What do we need servers for? Let's have an off line mode.
-
Davor✭✭✭✭✭
✭VaranisArano wrote: »Hey, hope that helps clarify those two points and why I think those add up along with the other points to explain why I think ZOS isn't going to make an offline mode.
Yes it does. Thank you very much. Greatly appreciate the explanations. Dang, was such a great debate, I think you won. I can't counter point anything now. LOL
Not my quote but I love this saying
"I would pay It for support. But since they choosed we are just numbers and not customers, i dont mind if game and zos goes to oblivion"0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Ydrisselle wrote: »starkerealm wrote: »Azuramoonstar wrote: »TheValar85 wrote: »well let me inform you guys
those who say it is not posible to allow offline mode for this thats a huge lie.
.
care to point out an example of this? as I never seen a full blown MMO with a single player/offline mode.
i' ve seen single player games with optional multiplayer. And i've seen orpg which are not full blown mmo.
I have. Hellgate: London was an MMO with an offline fork. It sank the studio within six months of launch. Post mortems from the development leads cite developing and maintaining two separate code bases as one of the leading factors that lead to the game's demise.
It's also a real shame, because HG:L was 5 to 8 years ahead of its time in some respects.
I played Hellgate, I even still have it somewhere. It was a mess for many different things. I think it was not the game that killed the studio, it was the leading of the studio itself.
There's an element of truth to this. Leadership chose to go with the split offline/online system, resulting in the team having to, effectively, develop two separate code bases simultaneously. This meant that, nearly all of the work was doubled, including some nasty bugs that went live in the retail build for the offline mode, hobbling it out of the gate.
So, while it's true that the decisions leadership made lead to the death of Flagship, one of those decisions was a separate offline fork of the game.1 -
Azuramoonstar✭✭✭✭
If I'm honest it wasn't anything like that, it was just a case of being really pestered to join people's guilds and stuff: I wasn't even given a chance to figure out the most basic stuff without someone coming along, "helping" me in the training area and then "now you owe me, you must join me". No, go away, stop harassing me when I don't even have a clue what I'm doing! I'm not even sure what was the point since I clearly had no idea what I was doing, unless cannon-fodder is a thing.Azuramoonstar wrote: »i can sympathize with the WoW harassment. When i first tried it after breaking up with my ex. i made a rp character to test out rp on a server only for 5 ppl to start calling me a ***. When i asked how to report it, i was bullied being called thin skinned, only to get a 72 hour temp ban for telling people what i was called, and i jut simply wish to report it. played 5 min never played till a year after and only got to 46.
Whatever I think of subsequent games like TOR and ESO, at least people for the most part leave you to get on with it or help out without insisting you're forever in their debt.
Your experience sounds way more bothersome than mine which was really just me ending up too exasperated to even try any longer. I think being handled so clumsily makes matters worse. Maybe I've been lucky or maybe it's because I stay away from the actually MP bits of ESO but in spite of my occasional griping about random stuff it seems a lot less toxic than that.
Then again, it's early morning here, the time of day when I'm generally in a good mood: my tone may be entirely different had I written this late afternoon when I've run out of steam.
Again i can sympathize, best way to handle it mostly "thank for the offer but i'll pass." if they don't take no for an answer block them.
I had reverse happen in WoW, when i tried to join guilds i was given a long list of addond to download before i could join. (a good 20+ guilds i tried joining, mostly social ones) I tried to explain my situation in that the pc i was playing on was shared, and was told i wasn't allowed to download such programs. (the worst part was it was a computer i bought when i was 26 year old with 1000 dollars i won on a scratch ticket, my family broke their pc and demanded mine. reason i still lived at home was due to disabilities that prevent me from living by myself, disabilities prevented me from working a full time job the ticket i bought was from a tip i got from my job) Anyway.. i was ridiculed and called, bad, lazy and a liar. Which is why i have the opinion i have in such matters.
I've been on the side of the fence that i was called, bad, toxic, a loser, horrible. Just because of having a different opinion, if people spent effort to get to know me they would learn I am the type the enjoys to help others when they need it, more then willing to drop what I'm doing to do so.
