I wouldn't mind this game being so single player focused if....

daemonor · May 2020

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff like the hunt for mythic items for example. And I wouldn't be against, but the quests are absoloutely pointless throughout the whole game. I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything and in my opinion that becomes a problem when a big part of resources are spent for designing them and the players who enjoy the mmo aspect of the game get absoloutely nothing out of it.

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped. I'm not saying it's a perfect design and eso should do exactly that, but you don't exclude a big part of players from your content. Now you got this strange division of people all the time, the players who play eso for the story cheer for the great expansions and content, because they like landscapes and play this game like it's skyrim. Then you got the pvers complaining that their sets/items get nerfed cause of pvp imbalances. Then you got the pvpers who are complaining that they haven't received any content for 4 years.

My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression. Now basically the people who play this game as skyrim are always content, and those who want a pve/pvp mmo are always left with the short end of the stick. This is a mmo game after all. Would like to hear your thoughts on this, I hope I got my point across.

zvavi · May 2020

Best quests are group content ones. Actually feels good, unlike the 127th calamity of Tamriel that dies in 2 slaps. Also the majority plays eso for this single player questing, sooooo...

anitajoneb17_ESO · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff

Twice a year we get dungeons DLC : 2 x 4-player dungeons.
What's in there for solo players and questers ? Nothing.

Once a year we get a story-zone DLC. What's in there for group players ? Nothing.

And once a year we get an expansion, with a new zone and new quests, and a new trial. There's for everyone.

If you add things up, on a yearly basis, group players get more than solo players. That's pure maths. Your vision is biased.

As to PvP players, they rarely get new environments and systems, but they get new "opponents" each time there's a combat change (that's, roughly said, basically every update) and new sets (also every update).

Again, your vision is simply untrue.

daemonor wrote: »

This is a mmo game after all.

Not primarily. Game Director Matt Firor himself said he saw the game as an Online-RPG rather than "your typical MMO". And that's why so many people love ESO.

daemonor · May 2020

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff

Twice a year we get dungeons DLC : 2 x 4-player dungeons.
What's in there for solo players and questers ? Nothing.

Once a year we get a story-zone DLC. What's in there for group players ? Nothing.

And once a year we get an expansion, with a new zone and new quests, and a new trial. There's for everyone.

If you add things up, on a yearly basis, group players get more than solo players. That's pure maths. Your vision is biased.

As to PvP players, they rarely get new environments and systems, but they get new "opponents" each time there's a combat change (that's, roughly said, basically every update) and new sets (also every update).

Again, your vision is simply untrue.

daemonor wrote: »

This is a mmo game after all.

Not primarily. Game Director Matt Firor himself said he saw the game as an Online-RPG rather than "your typical MMO". And that's why so many people love ESO.

If he actually said so then there's nothing else to discuss, this game is online skyrim. I rest my biased case.

And it's not about facts. So what that they release 4 dungeons a year and 1 expac a year. It doesn't translate very well into practice, and I feel this game is lacking in group activities and content I have the very right to feel that. You are free to disagree with me, and if this game satisfies you in whatever activities you are interested primarily, that's great.

Nairinhe · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything

You will miss out on stories and characters, which are generally quite nicely done in ESO and IMHO are the heart of this game

BlueRaven · May 2020

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff

Twice a year we get dungeons DLC : 2 x 4-player dungeons.
What's in there for solo players and questers ? Nothing.

Once a year we get a story-zone DLC. What's in there for group players ? Nothing.

And once a year we get an expansion, with a new zone and new quests, and a new trial. There's for everyone.

If you add things up, on a yearly basis, group players get more than solo players. That's pure maths. Your vision is biased.

As to PvP players, they rarely get new environments and systems, but they get new "opponents" each time there's a combat change (that's, roughly said, basically every update) and new sets (also every update).

Again, your vision is simply untrue.

daemonor wrote: »

This is a mmo game after all.

