Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
Why not let people pvp in all zones, if they choose to?
-
Sorbin✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.
@Sorbin
Fact is this has absolutely nothing to do with the casual player. In fact I find your comment rather entertaining as I know quite a few hard core PvP and PvE players that like the story lines Zos has added to the game over the years. Also, those stories and dungeons are what pays the bills and are what brings in new players so it is extremely smart business for Zos to continue it. lol.3 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.0 -
Sorbin✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.
@Sorbin
Fact is this has absolutely nothing to do with the casual player. In fact I find your comment rather entertaining as I know quite a few hard core PvP and PvE players that like the story lines Zos has added to the game over the years. Also, those stories and dungeons are what pays the bills and are what brings in new players so it is extremely smart business for Zos to continue it. lol.
Yeah, it's fine in the short term. People used rave about the ongoing support GW2 got in the Living World updates. Eventually your playerbase hits a wall though. The story content wears thin and gets blasted through in short order when it comes out. PvP stagnates without any meaningful updates. The PvE content is just rehash after rehash. The playerbase starts to bleed out.
ZOS is already working on other projects so I fully expect them to keep stringing the playerbase along with low-effort content until they all get bored comparing cosmetics and running the exact same PvE content over and over again, at which point they'll abandon the game nearly completely.
And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic. They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game. Which is a shame, because this game's PvP is actually incredibly unique and creates great moments, and could be truly special if it received even a modicum of support instead of ZOS continually churning out low-effort content to chase the easiest short-term dollar they can get.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.
@Sorbin
Fact is this has absolutely nothing to do with the casual player. In fact I find your comment rather entertaining as I know quite a few hard core PvP and PvE players that like the story lines Zos has added to the game over the years. Also, those stories and dungeons are what pays the bills and are what brings in new players so it is extremely smart business for Zos to continue it. lol.
Yeah, it's fine in the short term. People used rave about the ongoing support GW2 got in the Living World updates. Eventually your playerbase hits a wall though. The story content wears thin and gets blasted through in short order when it comes out. PvP stagnates without any meaningful updates. The PvE content is just rehash after rehash. The playerbase starts to bleed out.
ZOS is already working on other projects so I fully expect them to keep stringing the playerbase along with low-effort content until they all get bored comparing cosmetics and running the exact same PvE content over and over again, at which point they'll abandon the game nearly completely.
And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic. They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game. Which is a shame, because this game's PvP is actually incredibly unique and creates great moments, and could be truly special if it received even a modicum of support instead of ZOS continually churning out low-effort content to chase the easiest short-term dollar they can get.
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and that is what you are espousing. Clearly you do not like PvE, or at least TES stories here, and that seems to have lead you to be bitter about them and that is ok. However, that does not mean it has anything to do with good business sense.
While I expect all players would have no issue with PvP in the PvE zones as long as it is segregated as it should be. So you can call it pathetic all you want to but I see that same pitiful dogma on both side of the argument which is why I replied.2 -
barney2525✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Adding group dueling would be nice. Also a new pvp map would be great or just adding more towns and objectives in cyrodiil
On the surface, it sounds like a good idea, but in reality you would be thinning the herd. Not everyone does PvP to start with. Giving them multiple options to go to PvP just makes fewer people at each location.
IMHO
1 -
Sorbin✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.
@Sorbin
Fact is this has absolutely nothing to do with the casual player. In fact I find your comment rather entertaining as I know quite a few hard core PvP and PvE players that like the story lines Zos has added to the game over the years. Also, those stories and dungeons are what pays the bills and are what brings in new players so it is extremely smart business for Zos to continue it. lol.
Yeah, it's fine in the short term. People used rave about the ongoing support GW2 got in the Living World updates. Eventually your playerbase hits a wall though. The story content wears thin and gets blasted through in short order when it comes out. PvP stagnates without any meaningful updates. The PvE content is just rehash after rehash. The playerbase starts to bleed out.
ZOS is already working on other projects so I fully expect them to keep stringing the playerbase along with low-effort content until they all get bored comparing cosmetics and running the exact same PvE content over and over again, at which point they'll abandon the game nearly completely.
And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic. They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game. Which is a shame, because this game's PvP is actually incredibly unique and creates great moments, and could be truly special if it received even a modicum of support instead of ZOS continually churning out low-effort content to chase the easiest short-term dollar they can get.