I find my time has more value in helping others then spent on myself.
which is why i had the argument " i have a real life, i don't want to waste "my" time" to me me when you join a group game or group content, your time becomes the groups time. A bit of communication will go a long way. Will everyone will be nice? nope. In those cases remove them, or leave. Block them, and if what they said/did broke the tos report it.
which is also why i don't like the argument of "i want an offline mode because players are toxic and get in my way" i think that punishes players who are nice and didn't do anything wrong.Long time mmo player: 2004-[current year]
Long time Elder scrolls player: Xbox launch morrowind.
Follower of the dawn and dusk, keeper of the moon and star.0 -
Azuramoonstar✭✭✭✭RavenSworn wrote: »"I'm in a bus with everyone else but why can't this bus be more like a car? Why must all these people ride on it as well? See, there's other cars and trucks as well? Why can't this bus be more like them?"
Why would you take a bus (mmorpg) when there's cars (single player rpg) or trucks (orpg) around, and then asking for the bus to
Are they similar? Sure they are, they have windows, they have doors, safely bags in them, they have wheels, they have rims, steering wheels... But they are built differently, with different intentions.
/shrug. You can always play pts op, but even then, there will be, always, that chance of another player in that same world.
And if more people drive a car, you would have MORE room on the bus. So it would BENIFIT you if we did.
Thank you for proving my point.
if more people drive cars, bus's will lose money to run and thus shut down if they don't make enough money per run which will screw over those who needed to use the bus. Whivh is what the person was trying to say.
If you look up all the mmo created after WoW most were shut down because the amount of players playing got so low they couldn't afford to run the servers. MMO cost money to run.Long time mmo player: 2004-[current year]
Long time Elder scrolls player: Xbox launch morrowind.
Follower of the dawn and dusk, keeper of the moon and star.0 -
Davor✭✭✭✭✭
✭MerlinPendragon wrote: »No offline mode, please. Let's maintain resources for the live world. Want offline? There are several other Elder Scroll titles out there.
[
And your points are again?Azuramoonstar wrote: »RavenSworn wrote: »"I'm in a bus with everyone else but why can't this bus be more like a car? Why must all these people ride on it as well? See, there's other cars and trucks as well? Why can't this bus be more like them?"
Why would you take a bus (mmorpg) when there's cars (single player rpg) or trucks (orpg) around, and then asking for the bus to
Are they similar? Sure they are, they have windows, they have doors, safely bags in them, they have wheels, they have rims, steering wheels... But they are built differently, with different intentions.
/shrug. You can always play pts op, but even then, there will be, always, that chance of another player in that same world.
And if more people drive a car, you would have MORE room on the bus. So it would BENIFIT you if we did. Thank you for proving my point.
if more people drive cars, bus's will lose money to run and thus shut down if they don't make enough money per run which will screw over those who needed to use the bus. Whivh is what the person was trying to say.
If you look up all the mmo created after WoW most were shut down because the amount of players playing got so low they couldn't afford to run the servers. MMO cost money to run.
Yeah I noticed that. Most MMOs don't last long, with WoW being the exception that I know of. Now here is the kicker. Why did they shut down? Why can't companies give people what they want? That is why I am sure they shut down. I don't play Riders of Icarus because 1) no controller support. 2) No Y inverse. I can sort of understand the no controller for various of reasons. Still many people want controller support in games they play. BUT not having no Y inverse is just insane. There are us old school farts who need Y inverse because we use to love playing our flying games and so use to Y inverse. I know my son thinks I am weird for playing in Y inverse but I keep reading many people want it and don't play it.
So why do companies not give people what they want? Of course they shut down when people don't play it. They go else where with what they want.Not my quote but I love this saying
"I would pay It for support. But since they choosed we are just numbers and not customers, i dont mind if game and zos goes to oblivion"0 -
SickleCider✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭The obvious answer is sometimes the correct one. We can't have an offline mode because account data is saved server side, not locally.✨🐦✨ Blackfeather Court Commission ✨🐦✨2 -
Davor✭✭✭✭✭
✭Versispellis wrote: »The obvious answer is sometimes the correct one. We can't have an offline mode because account data is saved server side, not locally.