Not primarily. Game Director Matt Firor himself said he saw the game as an Online-RPG rather than "your typical MMO". And that's why so many people love ESO.

This, but I would also add that the newer world bosses, dragons, and the upcoming harrowstorms are group content as well.

Also questing in WoW was horrible. Beyond the whole “let’s end this story chain in a group dungeon in a way that inconveniences the dungeon group” style of progression. WoW quests were just a series of fetching a number of “these”, and kill a number of “those”, over and over again. The questing in ESO is far superior.

MartiniDaniels · May 2020

zvavi wrote: »

Best quests are group content ones. Actually feels good, unlike the 127th calamity of Tamriel that dies in 2 slaps. Also the majority plays eso for this single player questing, sooooo...

This. I absolutely can't understand how team which makes interesting and wonderful dungeons with beautiful design, clever writing and engaging combat, how the same team makes so lackluster overland. I was never interested in MMORPG as a genre, and came to ESO expecting to play it mostly as single-player game, but ironically I quickly delved into group content because dungeons and later trials and PVP were amazing, while single player content of ESO is snooze fest.

daemonor · May 2020

Nairinhe wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything

You will miss out on stories and characters, which are generally quite nicely done in ESO and IMHO are the heart of this game

Except that I won't, because I do not enjoy stories in a mmo game. I played morrowind oblivion and skyrim for at least half a year each and I do love a good single player rpg. Doing the same in a mmo for just lines of text scattered all over the world not tied to each other and you being able to pick whatever/whenever die and respawn with 0 consequences does not give me the same feeling unfortunately.

Tandor · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

<snip> I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything <snip>

Apart from the entire purpose of the game, of course. Plus quite a few skill points.

Let's not pretend that it is a pure PK game and nothing more, or that it is entirely based around competitive content like Trials. The TES IP is entirely about quest-based storylines centred on the TES lore, and TES provides that within a multiplayer setting. It nonetheless does offer other things such as PvP and Trials for those that want them, which many do not.

I quite understand that this doesn't appeal to everyone, and the game itself won't appeal to everyone, nor does it need to. I can also understand that ESO isn't WoW, and for that many of us - including WoW players like me - are eternally grateful.

BlueRaven · May 2020

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

zvavi wrote: »

Best quests are group content ones. Actually feels good, unlike the 127th calamity of Tamriel that dies in 2 slaps. Also the majority plays eso for this single player questing, sooooo...

This. I absolutely can't understand how team which makes interesting and wonderful dungeons with beautiful design, clever writing and engaging combat, how the same team makes so lackluster overland. I was never interested in MMORPG as a genre, and came to ESO expecting to play it mostly as single-player game, but ironically I quickly delved into group content because dungeons and later trials and PVP were amazing, while single player content of ESO is snooze fest.

“Engaging Combat”?

Engaging encounters? Maybe. Engaging dungeon design? Sure. Engaging visuals? Yup.

Engaging combat? Um... No.

Nairinhe · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

Nairinhe wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything

You will miss out on stories and characters, which are generally quite nicely done in ESO and IMHO are the heart of this game

Except that I won't, because I do not enjoy stories in a mmo game. I played morrowind oblivion and skyrim for at least half a year each and I do love a good single player rpg. Doing the same in a mmo for just lines of text scattered all over the world not tied to each other and you being able to pick whatever/whenever die and respawn with 0 consequences does not give me the same feeling unfortunately.

Then I've got a feeling that you've either picked the wrong game in general or will have to do that new trial and then sit and wait for the next dungeon DLC

xshatox · May 2020

*cry in pvp*

MartiniDaniels · May 2020

BlueRaven wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

zvavi wrote: »

Best quests are group content ones. Actually feels good, unlike the 127th calamity of Tamriel that dies in 2 slaps. Also the majority plays eso for this single player questing, sooooo...