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and that is what you are espousing. Clearly you do not like PvE, or at least TES stories here, and that seems to have lead you to be bitter about them and that is ok. However, that does not mean it has anything to do with good business sense.
While I expect all players would have no issue with PvP in the PvE zones as long as it is segregated as it should be. So you can call it pathetic all you want to but I see that same pitiful dogma on both side of the argument which is why I replied.
You'd expect people to not take issue with an opt-in only PvP system in the open world, but unfortunately it isn't the case. PvE only players on these forums have raised issue time and time again with the very notion of PvP happening anywhere in eyesight of them, even if it's an opt-in only system that would completely prevent any ganking at all.
Meanwhile, I suspect that PvP players would actually be fine with a PvE-only Cyrodiil as long as we got literally any sort of meaningful content as well.1 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
So if you were referring to population levels rather than player levels then apologies for misunderstanding your reference to player levels. However, population levels are still pertinent to my point in that they are as you say smaller for PvP than for PvE, and my basic point is that PvEers are affected by proposals like this because they divert developer resources away from more pressing issues including PvP-related ones.
The reasoning for adding more PvE content is very clear - it's where the bulk of the interest in the game lies, and fewer players have performance issues with it. Existing PvP content is currently in need of more performance attention and there is minimal interest in the kind of additional PvP content being proposed here. I'm wholly in favour of any additional content that will enhance the game in a cost-effective way, but I don't believe that creating PvP instances of the very many open world zones will do that.
Let me add an extra point - when we see PvPers supporting PvE instances in Cyrodiil and IC then perhaps we'll be more likely to see PvEers supporting PvP instances in open world PvE zones
! Even more so, of course, if the PvPers can explain how they anticipate any such open world instances being viably populated and resulting in anything other than quest-interrupting gank-fests.
In the meantime, ZOS know that the way they're bringing in additional players and revenue is through adding more PvE content, not more PvP content. As you rightly say, ZOS would need to be convinced that their previous decisions on this were wrong if they were to be persuaded to adopt a different approach now.2 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.
@Sorbin
Fact is this has absolutely nothing to do with the casual player. In fact I find your comment rather entertaining as I know quite a few hard core PvP and PvE players that like the story lines Zos has added to the game over the years. Also, those stories and dungeons are what pays the bills and are what brings in new players so it is extremely smart business for Zos to continue it. lol.
Yeah, it's fine in the short term. People used rave about the ongoing support GW2 got in the Living World updates. Eventually your playerbase hits a wall though. The story content wears thin and gets blasted through in short order when it comes out. PvP stagnates without any meaningful updates. The PvE content is just rehash after rehash. The playerbase starts to bleed out.
ZOS is already working on other projects so I fully expect them to keep stringing the playerbase along with low-effort content until they all get bored comparing cosmetics and running the exact same PvE content over and over again, at which point they'll abandon the game nearly completely.
And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic. They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game. Which is a shame, because this game's PvP is actually incredibly unique and creates great moments, and could be truly special if it received even a modicum of support instead of ZOS continually churning out low-effort content to chase the easiest short-term dollar they can get.
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and that is what you are espousing. Clearly you do not like PvE, or at least TES stories here, and that seems to have lead you to be bitter about them and that is ok. However, that does not mean it has anything to do with good business sense.
While I expect all players would have no issue with PvP in the PvE zones as long as it is segregated as it should be. So you can call it pathetic all you want to but I see that same pitiful dogma on both side of the argument which is why I replied.
You'd expect people to not take issue with an opt-in only PvP system in the open world, but unfortunately it isn't the case.
It would and should depend on that opt in. Man have suggested a flag system which has been known to be very easily exploited in more than one game and it would be very wise for a player to balk at it.. My suggestion I made earlier is the only fool proof separation.0 -
Kiralyn2000✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic.
As if the adamantly pro-pvp folks don't "all have the exact same attitude" (those poor deluded carebears, doing boring repetitive pve, when they could be enjoying the Enlightened Glorious Experience of.... teabagging and jerks?), etc.They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game.
Of course, there's different kinds of "bothered by". The rabid pvpers who keep crowing about people being "trauamatized" by being killed is one kind of bothered. (which I really doubt exists)
But there's other ones - like not wanting chat to be full of testosterone-fueled "trash talk" idiocy; or the way that, even if you've 'opted out' of the 'optional' pvp, it could still rampage across the PvE area you're trying to adventure in (thereby screwing up your appreciation of the story, or your quest progression, or...); or the way that even if you're 'opted out', people might come up with ways to grief you with it anyway (saw that a lot on WoW's PvE servers when I played); etc.