Obvious answer would be to have locally then. Problem solved. Not my quote but I love this saying
"I would pay It for support. But since they choosed we are just numbers and not customers, i dont mind if game and zos goes to oblivion"0 -
CompM4s✭✭✭✭✭For the most part you can go questing with little to no interference from other players. Most of the population is in cyrodiil, dungeons, trials etc...1 -
RedRook✭✭✭✭For the most part you can go questing with little to no interference from other players. Most of the population is in cyrodiil, dungeons, trials etc...
It's not the people, it's the performance (speaking only for myself). If everything was client-side, lag and present joys like bar swap not happening or potions refusing to be consumed would be just a bad memory.
Does nothing for the pain in PVP or trials, but dungeons and Maelstrom arena would be a lot nicer.Edited by RedRook on August 10, 2018 12:30AM1 -
Ydrisselle✭✭✭✭✭Versispellis wrote: »The obvious answer is sometimes the correct one. We can't have an offline mode because account data is saved server side, not locally.
Obvious answer would be to have locally then. Problem solved.
That's only working if those data could never be copied over to the live servers. Still it's simply not profitable to convert ESO to a single player traditional Elder Scrolls game.0 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Versispellis wrote: »The obvious answer is sometimes the correct one. We can't have an offline mode because account data is saved server side, not locally.
Obvious answer would be to have locally then. Problem solved.
Except, remember that big explanation I had about what it means for ZOS to have to convert how the game works to handle and store all that information client-side? That's what this is all about. Its not so simply to have the account data saved locally (client-side) and in any case, changing all of that cost money.0 -
Davor✭✭✭✭✭
✭VaranisArano wrote: »Versispellis wrote: »The obvious answer is sometimes the correct one. We can't have an offline mode because account data is saved server side, not locally.
Obvious answer would be to have locally then. Problem solved.
Except, remember that big explanation I had about what it means for ZOS to have to convert how the game works to handle and store all that information client-side? That's what this is all about. Its not so simply to have the account data saved locally (client-side) and in any case, changing all of that cost money.
Oh I do. I was just being cheeky. Not my quote but I love this saying
"I would pay It for support. But since they choosed we are just numbers and not customers, i dont mind if game and zos goes to oblivion"0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭Azuramoonstar wrote: »MMo's already have tools to better your experiences, we have block/ignore/black lists to add people who grief, bully etc. We have guilds people can form and invite people we enjoy playing with.
This is where your whole argument falls apart.
ESO has a limited ignore list. It isn't infinite, like older games with smarter and wiser developers which is funny considering ESO developers had the benefit of hindsight to learn from their example and their mistakes in other things. This means ESO doesn't allow you to ignore every person who you want to. I haven't had reason to ignore many people, by my standards, but I hit the very paltry limit very quickly after starting ESO about 3 years ago.
Also, people join guilds in ESO for trade vendors above any other reason and then potential group members for dungeons/trials where they don't even talk much of the time either. They're just in the guild and never socialize. Also, only the leader truly has the power to choose whoever they want to guild with as anybody lower just has to accept anybody else added to it even if they don't like them. It's like the song "Safety Dance" where they say "We can dance if we want to, we can leave your friends behind, because your friends don't dance and if they don't dance then they're no friends of mine".
There are too many incentives to have a big guild and not to actually be in a small "friends only" guild.
The ESO developers didn't even learn from developers who could do much more with much less player hardware power and server power and dial-up internet.
I gamed on City of Heroes for years on a 128kbps internet connections with a Nvidia GeForce 7900 GTX, the old old video card from 2006, and actually it was the weaker mobile version in a gaming laptop. It had far bigger player raids and pvp groups with 40-50 players capping a zone's population and all firing off very flashy heavy particle effects that this game doesn't look like it could ever do without killing every computer out there.
Here is a reference video:
[imgurl]
https://youtu.be/F9GolLyHYCs[/imgurl]
That game, launched in 2004, had an infinite ignore list by "global handles"(equivalent to username in ESO) because it was, wisely and smarter than ZOS, stored on client-side. It had a far better working Looking For Group tool, without any memorable bugs. It had Guild housing from early in the game with far more freedom to place items and higher item limits than our current player homes.