This. I absolutely can't understand how team which makes interesting and wonderful dungeons with beautiful design, clever writing and engaging combat, how the same team makes so lackluster overland. I was never interested in MMORPG as a genre, and came to ESO expecting to play it mostly as single-player game, but ironically I quickly delved into group content because dungeons and later trials and PVP were amazing, while single player content of ESO is snooze fest.

“Engaging Combat”?

Engaging encounters? Maybe. Engaging dungeon design? Sure. Engaging visuals? Yup.

Engaging combat? Um... No.

Ha-ha, thanks for correction. I definitely misused the word. "Thrilling" or "exciting" will be a better definition.

anitajoneb17_ESO · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

If he actually said so then there's nothing else to discuss, this game is online skyrim. I rest my biased case.

And it's not about facts. So what that they release 4 dungeons a year and 1 expac a year. It doesn't translate very well into practice, and I feel this game is lacking in group activities and content I have the very right to feel that. You are free to disagree with me, and if this game satisfies you in whatever activities you are interested primarily, that's great.

The opposite vision, which is also quite widespread among players, is that ESO focuses too much on group content, and that vision is also biased. The truth is, it's hard to compare non-repeatable content (overland/questing) with repeatable content (dungeons/trials).

At launch back in 2014, ESO had an audience clearly split into two groups : players coming from MMOs, and players coming from TES-games. They tried to combine the two, and it resulted in the original Craglorn disaster. Then they made a choice... and that choice resulted in catering more to former TES-players than to MMO players, and making the game look and feel more like "Skyrim-online". Hence the One Tamriel strategy.
This choice certainly wasn't dictated by any sort of personal preference from the developers, but by a detailed analysis of the actual and potential playerbase.

Even though they made that choice, there's still a little bit of everything for everyone in ESO. Players who spend 2 hours a week in the game, and players who spend 14 hours a day in it. Players who have never touched any other MMO, and the swarm of former WOW players that arrived last year. Casual and hardcore. Competitive combat lovers, and lore-fans. Social players taking care of guilds and creating events and content. Design lovers who dive into housing and decoration. Even people who subscribe once in a while, play whatever content is new to them, then leave again for two months and come back : they still find their way through. In fact, very few people actually leave ESO "forever". Most of them come back, for a short or a long time. And they find their way of enjoying the game.

I think ESO is extremely well balanced - even though I, too, feel totally left out of some content (in my case : dungeons and trials, normal being too easy and vet too hard for me). There's still enough there to keep me busy.
If you feel there isn't enough there for you (and that's your right), maybe you should find a game that's more suited to your taste and less generic than ESO.

daemonor · May 2020

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

If he actually said so then there's nothing else to discuss, this game is online skyrim. I rest my biased case.

And it's not about facts. So what that they release 4 dungeons a year and 1 expac a year. It doesn't translate very well into practice, and I feel this game is lacking in group activities and content I have the very right to feel that. You are free to disagree with me, and if this game satisfies you in whatever activities you are interested primarily, that's great.

The opposite vision, which is also quite widespread among players, is that ESO focuses too much on group content, and that vision is also biased. The truth is, it's hard to compare non-repeatable content (overland/questing) with repeatable content (dungeons/trials).

At launch back in 2014, ESO had an audience clearly split into two groups : players coming from MMOs, and players coming from TES-games. They tried to combine the two, and it resulted in the original Craglorn disaster. Then they made a choice... and that choice resulted in catering more to former TES-players than to MMO players, and making the game look and feel more like "Skyrim-online". Hence the One Tamriel strategy.
This choice certainly wasn't dictated by any sort of personal preference from the developers, but by a detailed analysis of the actual and potential playerbase.

Even though they made that choice, there's still a little bit of everything for everyone in ESO. Players who spend 2 hours a week in the game, and players who spend 14 hours a day in it. Players who have never touched any other MMO, and the swarm of former WOW players that arrived last year. Casual and hardcore. Competitive combat lovers, and lore-fans. Social players taking care of guilds and creating events and content. Design lovers who dive into housing and decoration. Even people who subscribe once in a while, play whatever content is new to them, then leave again for two months and come back : they still find their way through. In fact, very few people actually leave ESO "forever". Most of them come back, for a short or a long time. And they find their way of enjoying the game.