(oh, god - and don't get me started on all the complaints the "but mah immershuns!" crowd would have. /facedesk)Edited by Kiralyn2000 on January 7, 2020 9:44PM7 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
So if you were referring to population levels rather than player levels.
I had thought that would have been fairly clear after my last reply that specifically stated player level vs dev level. This has nothing to do with population levels or the level of the actual player.
To try to make it clear. The players can certainly voice their opinion about something being added to the game (that is this thread) but it is Zos that needs to determine if they can reasonably add it to the game. Customer vs company.
The reasoning for adding more PvE content is very clear - it's where the bulk of the interest in the game lies, and fewer players have performance issues with it. Existing PvP content is currently in need of more performance attention and there is minimal interest in the kind of additional PvP content being proposed here. I'm wholly in favour of any additional content that will enhance the game in a cost-effective way, but I don't believe that creating PvP instances of the very many open world zones will do that.albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
I know the reasons for adding PvE content. However, having a second instance hardly hurts performance as they are separate to begin with. It is a weak argument to bring up Cyodiil. There would not be any PvP objectives drawing hordes of players to one location in Dagerfall. You are also ignoring that part of the population, a significant part of the population also likes PvP. They pay money.
Let me add an extra point - when we see PvPers supporting PvE instances in Cyrodiil and IC then perhaps we'll be more likely to see PvEers supporting PvP instances in open world PvE zonesalbertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers ! Even more so, of course, if the PvPers can explain how they anticipate any such open world instances being viably populated and resulting in anything other than quest-interrupting gank-fests.
Not very comparable as the PvP players are not exactly scared of facing a little PvE. They are just asking for an additional layer added to their game at no cost to you.
Further, it is actually Zos that specifically chose to lock those quests, delvs, and over 60 skill points behind PvP Cyrodiil. It is Zos that is literally telling players that if they want those they must risk facing a little PvP. So you are saying you want to punish some players because of the choice Zos made.
As for filling up the PvP instances and what they would do I see no reason why you would care. Do you really worry about what other players do with their time? I do not concern myself with what others do with their time.0 -
Bobby_V_Rockit✭✭✭✭✭
✭A new PvP zone would be cool though, how much longer can players keep trying to overthrow their King/Queen and become emporer of the throne? Its dull and repetitive. New zone!0 -
DR4GONFL1✭✭✭✭Hey you guys are right. Let's just let ZOS keep churning out phoned-in story DLCs that everyone forgets after 6 weeks and 4-man dungeons that just get dumped into the blender of the daily pledge. That'll keep the game fresh.
This constant need to placate the casual gamer is going to take this game down the same path Guild Wars 2 has gone. Another year like 2019 and this is basically just going to be Elder Chat Room Online.
@Sorbin
Fact is this has absolutely nothing to do with the casual player. In fact I find your comment rather entertaining as I know quite a few hard core PvP and PvE players that like the story lines Zos has added to the game over the years. Also, those stories and dungeons are what pays the bills and are what brings in new players so it is extremely smart business for Zos to continue it. lol.
Yeah, it's fine in the short term. People used rave about the ongoing support GW2 got in the Living World updates. Eventually your playerbase hits a wall though. The story content wears thin and gets blasted through in short order when it comes out. PvP stagnates without any meaningful updates. The PvE content is just rehash after rehash. The playerbase starts to bleed out.
ZOS is already working on other projects so I fully expect them to keep stringing the playerbase along with low-effort content until they all get bored comparing cosmetics and running the exact same PvE content over and over again, at which point they'll abandon the game nearly completely.
And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic. They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game. Which is a shame, because this game's PvP is actually incredibly unique and creates great moments, and could be truly special if it received even a modicum of support instead of ZOS continually churning out low-effort content to chase the easiest short-term dollar they can get.
Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and that is what you are espousing. Clearly you do not like PvE, or at least TES stories here, and that seems to have lead you to be bitter about them and that is ok. However, that does not mean it has anything to do with good business sense.
While I expect all players would have no issue with PvP in the PvE zones as long as it is segregated as it should be. So you can call it pathetic all you want to but I see that same pitiful dogma on both side of the argument which is why I replied.