And guess what, that game never did release a "private server" or "offline version", but players did manage to reverse engineer enough code, with most of it being client side aside from NPC mob placement data and combat returns from the server, so players can still technically play it but without any ability activations or combat but they can walk around and visit all the zones and use the entire character creation system.
It's called paragon chat:
[imgurl]
https://youtu.be/_uCBJIhfdFc[/imgurl]
Offline versions are FAR from impossible and even player supported online versions work in enough fashion to still be around for a relatively niche game years and years after the end of that game in 2012.Edited by Mystrius_Archaion on September 6, 2018 4:34AM0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭It's absolutely hilariously ridiculous that some people still use the excuse "players will cheat" to not consider an offline mode without even thinking of "cheating against who?".
You can't cheat against yourself. That's the essence of offline. It means "alone". It means "not online" meaning nothing done offline will translate to online ever, so long as anybody with 5% of a brain even remotely thinks that may be a potential problem so they can easily code in a check to prevent that.
And also, who the hell cares if anybody cheats in PVE?
If you're making PVE a competition then you may as well drop your pants in public and yell for a ruler to measure your privates with and smile for the inevitable "mugshot" as you ignore the police commands to "pull your pants up or you're going to jail". That sort of result is usually reserved for the drunks and drugged up people with no shame or sense of self-preservation.1 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »I don't know why people care if there was a solitary version of the game. It would have to be unlinked from the megaservers but that isn't so horrible. I think from the perspective of other dead MMO's like City of Heroes it would be nice for the sake of nostalgia alone to be able to hop on those games. Co-op mode wouldn't be bad either.
The big question is whether such a thing would be worth it to the game developers. Maybe, but I presume they would sell it as a separate product. (Kind of like HD/3d Skyrim).
I would pay again for it, as I have paid for 3 versions of Skyrim and am planning to pay for a 4th, VR.
They're ignoring the additional sales if they just sell them as separate versions with different features, maybe even different combat.
I just want the huge world and customization of my characters and would prefer other combat and no more logging into Summerset in Alinor to zone chat talking about private parts and how cool drugs supposedly are or whatever conspiracy theory about whatever news is fake, or any other example of the absolute worst forum posts that get banned and blocked on forums but are too common and impossible to block completely in game because the ignore list isn't big enough.
I end up just hiding zone chat entirely and playing solo without bothering with other people aside from my very very small friends list, most of whom are from other games when I was more social and not sickened by more recent game's communities.0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭Peekachu99 wrote: »Um, the cheating would be out of control. You’d see level one—NOT CP, BUT LEVEL—running around in VMoL, VAS skins with every crow store mount unlocked in the game. Offline or heavily client side game NEVER work for these reasons.
Before they locked Vet dungeons/trials by level sometime in this last year, level 1 characters could go to VMoL, and since One Tamriel scaling, could actually be useful rather than worthless.
Hell! By all the definitions and arguments of all you "cheating would be rampant" posters, One Tamriel scaling is cheating already.
Sweep that under the rug and ignore it all you want, but now players are going and doing content you used to have to spend hundreds of hours leveling and questing to be able to even attempt.Edited by Mystrius_Archaion on September 6, 2018 5:09AM0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Funny.
"You want offline mode for THIS game? Go play another and stop paying for this game so it dies more quickly because of lack of funds."
This is a major flaw in the argument for going to play Skyrim. We just want to continue playing THIS game and paying to support THIS game, just without what we consider flaws of it which one is the other people we "need"(because of code and fake difficulty) for group content even if we can't stand the people.
So yes, keep telling me to leave and I'll take my wallet elsewhere even though I've done a lot more to support the game that many of you lifetime subscribers due to the fact that I actually bought many crown crates and other cosmetics. My money is worth more than yours because the number of dollars I spend is higher.
Several of you like to say, to excuse the ZOS apparent greediness, that "the subscription isn't enough to keep the game going" and yet many of you only pay that. Good luck keeping it going without people like me that are interested in the things that cost extra and aren't "how the game used to be" because they cost extra beyond the subscription.0 -
shaielzafine✭✭✭✭✭It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.1
-
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »
Funny.