I think ESO is extremely well balanced - even though I, too, feel totally left out of some content (in my case : dungeons and trials, normal being too easy and vet too hard for me). There's still enough there to keep me busy.
If you feel there isn't enough there for you (and that's your right), maybe you should find a game that's more suited to your taste and less generic than ESO.

Well I am all of those combined. As I mentioned before I played morrowind oblivion and skyrim and world of warcraft since vanilla up untill now aswell. I also started playing eso pre one tamriel, but not too long after they introduced cp. I play on and off mostly, but when I do its a lot of hours per day. Up untill this year I wasn't really complaining about anything, but these performance issues with the absoloutely dissapointing expansion made me think that this game is rpg with online elements like you said. Unfortunately currently both world of warcraft and eso are dissapointing and I can't find any other mmos with similar setting that hit the sweet spot. Like wow is way too grindy, artificially time gated and rng based now to enjoy, and eso well at this point i got most of the sets/skins/characters that I wanted and there's just not much left to do.

TokenIntellect · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

And it's not about facts. So what that they release 4 dungeons a year and 1 expac a year. It doesn't translate very well into practice, and I feel this game is lacking in group activities and content I have the very right to feel that. You are free to disagree with me, and if this game satisfies you in whatever activities you are interested primarily, that's great.

Ha! It certainly isn't about facts.

Fact is, there has been a persistent and vocal minority on the forums (no telling how many in game) who like solo play within the MMO sandbox.
Fact is, for the past two years ESO has been gating more and more content behind forced-group play
Fact is, ZOS has stated they have no intention on opening up the 'year-long-story' idea to solo questers
Fact is, ZOS has stated, specifically, they intend to more-deeply integrate story into dungeons than was done with Elsweyr
Fact is, ZOS has no intention to fix the lore-breaking changes to Bosmer, Argonians, and pwescious widdle kitty cats
Fact is, ZOS has stated their intent to use more and more elaborate group-dependent mechanics in new content
Fact is, ZOS has largely ignored (and occasionally actively silenced— for reasons that, to avoid discussing moderation, I'm sure are entirely legit) those who don't want forced-group activities and content

You are certainly entitled to your feelings, but neither we nor ZOS are responsible for them. And while your feelings (and hopefully all of our feelings) matter, they shouldn't matter more than the facts.

Ilsabet · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped. I'm not saying it's a perfect design and eso should do exactly that, but you don't exclude a big part of players from your content.

My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression.

So your solution is to force PvPers and people who prefer group content to go through questing that they wouldn't otherwise choose to do, as a prerequisite to do the content they prefer to do? You think that would make them happy?

Kiralyn2000 · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

Nairinhe wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything

You will miss out on stories and characters, which are generally quite nicely done in ESO and IMHO are the heart of this game

Except that I won't, because I do not enjoy stories in a mmo game.

Whereas the story/quests & exploration is the primary reason I play MMOs. And most of the MMOs I've played (starting with WoW) have had huge proportions - increasing over the last decade - of 'single player content'. And story, quests, and exploration.

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped.

"I hate this content, but it's better in other MMOs because I'm forced to do it in order to be ready for the group stuff I prefer!"

...that's twisted, dude.

Hurbster · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff like the hunt for mythic items for example. And I wouldn't be against, but the quests are absoloutely pointless throughout the whole game. I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything and in my opinion that becomes a problem when a big part of resources are spent for designing them and the players who enjoy the mmo aspect of the game get absoloutely nothing out of it.