You'd expect people to not take issue with an opt-in only PvP system in the open world, but unfortunately it isn't the case. PvE only players on these forums have raised issue time and time again with the very notion of PvP happening anywhere in eyesight of them, even if it's an opt-in only system that would completely prevent any ganking at all.
Meanwhile, I suspect that PvP players would actually be fine with a PvE-only Cyrodiil as long as we got literally any sort of meaningful content as well.
lol... of course PvP would be fine in the PvE zones. Anyway I can feel your hate even when you type PvE but I've played for a few years and I haven't hit a wall. A few really difficult 12 man trials to complete and always more on the way. I honestly would think the opposite as I do enjoy battle grounds but I personally would get bored running cyrodiil day after day.
So many players make it a PvE or PvP world and2 ours is better than yours mentality. I don't care what you play I have friends who do both which is how I got into battle grounds and in turn they run trails and to undaunted quests.
1 -
Sorbin✭✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »And honestly, the people who are so adamantly opposed to PvP all have the exact same attitude and it's seriously pathetic.
As if the adamantly pro-pvp folks don't "all have the exact same attitude" (those poor deluded carebears, doing boring repetitive pve, when they could be enjoying the Enlightened Glorious Experience of.... teabagging and jerks?), etc.They might all try to deny it, but it's painfully obvious that they get extremely bothered by the notion that someone could kill them in a video game.
Of course, there's different kinds of "bothered by". The rabid pvpers who keep crowing about people being "trauamatized" by being killed is one kind of bothered. (which I really doubt exists)
But there's other ones - like not wanting chat to be full of testosterone-fueled "trash talk" idiocy; or the way that, even if you've 'opted out' of the 'optional' pvp, it could still rampage across the PvE area you're trying to adventure in (thereby screwing up your appreciation of the story, or your quest progression, or...); or the way that even if you're 'opted out', people might come up with ways to grief you with it anyway (saw that a lot on WoW's PvE servers when I played); etc.
(oh, god - and don't get me started on all the complaints the "but mah immershuns!" crowd would have. /facedesk)
You doubt it exists? You're literally already complaining about the story being broken by a hypothetical optional PvP system "rampaging" around the open world. As if a stream of people loading into an area and repeatedly killing the same enemies over and over doesn't already break immersion as it is.
The real reason PvE players can't stand the sight of an optional PvP system that they wouldn't ever have to take part in is because it's a constant reminder that you aren't actually that good at the game.1 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@Kiralyn2000
Would you object to Zos designing a system that created a separate instance of PvP zones for those who specifically flagged themselves to join that instance? This would not harm the majority of players who chose to remain in the main PvE instances?
It is a proven design that has effectively worked in other games and is not open to exploiting PvE players. A win/win situation.
The business and technical aspect is for Zos to decide so I am not asking about that. This is an idea that does not harm you or anyone for that matter.0 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
So if you were referring to population levels rather than player levels.
I had thought that would have been fairly clear after my last reply that specifically stated player level vs dev level. This has nothing to do with population levels or the level of the actual player.
To try to make it clear. The players can certainly voice their opinion about something being added to the game (that is this thread) but it is Zos that needs to determine if they can reasonably add it to the game. Customer vs company.
The reasoning for adding more PvE content is very clear - it's where the bulk of the interest in the game lies, and fewer players have performance issues with it. Existing PvP content is currently in need of more performance attention and there is minimal interest in the kind of additional PvP content being proposed here. I'm wholly in favour of any additional content that will enhance the game in a cost-effective way, but I don't believe that creating PvP instances of the very many open world zones will do that.albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
I know the reasons for adding PvE content. However, having a second instance hardly hurts performance as they are separate to begin with. It is a weak argument to bring up Cyodiil. There would not be any PvP objectives drawing hordes of players to one location in Dagerfall. You are also ignoring that part of the population, a significant part of the population also likes PvP. They pay money.
Let me add an extra point - when we see PvPers supporting PvE instances in Cyrodiil and IC then perhaps we'll be more likely to see PvEers supporting PvP instances in open world PvE zonesalbertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers ! Even more so, of course, if the PvPers can explain how they anticipate any such open world instances being viably populated and resulting in anything other than quest-interrupting gank-fests.
Not very comparable as the PvP players are not exactly scared of facing a little PvE. They are just asking for an additional layer added to their game at no cost to you.