"You want offline mode for THIS game? Go play another and stop paying for this game so it dies more quickly because of lack of funds."
This is a major flaw in the argument for going to play Skyrim. We just want to continue playing THIS game and paying to support THIS game, just without what we consider flaws of it which one is the other people we "need"(because of code and fake difficulty) for group content even if we can't stand the people.
So yes, keep telling me to leave and I'll take my wallet elsewhere even though I've done a lot more to support the game that many of you lifetime subscribers due to the fact that I actually bought many crown crates and other cosmetics. My money is worth more than yours because the number of dollars I spend is higher.
Several of you like to say, to excuse the ZOS apparent greediness, that "the subscription isn't enough to keep the game going" and yet many of you only pay that. Good luck keeping it going without people like me that are interested in the things that cost extra and aren't "how the game used to be" because they cost extra beyond the subscription.
The major flaw in your argumentation is that you dont seem to undestand how it works. If you have so much money, you'd have more luck developing your own game.
You're claiming it would be super profitable because of people like you. But every mmo has a marketng department, and those guys arent idiots, if selling single-player versions of mmos would be profitable, it would have been a common practice at this point.Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭Versispellis wrote: »The obvious answer is sometimes the correct one. We can't have an offline mode because account data is saved server side, not locally.
It's actually both, but the server is considered "master" such that it can rewrite the "slave" client side.
That's how the code works.
I saw the arguments earlier in the thread about "it's too much information to run on one PC", but then how does Skyrim work with a huge world and better graphics?
It's not transferring all 60+ gigabytes of the game data every second or even every day. In fact, my monthly gaming data exchange is under 1GB even on the heaviest of months, which I know because I've had to work with data caps on cellphone hotspot due to living in one of the poor internet regions of the United States. It only takes a small amount of data because they minimized it to mostly just XYZ location and some action variable, which is one reason you can't do some things the same time as others because it reduces momentary bandwidth usage.
I'm at least 3 miles from "ok" internet, which is at least 10s of thousands of dollars in distance of cable laying, and 11 miles from actually "decent" internet at only 100mbps, which is potentially a million dollars of distance.
I need the potential off offline to live where I want, because of work and because it is beautiful, and because we shouldn't all be forced to live on top of each other. It's not like people enjoy living with loud real life neighbors and drug labs in the neighbor's house and drive-by-shootings and sirens from police cars at any hour even if it is convenient to everything; it's literally convenient to everything, even the horrible stuff is conveniently right next door.
And yes, if this game "requires servers because it's too huge" then every offline game ever could never have existed and the internet bandwidth everyone has must be 100GBps, gigabytes, so that the game can be transferred fully every second on top of all the character actions.0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭FYI, I actually would love to stay with just the online mode, if it was designed or changed to be better than currently it is.
How could it be better?
Well....the reason I played City of Heroes, my first 3D mmo and first mmo I actually grouped on every day, and grouped regularly for the biggest raids was that groups were just plain more fun than solo, mostly because they were guaranteed more rewarding and easier than solo because of shared AoE buffs and cannon fodder enemies.
There is a reason games like Dynasty Warriors and Hyrule Warriors and Fire Emblem Warriors exist. Look them up. They're all about flashily eliminating hoards and hoards of enemies with the occasional "big boss" that you solo and still don't get that much challenge from but is still fun.
Honestly, that's the main reason I solo on ESO. I have to rely on group members to be more than just "pleasant company". I have to rely on them to be "competent players" as well, which is like winning the lottery jackpot.
If I didn't give a rat's butt who I was grouped with, because the content could be completed with any group, then I would group regularly with larger groups and could find more groups easily and avoid the toxic players that are more common in the endgame of the current design of the game with the "1%" who actually do the content meaning I have less options for group members.
This is where ZOS fails at game design the most and could easily turn that around to make it as wonderful as good old City of Heroes grouping was, despite almost any bug.Edited by Mystrius_Archaion on September 6, 2018 5:44AM0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭shaielzafine wrote: »It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.
"Offline mode".......
How could you "sell to others later" when you can't take it "online" because it is "offline"?0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »
Funny.
