PvP is what brings players together. We had only 1 PvP Update in 4 years.

idk · June 2018

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

hmsdragonfly wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Ain' bringin' me together.

Also, no real PVP fallacy.

PVP dont sell. It's why the game quickly abandoned said updates aside from battlegrounds.

If we take a closer looks, most popular games right now are PvP games: League of Legends, CSGO, Dota 2, Fortnite, PUBG, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Overwatch etc

So PvP do sell. League and Dota have both PvE and PvP and if you want to do well in those 2 games you have to be good at both PvE (creeps farming) and PvP (combat against players).

We are living in the era which PvP games dominate. Maybe it's just that no PvP MMO has been done right in the past.

The thrill of competing against another player is something very special and you will have players asking for PvP mode in a lot of games. Even Bioware's new IP Anthem, even when Bioware barely has any history with PvP (Mass Effect, Dragonage), there are people requesting PvP mode for Anthem.

@hmsdragonfly

You are correct. PVP does sell. PVP MMO's, do not sell. And that's been shown time and again.

battlegrounds, asymetrical games, hero shooters, these are all forms where PVP is both the central focus and the driving force. These games also distill their gameplay into a few factors, where as PVP in MMO's has layers on layers of variables.

Comparing an MMO to a Battle Royale or a Moba is apples to oranges. Find me a PVP focused MMO that hasn't collapsed under it's own weight within five years. Then you have a case. In the meantime, let me list a few that have died. Shadowbane. Warhammer online. Darkfall online. Dark Age Of Camelot.It is what it is, these games tend to die when the PVP community cannibalizes itself due to the weight of the people on top who have found out how to exploit the system. Contrast with Moba's where teamwork and knowledge of mechanics alone can make the difference, and you will see why these are not fessible examples.

First, saying games that were released 30 years ago (Warhammer) and 17 years ago (DAoC) have died as though that indicated a failure in design is a little absurd. Heck, some in this thread were probably not born yet when Warhammer was released.

Heck, by those standards the first TES game was a failure, They had to make another one to keep revenue flowing.

Both you and the person you are arguing with seem to be talking around each other as well.

Heck, he talks about LOL and Dota as being a success as though there is a comparison in game design when it is more likely the business model that has brought them success.

Both are Free to Play games that monotize differently. Heck, LOL monetizes to make it easier to play the game by selling champions and such while others just play for free milking those who spend.

None off any of is comparable game wise and all of it missing the mark by a long shot.

The_Red_Viper · June 2018

"I personally do not like this, therefore no one else likes this."

[edited to remove baiting comment]

Also for people saying that successful MMOs ignore PvP are very wrong. WoW, the most successful of them all, always makes major changes to PvP every expansion.

Kamatsu · June 2018

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

You are correct. PVP does sell. PVP MMO's, do not sell. And that's been shown time and again.

Find me a PVP focused MMO that hasn't collapsed under it's own weight within five years. Then you have a case.

I find myself strangely giving an example to rebutt you... Eve Online. It's a PvP MMO that's still going strong after running for years, has for the most part had steady increases in population... however on the other hand it's fairly small when compared to ESO, WoW, FFXIV, etc. It was also built up for PvP from the very start.... it didn't have PvP tacked onto it at the last minute like most PvE-centric MMO's have had.

And this is also where others are correct - virtually no MMO has done PvP very well, whether it's been open-world PvP or instanced/battle-grounds style PvP. About the only other MMO style game that I can think of that's done PvP well, apart from Eve Online, was Guild Wars 1.... and even then, the PvE player base and support completely dwarfed it's PvP base. You have to also consider that GW1 started as a PvP game mainly and had PvE tacked onto it... and it's the PvE which sold it and kept players going, not the PvP - it's why Guild Wars 2 is PvE with tacked-on PvP.

And yes GW1's PvP wasn't perfect and had a lot of issue's, especially in the end where it became practically impossible to balance it due to the number of classes, abilities, expansions, etc that there were.

However, to put this whole argument into a point - this revolves around the same thing in the "We want it harder" vs "leave it easy" argument - or the "add in open world-PvP" argument. The game for the most part is a PvE game with PvP tacked on.... yet PvE players keep seeing PvP players pushing for more and more development to be taken from the majority of the game / player-base to work on things for the minority and/or to the detriment of the majority. So there is, at least to me, an understandable backlash against that.

