DMuehlhausen wrote: »

ZarkingFrued wrote: »

It takes a long time to train all of your mounts currently. Logging in and out of all 18 characters every day is not even an option for me. It would be nice to have an option to train all of your mounts for your characters on any character. Maybe allow direct character swap from the in game settings menu so you don't hit so many load screens.

Why do you need 18 characters? Don't say bag / bank space. Be a sub and it's not a problem. there is absolutely no need for that many characters. There are 3 roles so you really need 4 max. Tank, Healer, Melee, and ranged damage dealer. Yeah I get people want to play as many as possible, but if you are going to play or have that many you should complain about stuff that takes a lot of time, cause obviously it's going to.

Before you ask, I have 3 level 50, and then a couple name holding characters and I only play 1 of the 3.

@DMuehlhausen - Who made you the alt police?? For YOU there may not be a "need" for more than 4 characters, but no one asked you, did they?
Don't hate on the way people play the game. People having 18 characters has nothing to do with you. Also, that's not even what this whole topic is about. We want this whole train-for-60-days-for-max-speed changed.

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

I can attest to the fact that 3 of my IRL friends never even gave the game a fair shot due to the extreme tedium of mount training.

Maybe they're not cut out to be MMO players, then? It isn't a genre of game where you can expect to just blast through it in a month and be "done". You're expected to play for months/years. Of course, there'll be some things that are meant to take time.



---
Similar topic - saw a thread on the Star Trek Online forums recently. Dude posts how he came back to the game after a long break, and it was already ruined. Why? Because, among the dozens of new things he hadn't seen/done/played before, there was a minor little side-game called Endeavors. It gives you some small tasks each day (kill X mobs of type Y; do X damage with weapon type Y; win X credits at Dabo; Do dungeon X; etc) you can complete for loot & Endeavor XP. As you gain XP, you can get little boosts like a lesser form of ESO's constellations. And why did this "ruin" his return to the game? Because he couldn't grind it out in a week - it would take time to max out. Seriously? Tons of new features & content, and he's throwing a fit because he can't max out some minigame instantly? /facepalm

Well, firstly, mount training isn’t even a mini game, it’s a time gated system, even the gold cost is negligible. It just sits there to tell new players, “Hey, welcome to ESO, we want the next 6 months of your life if you want to run fast”! Absolutely nothing to do with challenges, gameplay, storytelling, exploration, or anything else an “MMO” or let’s just say a video game is supposed to offer.

Also, these players, all of them, have always had similar gaming interests as myself. I enjoy many kinds of games, I play MOBA’s, shooters, RPG’s, battleroyales, etc. Would it be asinine for me to ask if maybe you, “just aren’t cut out” for those games,the answer is yes, yes it would.

It’s not about instant gratification either, I made one of them purple gear and they refused it, said he wanted to earn his own. I said fine. You see, you may see things differently, but completing something time gated isn’t rewarding in the same way achieving something is. It’s not the same seretonin hits as a reward for a job well done. Allowing players to spam gold onto a mounts training, assuming it’s a new player that farmed that gold either questing or stealing, is the kind of serotonin reward that feels good instead of the “*** finally” feeling of time gating. Plus its something you can actually feel the benefits from instantly, instead of this 1 unnoticeable point every 20hrs.

ZOS really do need to look at this stupid system.

idk wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

I can attest to the fact that 3 of my IRL friends never even gave the game a fair shot due to the extreme tedium of mount training.

If they quit the game because of mount training then they were not into the game, to begin with. That is a very petty reason to leave a game. I expect there is more to the story that they really just did not like the game or its combat as mount training has not been holding this game back.

I mean, sure, of course, there can be hundreds of reasons really. But I’m telling you, it’s not a good idea to time gate this kind of system at this point in a new players experience with the game. When new players ask for advice, one of the first things people tell them is to “train your horses, do your research”.
These being the only two seriously time gated systems in the game, their nature, and the point people are introduced to them are detrimental to players experiences. Mount training in particular is a system you can’t ignore, everyone’s galloping around and you can do absolutely nothing except get mums credit card. This is certain to force players to consider if the game is worth 6 months to be like those players flying around, or worth the serious cost at that point. And if they take an interest in PvP particularly. Forget about it.

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

1/ If you consider that paying what you pay discharges you from any other "obligation" to the game provider, it's fine (and it's the way it's meant to be). But it wasn't my point. My point was that, beyond direct sales, ZOS also needs to ensure that people log into the game and do some stuff on a regular, ideally daily basis, because that's as much an asset to then as what you've paid upfront.

2/ The F2P models that you mention are another proof that audience/playerbase/logins are just as important, if not even more important, than upfront purchases for a company that intends to run the game as a service, over a long time.