"You want offline mode for THIS game? Go play another and stop paying for this game so it dies more quickly because of lack of funds."
This is a major flaw in the argument for going to play Skyrim. We just want to continue playing THIS game and paying to support THIS game, just without what we consider flaws of it which one is the other people we "need"(because of code and fake difficulty) for group content even if we can't stand the people.
So yes, keep telling me to leave and I'll take my wallet elsewhere even though I've done a lot more to support the game that many of you lifetime subscribers due to the fact that I actually bought many crown crates and other cosmetics. My money is worth more than yours because the number of dollars I spend is higher.
Several of you like to say, to excuse the ZOS apparent greediness, that "the subscription isn't enough to keep the game going" and yet many of you only pay that. Good luck keeping it going without people like me that are interested in the things that cost extra and aren't "how the game used to be" because they cost extra beyond the subscription.
The major flaw in your argumentation is that you dont seem to undestand how it works. If you have so much money, you'd have more luck developing your own game.
You're claiming it would be super profitable because of people like you. But every mmo has a marketng department, and those guys arent idiots, if selling single-player versions of mmos would be profitable, it would have been a common practice at this point.
Game development = millions of dollars per year
my monetary contribution per year to this game = $300-600 per year
You think $300-600 = millions...?0 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »shaielzafine wrote: »It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.
"Offline mode".......
How could you "sell to others later" when you can't take it "online" because it is "offline"?
There are games that allow you to play both offline and then log in and continue playing online. Those games are often full of cheaters and none of them are mmos.
There's no mmos that develop separate online and offline versions simply because it wouldnt worth it. Again, if it's so easy, why do you think no one makes those offline versions?Edited by LadyNalcarya on September 6, 2018 5:54AMDro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »
Funny.
"You want offline mode for THIS game? Go play another and stop paying for this game so it dies more quickly because of lack of funds."
This is a major flaw in the argument for going to play Skyrim. We just want to continue playing THIS game and paying to support THIS game, just without what we consider flaws of it which one is the other people we "need"(because of code and fake difficulty) for group content even if we can't stand the people.
So yes, keep telling me to leave and I'll take my wallet elsewhere even though I've done a lot more to support the game that many of you lifetime subscribers due to the fact that I actually bought many crown crates and other cosmetics. My money is worth more than yours because the number of dollars I spend is higher.
Several of you like to say, to excuse the ZOS apparent greediness, that "the subscription isn't enough to keep the game going" and yet many of you only pay that. Good luck keeping it going without people like me that are interested in the things that cost extra and aren't "how the game used to be" because they cost extra beyond the subscription.
The major flaw in your argumentation is that you dont seem to undestand how it works. If you have so much money, you'd have more luck developing your own game.
You're claiming it would be super profitable because of people like you. But every mmo has a marketng department, and those guys arent idiots, if selling single-player versions of mmos would be profitable, it would have been a common practice at this point.
Game development = millions of dollars per year
my monetary contribution per year to this game = $300-600 per year
You think $300-600 = millions...?
Try to re-read my comment. You've missed something.Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »shaielzafine wrote: »It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.
"Offline mode".......
How could you "sell to others later" when you can't take it "online" because it is "offline"?
There are games that allow you to play both offline and then log in and continue playing online. Those games are often full of cheaters and none of them are mmos.
And yet you didn't read when I posted "anybody with 5% of a brain would realize that is a potential problem and code it to prevent that by keeping it offline".
Seriously!
What you say as possible cheating is already as possible as it will ever be. The server is the "master" and the client side, your computer or my computer, are the "slaves". We can input anything we want from our side to send to the server and then to other players to cheat, but the server "clamps" that and prevents it from working by running checks to make sure no data is out of allowed ranges.
That's MMO Anti-Cheat Software Method #1.
The "offline" version would much more easily prevent "online" cheating by just blocking all play "online" from "offline"data. It would be much more powerful and easy to prevent any cheating.
Hell, it's like taking away the car/truck/keys of a drunk driver. That stops them from drunk driving a hell of a lot better than just taking their license or relying on their own drunk judgement to make them stop and think, while drunk, "maybe I'm too drunk to drive".