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped. I'm not saying it's a perfect design and eso should do exactly that, but you don't exclude a big part of players from your content. Now you got this strange division of people all the time, the players who play eso for the story cheer for the great expansions and content, because they like landscapes and play this game like it's skyrim. Then you got the pvers complaining that their sets/items get nerfed cause of pvp imbalances. Then you got the pvpers who are complaining that they haven't received any content for 4 years.

My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression. Now basically the people who play this game as skyrim are always content, and those who want a pve/pvp mmo are always left with the short end of the stick. This is a mmo game after all. Would like to hear your thoughts on this, I hope I got my point across.

I do not agree with any of this. Sounds like you want a sandbox game with no plot. Eve is available.

VaranisArano · May 2020

Would you like to return to the days of yore before One Tamriel?

See, ESO used to railroad you through the quests. Zones and group-content were level-locked, and worse, there was an artificial miss chance so you couldn't even grind too far above or below your level. Sure, you probably could grind your way up to Vet Rank 16 per character - none of this accountwide business and which was expected to take through Cadwell's Gold via questing- but it definitely was not as simple as running around the Alikr Dolmens now.

Wouldn't you rather have the choice to quest or not?
Or do you prefer the railroad?

MaleAmazon · May 2020

Disagree completely that this game is "single player focused". Though I suppose that depends on what you compare it to.

They have, in fact, at least since the debacles of previous years that I won´t get into (google it), been putting out content including

-Year-long story questing (in order to have people keep playing to get to the end of the story).

-Group dungeons and trials for groups. Including group dungeon-only DLC.

-PvP (not that much, but Battlegrounds got put in, IC got changed a bit, duels got put in way back, PvP sets have been looked over, and so on). Now, the PvP hardcore players are about as easy to please as a 2-year-old with sunburn, sleep deprivation and constipation - and some have about the same level of expression. So trying to gauge PvP from that is pointless. There are people online, and the Alliance War is tbh really tired old content by now; so I´d say it´s reasonable.

So it´s kind of on a rotation. Not SP focused.

What is completely lacking is tough solo content. We got vMA, and... well that´s it, actually. One damn piece of content in the *entire* game. Well, unless you go world boss soloing, which is fun - and actually shows you that combat in ESO is fast paced and really, really good. You just almost never get to experience it since group dungeons are about exact rotations and predictable behaviour (so you don´t have to react), PvP is about extreme bursting and stunlock (so you don´t actually get a chance to react), and Overland is a pushover.

As always, it´s people like myself who get the short end of the stick, drew the shortest straw, got the shaft, have to make do with the sour hist brew, etc.

Funny how that is

But no, honestly, this game was certainly pitched as "TES online", and TES is a single player game. It was not really intended to be "standard MMO in TES skin". Which is good. I personally do not like that the tone of the game is often not at all as serious as single player TES could be (Skyrim starts with an explicit beheading ffs), and there is no way to crank up the difficulty. And yes, there are ways to have separate difficulty settings in the same world where newbies and veterans play in the same spot, but since my above answer is already to much rehashing, lets not get into that now.

anitajoneb17_ESO · May 2020

Ilsabet wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped. I'm not saying it's a perfect design and eso should do exactly that, but you don't exclude a big part of players from your content.

My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression.

So your solution is to force PvPers and people who prefer group content to go through questing that they wouldn't otherwise choose to do, as a prerequisite to do the content they prefer to do? You think that would make them happy?

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped.

"I hate this content, but it's better in other MMOs because I'm forced to do it in order to be ready for the group stuff I prefer!"

...that's twisted, dude.

Well yeah, that's how it sounds, but I don't think that's what OP meant.
I believe he meant something like "I would be more inclined to do the content I enjoy less if it made sense in terms of progression for the content I enjoy most".

The problem is : ZOS has tried all of it already : Skills useful for PVE embedded into the alliance war skill lines, monster masks and dungeons sets useful for PVP hidden in dungeons, so PVE players would be encouraged/forced to PVP and vice-versa.
ZOS had to back off on all those fronts : golden vendor for monster masks, rearranging skill lines for easier access of essential skills, etc.
Last current hurdle (maelstroem weapons being only available by running VMA) is falling with next update.