Not saying one side is right or wrong in this, but when you pull back and look at it... that's what can be seen. People who play in one of the smallest sections of ESO demanding that the game be more shaped around their desires.

You think this backlash is against PvP? Nope. Go check Eve Online's forums and scroll for anyone asking / wanting the PvE missions to be expanded, for the PvE missions to be safer, for non-PvP PvE mission's... and you'll see the exact same backlash against them from the majority of players there. why? Same reason - the majority, being PvP players, seeing people from the minority, PvE only, pushing for more development resources be used to satisfy the minority over the majority.

You go to the forums of BDO, and I bet if you look you'll find someone complaining about it being open-pvp and wanting more 'safe' area's / quest's / etc from pvp'ing... and I'll guarantee you that they'll be seeing the same backlash from the majority of the playerbase.... since the majority who play there know & like that the game is open-pvp and would be against anything that removes/lessens/reduces that.

Same backlash happened when WoW merged server's and removed open-PvP server's. There was a huge outcry about that from the ppl who played on there, because the open-pvp, open ganjkking, etc gameplay is what they loved... and for those server's PvP players were the majority... so removing them was good for the minority on those servers, but bad for the majority.

coplannb16_ESO · June 2018

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

reguvin wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Ain' bringin' me together.

Also, no real PVP fallacy.

PVP dont sell. It's why the game quickly abandoned said updates aside from battlegrounds.

Mate, every big MMO has PvP in it's endgame. Saying that PvP doesn't sell is madness if you compare how many MMO's have excellent PvP ingame.

Mate, every big MMO which has prioratized PVP as it's driving force has died. Warhammer Online. Shadowbane. It's just a matter of history.

This game prioratized it up until a year in, when it realized that it just wasn't puting in the numbers needed for content production.

Disbelieve it if you want, call me crazy if you want, but PVP specific MMO's just dont tend to do well.

DAoC still going. It is a matter of doing it right. Shadowbane died to the endless griefing that free, unconstrained always on PvP causes. Also the game simply was crap. looked like crap. performed like crap. was not fun at all.

Warhammer Online died due to too much focus on PvE expansions and PvE raiding/grinding which in the end made PvP die due to forcing PvP players into PvE to be able to compete. an error many games repeat.

why is DAoCs PvP still going? #1 crafted gear is king, #2 skill and tactics matter more than gear, #3 no increase in max level, e.g. horizontal progression instead of vertical, thus also never invalidating existing gear, #4 meaningful PvP progression system that beats both ESOs CP and AvA-Skill system

James-Wayne · June 2018

Calm down... next chapter is Cyrodiil, massive overhaul incoming for all PvP players!

Yasha · June 2018

MrSensible wrote: »

Battlegrounds are fantastic. Small scale pvp is where the game should focus. Cyrodiil is just not fun. It's rarely a matter of skill and more often a matter of "Did my side have more people?" You capture a keep then rush to another, only to find the one you just captured has been retaken. Should drop Cyro pvp altogether and turn the zone into a big Adventure Zone or split it up into 9 smaller battleground zones.

Healthy games require a mixture of pvp and pve focus. PVP should never be the #1 priority in an MMO, as much as I wish it could. It simply isn't economically viable. It costs too many resources to balance and maintain vs. the number of people who are interested in. But that doesn't mean it should be forgotten altogether.

Cyro sucks. Battlegrounds good. Flame on.

I only play this game for the pvp, specifically the RvR in Cyrodiil because it is currently the best implementation of RvR on the market. The Bgs in ESO are the worst I have played in any mmo, and IC is usually just a gear/Telvar farming area.

DocDova · June 2018

PvE cooperation makes people friends not PvP.

Maryal · June 2018

SteveCampsOut wrote: »

Maryal wrote: »

IC was not a pvp dlc -- it was a hybrid. We've never been given a pvp dlc for this game.

Originally, entry into IC could have been locked to the exclusion of the others by control of the map (that's why the sewer icons on the map look like keyholes). Having exclusive entry to IC meant the 'controlling faction' would have the opportunity to farm, do the quest lines, or whatever ... as a pve zone (so long as map control was maintained). Obviously, when map control was lost, chaos would ensue as one or both of the other factions could gain entry to IC -- opening it up for pvp action. This would have resulted in IC 'as a pve zone' (due to faction exclusivity) and IC 'as a pvp zone' cycling. Granted, it would have been a rather chaotic cycle, but that would have been part of the fun. In theory, it would have been a win-win for pvp'ers and pve'ers alike.