How is this a hard concept? It's 3-year-old-child logic.Edited by Mystrius_Archaion on September 6, 2018 6:01AM0 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »
Funny.
"You want offline mode for THIS game? Go play another and stop paying for this game so it dies more quickly because of lack of funds."
This is a major flaw in the argument for going to play Skyrim. We just want to continue playing THIS game and paying to support THIS game, just without what we consider flaws of it which one is the other people we "need"(because of code and fake difficulty) for group content even if we can't stand the people.
So yes, keep telling me to leave and I'll take my wallet elsewhere even though I've done a lot more to support the game that many of you lifetime subscribers due to the fact that I actually bought many crown crates and other cosmetics. My money is worth more than yours because the number of dollars I spend is higher.
Several of you like to say, to excuse the ZOS apparent greediness, that "the subscription isn't enough to keep the game going" and yet many of you only pay that. Good luck keeping it going without people like me that are interested in the things that cost extra and aren't "how the game used to be" because they cost extra beyond the subscription.
The major flaw in your argumentation is that you dont seem to undestand how it works. If you have so much money, you'd have more luck developing your own game.
You're claiming it would be super profitable because of people like you. But every mmo has a marketng department, and those guys arent idiots, if selling single-player versions of mmos would be profitable, it would have been a common practice at this point.
Game development = millions of dollars per year
my monetary contribution per year to this game = $300-600 per year
You think $300-600 = millions...?
Try to re-read my comment. You've missed something.
No, you missed almost everything in my post.
I was comparing the amount of money I spend on this game to several of the opponents to this thread that have posted elsewhere in these forums saying "I will never spend any more on the game than the ESO Plus subscription and only use my saved up ESO Crowns for purchase and anything too expensive for that I do not purchase".
I also assumed, apparently underestimating the level of intelligence of readers(guess which direction?), that it was understood that I was implying that there are others like me who also purchase more who would leave for another game that does provide a better experience more in line with what we want if we were so inclined as to follow the prevailing suggestion to "go play another game if you want offline" and thus take a substantial amount of future revenue away from ZOS and end up cutting enough funds from this game, ESO, to result in its early cancellation compared to when it is likely to be shutdown.Edited by Mystrius_Archaion on September 6, 2018 6:09AM0 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »shaielzafine wrote: »It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.
"Offline mode".......
How could you "sell to others later" when you can't take it "online" because it is "offline"?
There are games that allow you to play both offline and then log in and continue playing online. Those games are often full of cheaters and none of them are mmos.
And yet you didn't read when I posted "anybody with 5% of a brain would realize that is a potential problem and code it to prevent that by keeping it offline".
Seriously!
What you say as possible cheating is already as possible as it will ever be. The server is the "master" and the client side, your computer or my computer, are the "slaves". We can input anything we want from our side to send to the server and then to other players to cheat, but the server "clamps" that and prevents it from working by running checks to make sure no data is out or allowed ranges.
That's MMO Anti-Cheat Software Method #1.
The "offline" version would much more easily prevent "online" cheating by just blocking all play "online" from "offline"data. It would be much more powerful and easy to prevent any cheating.
Hell, it's like taking away the car/truck/keys of a drunk driver. That stops them from drunk driving a hell of a lot better than just taking their license or relying on their own drunk judgement to make them stop and think, while drunk, "maybe I'm too drunk to drive".
How is this a hard concept? It's 3-year-old-child logic.
So you're trying to say that software developers have less than 5% of a brain? If it would be so easy, cheating in online games wouldnt even exist. If it would be so easy, mmo developers would always allow you to play offline. No one wants to lose profit, and if there was a possibility to sell the game to people with bad internet connection, they would use it.
It's really easy to imagine wonderful things that do not exist. I would really like to have a teleport machine, for example. It would be so easy to disappear in one place and then appear somewhere else! Too bad that things don't always work like you'd like to imagine them.
The only realistic way to implement this offline mode would be to make a separate version of the game. But then they would have to balance it differently and maintain 2 versions at once. This is going to be a financial and logistical nightmare, that's why even industry giants - like Blizzard, for example - dont do this.
All those other games that are infested by cheaters are fundamentally different: they are solo games with optional online mode. Not other way around.
Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU1 -
Mystrius_Archaion✭✭✭✭✭
✭LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »shaielzafine wrote: »It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.
"Offline mode".......
How could you "sell to others later" when you can't take it "online" because it is "offline"?
There are games that allow you to play both offline and then log in and continue playing online. Those games are often full of cheaters and none of them are mmos.
And yet you didn't read when I posted "anybody with 5% of a brain would realize that is a potential problem and code it to prevent that by keeping it offline".
Seriously!
What you say as possible cheating is already as possible as it will ever be. The server is the "master" and the client side, your computer or my computer, are the "slaves". We can input anything we want from our side to send to the server and then to other players to cheat, but the server "clamps" that and prevents it from working by running checks to make sure no data is out or allowed ranges.
That's MMO Anti-Cheat Software Method #1.
The "offline" version would much more easily prevent "online" cheating by just blocking all play "online" from "offline"data. It would be much more powerful and easy to prevent any cheating.
Hell, it's like taking away the car/truck/keys of a drunk driver. That stops them from drunk driving a hell of a lot better than just taking their license or relying on their own drunk judgement to make them stop and think, while drunk, "maybe I'm too drunk to drive".
How is this a hard concept? It's 3-year-old-child logic.
So you're trying to say that software developers have less than 5% of a brain?
I underestimated readers again....
No, I'm saying "these developers are obviously smart enough to code in a server check to prevent any offline data from going to any online version of the game and easily prevent cheating", given the assumption that they would bother to even think about an offline version at all in order to implement it.0 -
LadyNalcarya✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »LadyNalcarya wrote: »Mystrius_Archaion wrote: »shaielzafine wrote: »It's called Elder Scrolls Online, so not having an offline mode makes sense. It doesn't save your progress the way single player games do and you can't mod it the way you can mod something like Skyrim. If I was allowed to play offline mode without other players then I'd just farm things and then put it in the bank, then use it later to sell to others for profit. The skill lag and the very poor game performance that you mention is just something we have been living with now, since they haven't fixed anything. An offline mode wouldn't help, they need to get their things together before more people quit the game because it's performing poorly and for some people like the other commenters, unplayable.
"Offline mode".......
How could you "sell to others later" when you can't take it "online" because it is "offline"?
There are games that allow you to play both offline and then log in and continue playing online. Those games are often full of cheaters and none of them are mmos.
And yet you didn't read when I posted "anybody with 5% of a brain would realize that is a potential problem and code it to prevent that by keeping it offline".
Seriously!
What you say as possible cheating is already as possible as it will ever be. The server is the "master" and the client side, your computer or my computer, are the "slaves". We can input anything we want from our side to send to the server and then to other players to cheat, but the server "clamps" that and prevents it from working by running checks to make sure no data is out or allowed ranges.
That's MMO Anti-Cheat Software Method #1.
The "offline" version would much more easily prevent "online" cheating by just blocking all play "online" from "offline"data. It would be much more powerful and easy to prevent any cheating.
Hell, it's like taking away the car/truck/keys of a drunk driver. That stops them from drunk driving a hell of a lot better than just taking their license or relying on their own drunk judgement to make them stop and think, while drunk, "maybe I'm too drunk to drive".
How is this a hard concept? It's 3-year-old-child logic.
So you're trying to say that software developers have less than 5% of a brain?
I underestimated readers again....
No, I'm saying "these developers are obviously smart enough to code in a server check to prevent any offline data from going to any online version of the game and easily prevent cheating", given the assumption that they would bother to even think about an offline version at all in order to implement it.
My, my. We're on the meme level already. I hoped you'd last longer, pretending to be smarter than everyone else and all.
What you said doesnt matter because facts prove otherwise. If it's so easy, why no one does it? Game company is a business first and foremost, I'm sure they would love to have your money. Mmo companies sell all kinds of things, but they never offer an offline version of the game, even though the demand is here. If you're so wise, you'll understand why.
And if it's so easy to prevent cheating, why does it still exist in those solo games with online modes?Dro-m'Athra Destroyer | Divayth Fyr's Coadjutor | Voice of Reason
PC/EU0
This discussion has been closed.