Further, it is actually Zos that specifically chose to lock those quests, delvs, and over 60 skill points behind PvP Cyrodiil. It is Zos that is literally telling players that if they want those they must risk facing a little PvP. So you are saying you want to punish some players because of the choice Zos made.
As for filling up the PvP instances and what they would do I see no reason why you would care. Do you really worry about what other players do with their time? I do not concern myself with what others do with their time.
Beyond mild frustration/irritation at dueling around wayshrines in major locations it doesn't bother me what other players get up to, no. That's why, for example, I've never argued against players being able to buy crown crates although I've no interest in them myself. Others here and elsewhere have made the removal of player choice in such matters a personal crusade, even tho crown crates don't impact on the way they play the game at all.
As I've made clear, the reason I've put forward for opposing this idea is nothing to do with any impact on gameplay, rather it's to do with the impact on the use of scarce developer resources at a time of greater priorities - especially as those greater priorities include fixing the existing PvP content, which again I have no personal interest in but which I recognise is an important part of the game for those who do. I'm all for maximising everyone's enjoyment of the game but that does involve setting priorities and assessing the cost-effectiveness of major changes as well as the opportunity cost in terms of deciding which other priorities have to be dropped in order for others to be adopted. I don't see the introduction of open world PvP, however implemented including through flagged instances, as meeting any sort of critical criteria in those respects.0 -
regime211✭✭✭✭✭
✭albertberku wrote: »Same idea like in GTA Online: Passive mode, active mode. Passive mode is same as now.
If you are in active mode you can engage in combat with others that are in active mode, too.
Edit1: Even better, since we already have instances. Put PvPers in the same instances.
Edit2:albertberku wrote: »simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings.
Naw ZOS just needs to go get a design team and just completely reduce the map in pvp, and they can literally have us battle every month in diffrent style maps instead of the same boring ass keeps we fight in on a daily basis.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
So if you were referring to population levels rather than player levels.
I had thought that would have been fairly clear after my last reply that specifically stated player level vs dev level. This has nothing to do with population levels or the level of the actual player.
To try to make it clear. The players can certainly voice their opinion about something being added to the game (that is this thread) but it is Zos that needs to determine if they can reasonably add it to the game. Customer vs company.
The reasoning for adding more PvE content is very clear - it's where the bulk of the interest in the game lies, and fewer players have performance issues with it. Existing PvP content is currently in need of more performance attention and there is minimal interest in the kind of additional PvP content being proposed here. I'm wholly in favour of any additional content that will enhance the game in a cost-effective way, but I don't believe that creating PvP instances of the very many open world zones will do that.albertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers
I know the reasons for adding PvE content. However, having a second instance hardly hurts performance as they are separate to begin with. It is a weak argument to bring up Cyodiil. There would not be any PvP objectives drawing hordes of players to one location in Dagerfall. You are also ignoring that part of the population, a significant part of the population also likes PvP. They pay money.
Let me add an extra point - when we see PvPers supporting PvE instances in Cyrodiil and IC then perhaps we'll be more likely to see PvEers supporting PvP instances in open world PvE zonesalbertberku wrote: »people who say there is no demand for pvp in this game and there are not many people doing it even in cyrodiil, i recommend you to go to cyrodiil to check it first. And not at 4 am in the morning.
and again: simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings, dont be afraid. This is not Ultima Online, chill.
Oh no, there is a demand for PvP in this game. It has merely been a greater demand for PvE but that is irrelevant.
It can be done but the only way a "flag" system works is if it puts the player in a PvP specific instance that would be void of players that had not chosen PvP. It is the only system that works well.
It is quite simple in concept and there is no valid reason for a player to object regardless of their interest. Although a flag system to place players into specific instances was something Zos was working on until shortly before launched. Within a couple months of launch Zos announced they would scrap such a design.
In other words, people should shot bickering over petty differences. If anyone is truly interested in PvP in the PvE zones they need address why Zos scrapped such a system and convince Zos they should reconsider. Ignore those who balk at the idea since this design makes their argument irrelevant.
One valid reason is that it would be a waste of scarce developer resources to implement it, not least at a time when there are clearly many more important issues needing attention - not least of which is the game's performance in existing PvP content.
I would suggest you actually read the sentence you made bold as it is dealing with the player level. Further, if you read the entire post you quoted I point out Zos chose to scrap a similar system for a reason and that players interested in PvP in the PvE zones would need to address that.