It was a great idea, but during beta too many people complained that it would be unfair to pay for a dlc that, potentially, you couldn't play (or would be locked out of) for periods of time. So, that feature was scrapped during beta.
When faction controlled entry was scrapped during beta -- it was scrapped before the feature was 'turned on' in beta ... meaning, it was scrapped before anyone had a chance to actually experiment with the feature. It's important to note that the decision was based on a lot of hyperbole 'what if' qq'ing.

In hindsight, was scrapping the feature a good decision for the longevity of IC or for the benefit of pvp as a whole? Interesting to think about.
When IC initially released, the sewers were where most pve players went and was considered the 'care bears' portion of IC and the districts were where the hard-core pvp'ers went (a fact emphasized by many content creators at the time). Obviously there was some ganking in the sewers, but it was minimal when IC was first released. Things went downhill when the pvp'ers returned to Cyrodiil (why this happened is not discussed here to keep this post short). With no real pvp action, the IC pvp stragglers turned to their newly found past-time - sewer ganking. That caused the pve population in the sewers to steadily decline. Ironically, IC is now mostly empty and many people qq about that.

It's too bad that faction controlled entry was scrapped - IMO, that one change triggered IC's downward spiral which eventually lead to the current (mostly empty) status of IC.

So, I take issue with people claiming that IC was a pvp dlc, because it wasn't ... it was a hybrid. I do hope that someday they release a dlc that is purely pvp.

The "Locked" Imperial city deal fell through because having an area locked by faction has proven itself in the first game that had it to cause players to leave the game in droves. Much of ESO's PVP, 3 realms/3Factions/PVP Zones were based on the RVR of Dark Ages of Camelot. IC was meant to be similar to DAoC's Darkness Falls dungeon which could only be entered by the faction or realm that held the most keeps. What this ended up doing was causing players to mass up in one faction on many servers effectively locking out both other realms for most of the time. Your realm/faction can never get into the sweet dungeon with the sweet drops, you either have to make a new alt in the winning realm or quit the game. Guess which choice most people made when faced with having to level new alts in new realms.

LOL! Such insight! Such wisdom! A "Golden Rule" for all game designers/developers to always follow: Always decide what features to put in your game based on whether or not that particular feature worked in someone else's game. You should apply for a job at ZOS. No, on second thought, don't apply at ZOS, make that Ubisoft, or perhaps some other company.

Eduard_Rodric · June 2018

Agree

Dragonnord · June 2018

Not true. PvP doesn't bring people together at all. No one goes to PvP compared to the amount of players this game has. You go to PvP and see the same names always. It's just "a few" people (again; compared to amount of players or PvE players) that do PvP.

Besides, ZOS can barely manage the existent PvP content right now (a lot of broken stuff in PvP like sets, bugs, loading screens, crashes, queue delays, laaaaag, etc.) and you want more PvP content? Please no.

Claudman · June 2018

The Elder Scrolls Online: Battlegrounds.

Pre-Order for a special skin, supply drop exclusive and five crown crates.

Also, 'bringing players together'? What? You mean bringing them together where they want to kill each other? To be fair though, PvE is just as toxic as PvP in the ESO community, I don't know how a game managed to make PvE toxic. lol
Maybe Arena Net was right when they banned DPS trackers from Guild Wars 2.

reiverx · June 2018

If you enjoy PVP then just play it until it totally collapses. It's not going to suddenly get any attention from the devs and it's highly obvious they don't care at all.

Bodži · June 2018

It would be fun to see the PvP Arena with 1vs1 2vs2 4vs4 8vs8 12vs12 with rewards/achievements

Anotherone773 · June 2018

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

reguvin wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Ain' bringin' me together.

Also, no real PVP fallacy.

PVP dont sell. It's why the game quickly abandoned said updates aside from battlegrounds.

Mate, every big MMO has PvP in it's endgame. Saying that PvP doesn't sell is madness if you compare how many MMO's have excellent PvP ingame.

Mate, every big MMO which has prioratized PVP as it's driving force has died. Warhammer Online. Shadowbane. It's just a matter of history.

This game prioratized it up until a year in, when it realized that it just wasn't puting in the numbers needed for content production.