We must understand that ZOS does not necessarily do what each one of us wants, but ultimately, they do what we all want, as a whole, by looking statistically at what we actually do. We as players, together, statistically speaking, do not want to see content we like being gated behind content we do not like. That's all there is to it, really.

Nairinhe · May 2020

BTW, on "single-player focused": having recently achieved Master Angler title I can confirm that it's one of the real end-game activities, and guess what? You benefit from fishing together with other people! Even fishing is not single-player focused!

peacenote · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff like the hunt for mythic items for example. And I wouldn't be against, but the quests are absoloutely pointless throughout the whole game. I mean you can create a character from level 1 and not touch a single quest in game and you won't miss out on absoloutely anything and in my opinion that becomes a problem when a big part of resources are spent for designing them and the players who enjoy the mmo aspect of the game get absoloutely nothing out of it.

One example I can give of quests that matter would be world of warcraft. You are forced to do them if you're interested in competetive pve and pvp, because they give certain rewards or unlocks parts that cannot be skipped. I'm not saying it's a perfect design and eso should do exactly that, but you don't exclude a big part of players from your content. Now you got this strange division of people all the time, the players who play eso for the story cheer for the great expansions and content, because they like landscapes and play this game like it's skyrim. Then you got the pvers complaining that their sets/items get nerfed cause of pvp imbalances. Then you got the pvpers who are complaining that they haven't received any content for 4 years.

My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression. Now basically the people who play this game as skyrim are always content, and those who want a pve/pvp mmo are always left with the short end of the stick. This is a mmo game after all. Would like to hear your thoughts on this, I hope I got my point across.

Actually, what you're saying isn't true.

All of the major story line quests grant skill points, which help your character in group content. You miss out on a lot of skill points if you bypass the main stories.
Recurring characters are really common throughout ESO, and if you skip all the quests you lose out on your character's motivation for completing the group content. Maybe not everyone cares, but the bottom line is the story is woven throughout the quests and group content. Cloudrest is extremely nonsensical, imo, if you haven't worked your way through Summerset.
Quests are an extremely efficient way to level abilities - I always load up my bars with the skills I need to morph or skills lines that still need leveling when I turn in quests.
Quests can be done with friends, such that you can share pick-ups and the quests advance together if you both have them. So technically they aren't even exclusively "single player content."
Quests can drop BIS overland gear, like the Briarheart dagger.
Antiquities (the hunt for mythic items) made an effort to provide rewards for group play, both PvE and PvP-focused. I actually disagree with this, as I don't want to go digging all over Tamriel to improve my DPS, but that's what was implemented. So Antiquities is exactly like your WoW quest example where folks must participate in this content or they potentially miss out (if they want those items).

There are also lots of players (like me) that do everything - quest, play PvE dungeons and trials, and PvP, and you haven't really represented those folks in your explanation. There are people here who like all of the content and would get bored if ZOS stopped providing any of it (like less quests, or less dungeons, etc.).

All of that said, here is my personal point of view on this: I play ESO because it is an MMO and I can play with my friends. I'm generally happy with the balance of activities and am glad the story keeps advancing and there are more worlds to explore and quests to finish. Personally, I think the single most anti-group/MMO action that ZOS has done in the history of this game was to remove group queuing in BG's, which is why I've been so vocal about it on these forums. You can quest with your friends, and questing gives you that "MMO" feel except for when it takes you to an instanced location, because of all the players running around in the world... but BG's suddenly turned into a place you can't go with your friends, and if anything lately has made this game feel like it's too single-player focused, it's that change, not the continued development of quests. Both options, a single and group queue, should have been made available and, worst of all, it was an option we had for years that is now gone.

doomette · May 2020

I think it would be a bad idea to lock anything really essential to character development behind quests. I’ve done all the overland quests, and plan to do all future ones because some can be well-written, entertaining, and/or introduce great NPCs, but doing them once is enough for me. I’d hate for that content to become a chore if I had to redo it again on my alts. I was entertained by the skull the first time I did the psijic line, but now after 3-4 run throughs with alts, I’m rather sick of him.
And I imagine locking important, or worse, essential character development behind questing would result in a number of players who mostly/strictly do PVP and/or end-game PVE content quitting the game.