As it is, your reply would be reasoning for Zos to not add any DLC zone or dungeon or any more skill lines until server performance is at a reasonable level because in the past few years that have added to the game in a manner that has severally impacted the games performance. The fact that supports that statement is BGs added to the AF were what pushed that system past it's capacity.
Cheers
The bolded sentence immediately followed a proposal about creating a separate instance for players who had flagged for PvP in the open world, no mention of player level at all. It was about not affecting PvErs because they wouldn't be in the PvP instance. My point was that setting up such a system would take developer resources away from other more important things including performance issues in Cyrodiil - which seems to be the main gripe of all PvPers rather than the idea of introducing open world PvP which has little support even among PvPers.
You're right in that I don't expect ZOS to add any additional PvP content until they have the existing PvP content performing adequately, but it would be right for them to continue adding additional PvE content as a much smaller proportion of PvErs have performance issues with that aspect of the game compared with the proportion of PvPer's struggling in Cyrodiil.
Oh, no. Player level vs dev level. That should have been very obvious since the characters level has absolutely irrelevant to what is being discussed here.
Also, you are being very two faced by suggesting Zos should not add any PvP content but it is ok to add PvE content. That shows very brightly that you could care less with how any new PvE content impacts the performance of the game as long as you get what interests you. Your justification is very weak.
I find it odd that you are so much against the idea of having some PvP instances that would not effect your game play at all as long as Zos could figure out how to make it work. The game is not just about you and you are ignoring that it could also bring in additional players and revenue if they had more options for PvP. You are showing your cards.
Cheers ! Even more so, of course, if the PvPers can explain how they anticipate any such open world instances being viably populated and resulting in anything other than quest-interrupting gank-fests.
Not very comparable as the PvP players are not exactly scared of facing a little PvE. They are just asking for an additional layer added to their game at no cost to you.
Further, it is actually Zos that specifically chose to lock those quests, delvs, and over 60 skill points behind PvP Cyrodiil. It is Zos that is literally telling players that if they want those they must risk facing a little PvP. So you are saying you want to punish some players because of the choice Zos made.
As for filling up the PvP instances and what they would do I see no reason why you would care. Do you really worry about what other players do with their time? I do not concern myself with what others do with their time.
As I've made clear, the reason I've put forward for opposing this idea is nothing to do with any impact on gameplay, rather it's to do with the impact on the use of scarce developer resources at a time of greater priorities .
Yes, this is one of your several points you have made including that you think you should be able to go into a PvE Cyrodiil as a requirement for PvP instances of other zones.
You are certainly entitled to hold an opinion about Zos' resources and priorities in this matter. I do not have actual insight into Zos' operation which is why I stated earlier that I would leave the feasibility up to Zos as they have actual knowledge as to the feasibility and effort that this would require. Maybe you do, I have not visited them or met with them to see their actual environment and prefer not to make assumptions.
I edited out the part about Cyrodiil because it seems rather irrelevant. It makes no sense to hold off on adding something to the game because one part does not work perfectly. This is the same justification Zos uses when they decide to continue to add chapters and DLCs. If the response is that is PvE, Cyrodiil is PvP then I would add the BGs were added as part of a chapter and in updates to follow Zos added to BGs. I am just stating facts here to support what I said.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭albertberku wrote: »Same idea like in GTA Online: Passive mode, active mode. Passive mode is same as now.
If you are in active mode you can engage in combat with others that are in active mode, too.
Edit1: Even better, since we already have instances. Put PvPers in the same instances.
Edit2:albertberku wrote: »simple system, pvp flag on/off, off by default. If off you have nothing to do with pvp. 30 mins cooldown between on/off. Guards dont allow pvp within the close proximity of cities. Certain number of players can toggle on in the same zone to avoid any performance concerns, that also will help cyrodiil to maintain its population, which is already too high (even to an extent that causing performance issues). That simple. Really.
No one is going to kill you in the wilds and loot all your belongings.
Naw ZOS just needs to go get a design team and just completely reduce the map in pvp, and they can literally have us battle every month in diffrent style maps instead of the same boring ass keeps we fight in on a daily basis.
