

Personally I see it more as an excuse for every time someone says 'why doesnt ESO have X like any proper MMO?'. They can just shrug and say 'but were not an MMO, were an online RPG'.

Troneon · March 2016

ESO is a casuals game now they have been pushing it towards that since console launch for a while now. Soon to be released in the asian markets as well..

RIP ESO.

Short term fast turn over $$$$ player base...buy the base game, buy crowns and leave, Next person plz!!1! $$

Screw anything long term...

That's the focus now.

Nerouyn · March 2016

remilafo wrote: »

what a bunch of scripted BS..

I'd rarely commit or applaud such bluntness but yes, I came away from reading that article with a foul taste in my mouth. It's insulting. Lots of BS double-talk. ZO's success going under the radar. ESO isn't an MMO. Blah blah blah.

Matt Firor wrote:

The term MMO is freighted with a lot of pre-conceived notions, most of which are outdated and obsolete.

Terms mean things. That's the fundamental basis of all language. Obviously ESO is an MMO. A really great one in some respects. Sadly much less so in others. The fault lies entirely with developers, not players with "outdated and obsolete" notions.

Matt Firor wrote:

MMO now refers to a technology, not to a genre, and will probably keep moving in that direction.

Mad as a hatter!

anitajoneb17_ESO · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

Matt Firor wrote:

The term MMO is freighted with a lot of pre-conceived notions, most of which are outdated and obsolete.

Terms mean things. That's the fundamental basis of all language. Obviously ESO is an MMO. A really great one in some respects. Sadly much less so in others. The fault lies entirely with developers, not players with "outdated and obsolete" notions.

MMO is not only an acronym for words that have a meaning, it is also a concept, a genre, and what Firor is saying is that, while ESO has a lot of player (Massive) that can interact together in real time (Multiplayer) over the internet (Online), it does not intend to stick 100% to the format of the concept/genre. Makes sense. Open your own mind.