3/ You can't compare Skyrim and ESO. Skyrim has no server, no maintenance and no extension/development costs.

4/ What financial reports are you talking about ? I'd be very curious to know where you saw true financial data about ZOS/ESO and how you come to the conclusion that they're making margin far above whatever you consider "necessary".

5/ And again, I wasn't talking revenue here, I was talking investor trust here, and that's far more based on audeince (i.e. daily logins) than on direct sales.

1) No one forced ZOS to got open itself on the trading marked and having to deal with a board of investors that expect significant returns on investments. They way ZOS handles their internal business plan is not my concern as a customer and should never be. Thus, the only consideration as a customer I should have, is : I'm paying this amount of money for a product, this product better be worth what I'm paying.

2) Yet the F2P model is also applied to the letter on ESO, a game we pay full price + subscription. There is no place to be "company-friendly" here

3) I can absolutely compare 2 video games. Both priced the same, both providing me the same kind of activity. Again, the way a company runs it's business is not my concern as a customer. It's the company's job to make a product that will be worth my money.

4) Just use google. It's really not hard to find

5) No. You were talking about the necessity for us consumers to be company-friendly. Which is nonsensical from a paying customer's point of view. You want to support what a company does? buy their stuff this is how you support it, Not by defending anti customer practices because you have to be "company-friendly"

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/490731/horse-training-with-cyrodiil-stablemasters

Make an incentive system not a punishment system

Of course, it probably helped me that I didn't feel the need to train Stamina (I'm not a PvPer). So it's just 120 days.

Hellvlad wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

1/ If you consider that paying what you pay discharges you from any other "obligation" to the game provider, it's fine (and it's the way it's meant to be). But it wasn't my point. My point was that, beyond direct sales, ZOS also needs to ensure that people log into the game and do some stuff on a regular, ideally daily basis, because that's as much an asset to then as what you've paid upfront.

2/ The F2P models that you mention are another proof that audience/playerbase/logins are just as important, if not even more important, than upfront purchases for a company that intends to run the game as a service, over a long time.

3/ You can't compare Skyrim and ESO. Skyrim has no server, no maintenance and no extension/development costs.

4/ What financial reports are you talking about ? I'd be very curious to know where you saw true financial data about ZOS/ESO and how you come to the conclusion that they're making margin far above whatever you consider "necessary".

5/ And again, I wasn't talking revenue here, I was talking investor trust here, and that's far more based on audeince (i.e. daily logins) than on direct sales.

1) No one forced ZOS to got open itself on the trading marked and having to deal with a board of investors that expect significant returns on investments. They way ZOS handles their internal business plan is not my concern as a customer and should never be. Thus, the only consideration as a customer I should have, is : I'm paying this amount of money for a product, this product better be worth what I'm paying.

2) Yet the F2P model is also applied to the letter on ESO, a game we pay full price + subscription. There is no place to be "company-friendly" here

3) I can absolutely compare 2 video games. Both priced the same, both providing me the same kind of activity. Again, the way a company runs it's business is not my concern as a customer. It's the company's job to make a product that will be worth my money.

4) Just use google. It's really not hard to find

5) No. You were talking about the necessity for us consumers to be company-friendly. Which is nonsensical from a paying customer's point of view. You want to support what a company does? buy their stuff this is how you support it, Not by defending anti customer practices because you have to be "company-friendly"

Well, your answer to question 4 alone shows clearly that you have no clue what you're talking about. No financial figures from ZOS are available publicly anywhere, let alone data that would correlate the costs of developing and maintaining ESO with the revenues of direct cash sales.
Your answer to question 1 also shows how clueless you are : do you think game developers live from fresh air in the woods while developing a game that's (perhaps) going to sell well in 5+ years time ? Of course they HAD to rely on investors.

As to the rest, if you think there's no point and it's not your job to think about and try to understand why ZOS does what it does from a business point of view, then I can fairly reverse that argumentation by saying that ZOS has no point and it's not their job to listen to what you think and why you think that way. They're watching what you're doing : which is : buying the game, the chapters, the subscription and maybe crowns on top of that. And if you're buying all this, it means that you think their product is worth that money to you - regardless of whatever rubbish you may write anywhere.

Its a hugely frustrating issue. Especially when you go to a newer character & the mount is as slow as a snail to the extent you run faster, that should literally never be the case.

Its a small, yet significant way to encourage people to log in and play, that is the motivation. It all goes back the psychology behind grinding, which games exploit in a variety of ways.

I think there should be a far faster way to upgrade, probably a sliding scale whereby you pay a lot more exponentially for the amount of lessons you purchase at a time.

It's just a bad system. Remove the unnecessary cooldown on mount feeding. I really don't see why this is even a thing. Maybe make the ability to feed level based.