JKorr · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

So out of spite for the horrible performance and dissapointing expansion which brings uhm.. a new trial and 3 useless sets along and thats basically the only group content that we get, I was wondering about questing.

This game focuses so much on questing, roleplaying and single player stuff

Twice a year we get dungeons DLC : 2 x 4-player dungeons.
What's in there for solo players and questers ? Nothing.

Once a year we get a story-zone DLC. What's in there for group players ? Nothing.

And once a year we get an expansion, with a new zone and new quests, and a new trial. There's for everyone.

If you add things up, on a yearly basis, group players get more than solo players. That's pure maths. Your vision is biased.

As to PvP players, they rarely get new environments and systems, but they get new "opponents" each time there's a combat change (that's, roughly said, basically every update) and new sets (also every update).

Again, your vision is simply untrue.

daemonor wrote: »

This is a mmo game after all.

Not primarily. Game Director Matt Firor himself said he saw the game as an Online-RPG rather than "your typical MMO". And that's why so many people love ESO.

If he actually said so then there's nothing else to discuss, this game is online skyrim. I rest my biased case.

And it's not about facts. So what that they release 4 dungeons a year and 1 expac a year. It doesn't translate very well into practice, and I feel this game is lacking in group activities and content I have the very right to feel that. You are free to disagree with me, and if this game satisfies you in whatever activities you are interested primarily, that's great.

If this game was really single player focused, Cyrodiil would have a pve version, and pvp/pve would be balanced separately.

daemonor · May 2020

Yeah except that cyrodil never worked properly after its release, cause it's not tailored for large scale faction battles like it's supposed to be on paper, because they rather spend a years worth of expac designing quests. If this game was focused around that they would probably have it working properly.

As it appears the vocal majority on forums here are the ones who enjoy doing quests and I find nothing wrong with that, you can enjoy the game without trying to prove your point to me that quests and story is nescessary and I miss out on a lot by not doing them, because I don't. I fooled around untill about 300cp with my first character and the moment I got the game pretty much figured out all the immersion dissapeared and it's never coming back.

I'm not asking or suggesting to turn quests into anything, because they never would anyway. I'm saying it wouldn't feel like wasted content for certain groups of players cause they're never gonna touch them just for roleplaying purposes. Tho a point can be made that dungeons/bgs are wasted content for some players too cause they're never going to do it, but it's at least a group activity in a mmo game. I just can't get behind the idea considering overland quests or whatever harrowstorms, dragons a group activity, cause these are 5 minute 0 challenge/reward type.

I see it's a pointless discussion anyway cause half the posts are putting words in my mouth and fighting strawman arguments. This post wasn't an intent to argue with anyone or find out who is right, just expressed an opinion and wanted to hear out what other's think with either agreeing or disagreeing.

P.S. if these mythic items are guided thru quests and not random storyless rng exploration then great, I can totally dig that type of solo content.

VaranisArano · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

I see it's a pointless discussion anyway cause half the posts are putting words in my mouth and fighting strawman arguments. This post wasn't an intent to argue with anyone or find out who is right, just expressed an opinion and wanted to hear out what other's think with either agreeing or disagreeing.

At the beginning of the thread, you said "My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression. Now basically the people who play this game as skyrim are always content, and those who want a pve/pvp mmo are always left with the short end of the stick. This is a mmo game after all."

My thoughts, since you want them:

ESO is an MMORPG.