Zos did this. It is called BGs1 -
lucky_Sage✭✭✭✭✭To bad all y’all who say this game is PVE focused it was original suppose to be PVP focused but they can’t fix performance so they only focus on making crap to buy so pvp isn’t as big the game was a spiritual successor of Dark age of Camelot. They was originally going to have a open world pvp crime system but scrapped it because they didn’t want to push of the people who only quest and come back every dlcDC PC NA
Magdk - main
Stamcro - alt
AD PS4 NA -retired (PC runs way better to play on console)
magdk
magblade
stamplar
magden
magsorc0 -
nafensoriel✭✭✭✭✭lucky_Sage wrote: »To bad all y’all who say this game is PVE focused it was original suppose to be PVP focused but they can’t fix performance so they only focus on making crap to buy so pvp isn’t as big the game was a spiritual successor of Dark age of Camelot. They was originally going to have a open world pvp crime system but scrapped it because they didn’t want to push of the people who only quest and come back every dlc
What? The game was launched with 95% PVE content. It was planned for 95% PVE content.
ESO was in no way ever going to be a PVP focused game. If you are talking about the DAOC themes in cyrodiil you are reading WAY to much into things.
The problem with PVP in PVE games is the same reason there is only one truely successful ventriloquist comedian. It takes perfect execution and planning to do well. Otherwise, you get mediocre for both that ends up somehow being worse overall.
The good news is newer products have learned from this mistake and now games are mostly focused on one or the other with elements that can translate well being shared. No one sane is doing pure hybrid games like traditional MMOs anymore because it's a "Bad" idea with a capital B for long term support.
The reason the issue of more PVP in ESO is so divisive is that it has a good mediocre kernel of PVP but it long ago stopped it being a focus. The game is so heavily weighted to PVE players and PVE players spend considerably more money than any PVPer ever will. If you want ideas to be seriously considered by developers stop trying to make "pvp perfect" and start focusing on cheaper low hanging fruit that can be added along with PVE content updates.3 -
Iarao✭✭✭✭nafensoriel wrote: »albertberku wrote: »Same idea like in GTA Online: Passive mode, active mode. Passive mode is same as now.
If you are in active mode you can engage in combat with others that are in active mode, too.
Because almost every form of "open-world PVP" in a PVE centric game has failed in horrifyingly bad ways?
Because its not as simple as "enable pvp = true"
Because statistically, it is one of the least popular forms of PVP in games with extremely low usage rates?
rift had this type of thing very successfully. you could flag urself for pvp in the pve world. there was also a pvp place. but i am pretty sure this requires a very good server, possibly better than zos uses.0 -
Sylvermynx✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭nafensoriel wrote: »albertberku wrote: »Same idea like in GTA Online: Passive mode, active mode. Passive mode is same as now.
If you are in active mode you can engage in combat with others that are in active mode, too.
Because almost every form of "open-world PVP" in a PVE centric game has failed in horrifyingly bad ways?
Because its not as simple as "enable pvp = true"
Because statistically, it is one of the least popular forms of PVP in games with extremely low usage rates?
rift had this type of thing very successfully. you could flag urself for pvp in the pve world. there was also a pvp place. but i am pretty sure this requires a very good server, possibly better than zos uses.
Um. RIFT wasn't any better with flagging for pvp than WoW has ever been. The same problems were there - I played RIFT from 2013 - 2016, and the exploits were as always in games where flagging was the option - flagging and laying in wait for healers, etc.0 -
albertberku✭✭✭✭Get your facts straight:
PvE zones: PvE zones are dungeons, arenas, trials, IC and Cyrodiil. PvP zones are BGs, IC and Cyrodiil. Others are just zones.
PvP is a competition: Most of us do it because it is exciting, funny and you never know what is going to happen next.
ESO is not a good PvP game: ESO PvP is very well-balanced, challenging and skill-based. This is certainly a good PvP game.
1 -
Unseelie✭✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »albertberku wrote: »i am starting to believe that many (not all) people have some kind of hatred against PvP players and PvP in general, not because they dont find it interesting or it is going to break the game but because of the simple fact that they have some kind of trauma by getting beaten a lot by other players throughout the years. Because no matter how hard i try to explain my ideas, that seems like the only think they read: PvP. So i made it even easier for you. You are welcome.
Or, rather than some assumption that they're "traumatized" by being beaten - they're just not into that whole competitive/jock/macho scene. In an amazing turn of events, not everyone enjoys the same stuff. No need to read some deep psychological issues into it. /shrug
----
But it is always a bit odd how 90% PvE/10% PvP MMOs always seem to have a subset of Really Super Dedicated PvP players who want the game to change to be as PvP as possible (janky & imbalanced as the PvP systems dangling off the side of PvE MMOs always end up being)... rather than trying to find a real PvP game, that was designed & balanced for PvP from the ground up.