Disbelieve it if you want, call me crazy if you want, but PVP specific MMO's just dont tend to do well.

Shadowbane died because of chinese gold farming zergs. The devs would not do anything about them even though we pleaded and pleaded for them to move them to their own server and not allow any chinese IPs on the other servers.

I use to do a lot of solo pvp in SB. I saw all my friends leave as the zergs grew. I lost interest because while the chinese were terrible at the game, their were just to many of them in groups. I use to solo vs 2-3 people and win, i could do double the chinese and win. But they started farming in groups of 10 then 15 and then 20 plus. They sucked up all the resources and camps. The captured most of the mines. And when they attacked a city, their were hundreds of them.

That is why shadowbane died. Many people moved to Eve, including me. Eve by the way is still going strong and it is focused almost completely on PVP.

ESO doesnt draw many pvpers. You have people who pvp here, but TBH this games pvp is severely unbalanced and cheesy as is all game of this type such as WoW and Rift. Far to much crowd control, and there is a severe lack of purpose to PVP. Adding more PVP to this game is a waste of money and dev time. People play ESO for the PVE aspect and most you see running around BGS and Cyro are doing pvp either as a minigame of sorts or to farm AP.

A game needs to be built for PVP from the ground up not have it tossed in as an afterthought cause that is what is WOW did and we want to compete with WoW.

DocDova · June 2018

Any MMO to survive in long run, Should focus more on PvE content and story telling. I had zero online friends when I started ESO and now I have dozens, If for nothing I would log in to talk and play with them. PvP enthusiast easily move to new PvP MMO as they would have new engines and probably new content. What's important is people make friends and keep coming for playing with them.

Juhasow · June 2018

reguvin wrote: »

Imperial City was the only PvP update since release.

We want more updates like Imperial City which only focuses on PvPing.

This is a Great game with alot of content and amazing features. But it really needs to focus on bringing PvP players to play the Game.

Imperial City was not the only update for PvP since we had also battlegrounds with new modes and maps added later and Cyrodill itself got few changes like for example making cities capturable. Imperial City was also not PvP only focused updat since we got 2 new PvE dungeons with it and IC itself is full of mobs giving tel vars and general idea is to lure PvErs to farm it so PVPers can kil them.

Bruccius · June 2018

Sygil05 wrote: »

darkstar2084 wrote: »

someone enlighten me they have cyrodil, imperial city and now battlegrounds. What else do you think they could do for a pvp DLC? I cant really think of anything

That's like saying PVE already has dungeons, trials, and quests in various cities across the map, why release any DLC at all?

Most of us aren't game designers, which is why we pay someone else to come up with ideas to implement into the game to make PVP more enjoyable. Just because you're not able to come up with anything doesn't mean there aren't good ideas waiting out there for future releases.

Unfortunately, ZOS makes their money off the crown store, and PVP updates aren't going to help with their bottom line. My guess is we'll continue to see little tweaks to PVP this year, but no major changes of any sort.

The PvE playerbase is bigger than the PvP playerbase, that's why they make more PvE than PvP content.

Danksta · June 2018

DuskMarine wrote: »

Jake1576 wrote: »

It is true without pvp many would leave the game it doesn't get the respect it deserves with updates and fixes this is especially true for console players pvp is trash right now on ps4 and is unplayable pvp should be one of the main focuses in my opinion

alot of people dont go into pvp to actually pvp fyi. those pops mean jack..........

There's also plenty of people that would love to PvP but since it's been neglected for so long they don't.

reguvin · June 2018

What PvP in ESO is missing.

1. Ranked System
2. Arenas
3. World open PvP zones
4. Contested PvP Areas
5. Free for all PvP Areas
6. Ranked Battlegrounds 10v10
7. Guild PvP System (Keeps, Guild fights, PvP leveling)
8. PvP Events (Prize money matches)
9. Gold and chest rewards for winning Games
10. Highlights in main ESO Website

DuskMarine · June 2018

Danksta wrote: »

DuskMarine wrote: »

Jake1576 wrote: »

It is true without pvp many would leave the game it doesn't get the respect it deserves with updates and fixes this is especially true for console players pvp is trash right now on ps4 and is unplayable pvp should be one of the main focuses in my opinion

alot of people dont go into pvp to actually pvp fyi. those pops mean jack..........

There's also plenty of people that would love to PvP but since it's been neglected for so long they don't.

tell that to dc vs ep............ep has the highest pop on every single server its stupid.