1. Of the three types of game content you bring up, questing is the one that appeals to the highest number of players in the general population.
A. ESO is an Elder Scrolls game. The heavy emphasis on questing content is a staple of the series. Of course ZOS will lean into the brand's established strengths.
B. Both PVP expansions have become free releases due to low pop.
C. ZOS has nerfed DLC dungeons and at least one trial in an attempt to boost completion rates.
We can argue whether PVP/PVE have less players because they get less resources or they get less resources because they have less players a la the-chicken-or-the-egg, but that's pretty immaterial to the simple answer that Questing gets more resources because it attracts by far the most players. Of course ZOS desires to keep the majority satisfied.

2. ESO is an MMORPG. Questing is necessary to progress the RPG side of ESO. Its optional for the MMO side, which appears to be how most pure MMO players want it, judging by the complaints that led to purchasable skill lines after the Psijic Order grind. For MMO players who want to rush to their favorite PVE group content or PVP, having questing not be a requirement for progression is ideal, especially in a game that rewards creating alts.

For me, ESO allocates its resources in a way consistent with its nature as an MMORPG and the market share of its playerbase. Quests not being a required part of progression actually benefits players who solely play the MMO aspects.

daemonor · May 2020

VaranisArano wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

I see it's a pointless discussion anyway cause half the posts are putting words in my mouth and fighting strawman arguments. This post wasn't an intent to argue with anyone or find out who is right, just expressed an opinion and wanted to hear out what other's think with either agreeing or disagreeing.

At the beginning of the thread, you said "My point is, I wouldn't have a problem with them spending so much resources on designing questing, if it wasn't a purely single player aspect of the game and was somehow tied to pve/pvp progression. Now basically the people who play this game as skyrim are always content, and those who want a pve/pvp mmo are always left with the short end of the stick. This is a mmo game after all."

My thoughts, since you want them:

ESO is an MMORPG.

1. Of the three types of game content you bring up, questing is the one that appeals to the highest number of players in the general population.
A. ESO is an Elder Scrolls game. The heavy emphasis on questing content is a staple of the series. Of course ZOS will lean into the brand's established strengths.
B. Both PVP expansions have become free releases due to low pop.
C. ZOS has nerfed DLC dungeons and at least one trial in an attempt to boost completion rates.
We can argue whether PVP/PVE have less players because they get less resources or they get less resources because they have less players a la the-chicken-or-the-egg, but that's pretty immaterial to the simple answer that Questing gets more resources because it attracts by far the most players. Of course ZOS desires to keep the majority satisfied.

2. ESO is an MMORPG. Questing is necessary to progress the RPG side of ESO. Its optional for the MMO side, which appears to be how most pure MMO players want it, judging by the complaints that led to purchasable skill lines after the Psijic Order grind. For MMO players who want to rush to their favorite PVE group content or PVP, having questing not be a requirement for progression is ideal, especially in a game that rewards creating alts.

For me, ESO allocates its resources in a way consistent with its nature as an MMORPG and the market share of its playerbase. Quests not being a required part of progression actually benefits players who solely play the MMO aspects.

Fair enough.

jm42 · May 2020

daemonor wrote: »

Now you got this strange division of people all the time, the players who play eso for the story cheer for the great expansions and content, because they like landscapes and play this game like it's skyrim.

ESO is basically skyrim with online cooperative.
and pls, try to avoid terms like "strange" referring to anyone, because from someone's (and mine) point of view it is you who are strange here, demanding the game to be something that it doesn't meant to, because you like it more.

daemonor · May 2020

jm42 wrote: »

daemonor wrote: »

Now you got this strange division of people all the time, the players who play eso for the story cheer for the great expansions and content, because they like landscapes and play this game like it's skyrim.

ESO is basically skyrim with online cooperative.
and pls, try to avoid terms like "strange" referring to anyone, because from someone's (and mine) point of view it is you who are strange here, demanding the game to be something that it doesn't meant to, because you like it more.

[snip]

Strange division means that players are divided in a strange way, like they're playing different games and have negative feelings towards each other.

[Edited to remove Baiting]