MMOs/RPGs, with their levels, and rare gear drops, and gear locked behind PvE raids, etc - seem like a really bad place to find good PvP. Where it's skill-based, not "who ground for the better gear/enchants/stats".
I think this thread in and of itself shows why pvp has a bad rep and hardcore pvp players come off as knuckle dragging f-wits.
PVP can be fun, it really can but I believe the main things that come into play when you open up world pvp even when flagged is that it caters more to people who want to group up and gank lowbie loners and have more opportunity to camp waypoints and other points of interest , and at the same time it spreads the pvp player base among a larger foot print which will then cause more complaints.
The PVP flag in WoW and open world pvp is looked at by most who invest alot of time in it as a mistake.4 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭.
wrt to open world pvp, we do not have instances for open world PvP in the PvE zones so there is not an answer ATM. Next question please.1 -
lucky_Sage✭✭✭✭✭nafensoriel wrote: »lucky_Sage wrote: »To bad all y’all who say this game is PVE focused it was original suppose to be PVP focused but they can’t fix performance so they only focus on making crap to buy so pvp isn’t as big the game was a spiritual successor of Dark age of Camelot. They was originally going to have a open world pvp crime system but scrapped it because they didn’t want to push of the people who only quest and come back every dlc
What? The game was launched with 95% PVE content. It was planned for 95% PVE content.
ESO was in no way ever going to be a PVP focused game. If you are talking about the DAOC themes in cyrodiil you are reading WAY to much into things.
The problem with PVP in PVE games is the same reason there is only one truely successful ventriloquist comedian. It takes perfect execution and planning to do well. Otherwise, you get mediocre for both that ends up somehow being worse overall.
The good news is newer products have learned from this mistake and now games are mostly focused on one or the other with elements that can translate well being shared. No one sane is doing pure hybrid games like traditional MMOs anymore because it's a "Bad" idea with a capital B for long term support.
The reason the issue of more PVP in ESO is so divisive is that it has a good mediocre kernel of PVP but it long ago stopped it being a focus. The game is so heavily weighted to PVE players and PVE players spend considerably more money than any PVPer ever will. If you want ideas to be seriously considered by developers stop trying to make "pvp perfect" and start focusing on cheaper low hanging fruit that can be added along with PVE content updates.
go back and look at all the old stuff pre launch its pvp. pve makes more money so that's what the game becameDC PC NA
Magdk - main
Stamcro - alt
AD PS4 NA -retired (PC runs way better to play on console)
magdk
magblade
stamplar
magden
magsorc0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭.lucky_Sage wrote: »nafensoriel wrote: »lucky_Sage wrote: »To bad all y’all who say this game is PVE focused it was original suppose to be PVP focused but they can’t fix performance so they only focus on making crap to buy so pvp isn’t as big the game was a spiritual successor of Dark age of Camelot. They was originally going to have a open world pvp crime system but scrapped it because they didn’t want to push of the people who only quest and come back every dlc
What? The game was launched with 95% PVE content. It was planned for 95% PVE content.
ESO was in no way ever going to be a PVP focused game. If you are talking about the DAOC themes in cyrodiil you are reading WAY to much into things.
The problem with PVP in PVE games is the same reason there is only one truely successful ventriloquist comedian. It takes perfect execution and planning to do well. Otherwise, you get mediocre for both that ends up somehow being worse overall.
The good news is newer products have learned from this mistake and now games are mostly focused on one or the other with elements that can translate well being shared. No one sane is doing pure hybrid games like traditional MMOs anymore because it's a "Bad" idea with a capital B for long term support.
The reason the issue of more PVP in ESO is so divisive is that it has a good mediocre kernel of PVP but it long ago stopped it being a focus. The game is so heavily weighted to PVE players and PVE players spend considerably more money than any PVPer ever will. If you want ideas to be seriously considered by developers stop trying to make "pvp perfect" and start focusing on cheaper low hanging fruit that can be added along with PVE content updates.
go back and look at all the old stuff pre launch its pvp. pve makes more money so that's what the game became
Not really. There was PvE and PvP stuff as the game was clearly set to be mostly PvE focused. You even recognize the logic, PvE makes more money and has in major MMORPGs for awhile.0