Claudman · June 2018

@reguvin
It's also missing silly minigames to play against players.
Like a drinking minigame or even a TES version of Gwent.

DenMoria · June 2018

I thought PvP drove players apart. I mean we are killing each other. It doesn't get much more apart than death.

Faune · June 2018

I didn't read any of the comments, so I don't know if anyone has put this info here. We are getting new PvP with Murkmire, a new arena. https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/418734/new-group-arena-with-murkmire-dlc

Edit: Yep, I had no idea arena's weren't PvP. My noob is showing.

Claudman · June 2018

@Faune
I think that's going to be more like vMA or vDSA.

JackAshes · June 2018

Low cost update PvPers could sink their teeth into that would add more sandbox elements to the game..... https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5018358#Comment_5018358

mb10 · June 2018

Cyrodiil just needs an overhaul.

An update to the keeps, the regions outside the keeps and maybe make the map smaller its way too big atm for the population cap.

Most importantly, it needs a PERFORMANCE update.

Casterial · June 2018

reguvin wrote: »

What PvP in ESO is missing.

1. Ranked System
2. Arenas
3. World open PvP zones
4. Contested PvP Areas
5. Free for all PvP Areas
6. Ranked Battlegrounds 10v10
7. Guild PvP System (Keeps, Guild fights, PvP leveling)
8. PvP Events (Prize money matches)
9. Gold and chest rewards for winning Games
10. Highlights in main ESO Website

1. Ranked System - First they need to balance, that's too much work for them.
2. Same case as 1.
3. Open World zones would be amazing! More cyrodiil zones. In the lore there were more than just 1 front.
4. Some kind of BG? Or another small area in a PVE zone?
5. FFA Arena yes!
6.BG ranked would be cool, but they don't even have 10v10 for normal BGs.
7. Guild PVP System would be cool, capture places outside of Cyrodiil or even wage war against guilds and fight them in the open world?
8. PvP Events other then just Mayham.. I was so disappointed in this event like really? It took me a day.
9. They kinda' have this, but based off of AP gained.
10. This would be cool.

Casterial · June 2018

Alaztor91 wrote: »

IMO gear/items reliance is what ends up killing PvP in mmorpgs, pretty much every popular and successful PvP game has players starting on equal ground.

When you start adding stuff like set bonuses/gear quality/potions/poisons/cp points to the mix and the already existing class/skills balance problem because devs refuse to make skills/passives behave differently depending on which game mode they are used, that ''equal ground'' starts to disappear soon followed by competitiveness and interest.

I would prefer if PvP from mmorpgs were entirely based on your class and the skills they have access to, with gear and consumables made specifically for PvP, and skills/passives also tweaked specifically for PvP.

GW2 Arenas are equal stats and ground, but they don't have this regen system to stamina and magicka. So an issue with having equal ground/stats is what I saw on WoW it basically is one GIANT nerf to your character. However, I do agree if they could find a good template per character like
IE:
Magicka builds: 2k regen, 32k magicka, 20k hp, 650 stam regen, 350 health regen, 10k stam, 2k-2.5k spell damage
Stamina: 2k regen, 32k stamina, 20k hp, 650-700 magicka regen, 350 health regen, 10-11k magicka, 2.5k-3k wep damage

Beardimus · June 2018

reguvin wrote: »

Imperial City was the only PvP update since release.

We want more updates like Imperial City which only focuses on PvPing.

This is a Great game with alot of content and amazing features. But it really needs to focus on bringing PvP players to play the Game.

It's true. I reflected on this the other day. At the start i did every quest slow play. Full on. But Wrothgar was the last thing i went 100% on as switched focus to PvP.

All this conte t comes and goes at a wild pace I have no idea how people keep up with. Mainly as im ticking away in PvP.

Sure we got battlegrounds. And our pop is already split so we don't need more locations. But something focus wise would be neat.

I'm glad Brians team looked at PvP for summerset that's for sure tho

DenMoria · June 2018

So performance is still an issue? I kind of gave up with all the issues back before I took my break. I was hoping things had improved now that there aren't so many folks there.

mb10 wrote: »

Cyrodiil just needs an overhaul.

An update to the keeps, the regions outside the keeps and maybe make the map smaller its way too big atm for the population cap.

Most importantly, it needs a PERFORMANCE update.