wolfie1.0. wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

disky wrote: »

thorwyn wrote: »

I never really spent too much time fishing, because I find it boring and non-rewarding. Even the addition of mini games as suggested by OP would not change that, so I'm indifferent about it.

However, I would like to add one thought to the discussion that's nagging on me each time I read the forum. Whenever someone is proposing a change to the game, there is an impressively high chance that they will go defensive and play the "but it would just be optional" card at some point. On the surface, "optional" is a one-size-fits-all argument, designed to eliminate any tension between different opinions, but in reality, it is just a passive aggressive attempt at protecting the proposed changes against critical arguments and make each and every idea equally valid, regardless how absurd it may be. "I want flying penguins with rocket launchers? Don't like it? Switch it off!". See? Now YOU are the one to blame if you don't like the change.

While options sound nice and dandy in theory, they can potentially create a matrix of decisions, especially when each and every minor aspect of the game is drowned in more choices and selections than a tuna sandwich at Subways. Whenever ZOS adds a new feature or a QoL improvement of some sorts, a good portion of the player base is not (and will never be) even aware of the additions. Another huge part of the players just don't care and pick whatever is the default option. And a small minority of people are actually using the feature, sometimes complaining about how few people are using the feature. And you think that an option for an activity like fishing would make a difference? Think about extended group finder, think about the "what's that strange icon over my head" mystery and the list goes on.

So my point is: if you propose changes to the game, defend your ideas, convince the community and don't try to bail out from the discussion by using the but-it's-optional trope. It's not helpful.
Just to make this clear, this little rant is not meant to be against OP and his/her ideas.

Because it's the only possible way there is to get anything past the wall of negativity on this forum. Every single time I present something it's just endless hate. I'm trying to at least give people a way in to considering possibilities without their minds shutting down and instantly hating it. This forum is extremely conservative.

I know you're in the overland thread and I have to say that it makes the most sense there by far, and that is where I spend most of my time discussing an optional feature, but the fact is that I don't really think this should be optional. If it has to be, that's fine, but frankly I've tried making other suggestions here and while there have been some nice, constructive comments in this thread, it's always primarily negativity, and I'm just tired of the endless fight to defend an idea. I guess I'll just stop, which sucks, because I think there are a lot of ways this game could improve and I'd like to talk about them without needing to consider whether or not I want to wade into the kind of discussion we're having now.

Yeah. I actually think it's the opposite of avoiding criticism or feedback specific to your idea. It's the only way to get feedback or criticism specific to your idea.

Otherwise all the comments are "Nothing should ever change. It's good because I like it. I like it because it's good." And there is absolutely no feedback specific to the idea itself. It sometimes feels like we aren't playing a live service game which is a genre of game that makes improvements on existing systems all the time.

Making many improvements opt in allows for people who enjoy something as it currently to continue to enjoy it. And while I understand ZOS often doesn't take that route, that's not on the players giving the feedback. A post isn't going to automatically change anything.

Edit

Although to be fair OP, if the only thing to discuss is "I don't like it," there's really not much else to say beyond "I like it" or "I don't."

If no ideas are presented other than something need to change, then it won't change. I admit that sometimes I feel like I have to take a very very hard stance on ideas because one of the key problems I have with how ZOS implements changes often comes across as:

Low effort half made ideas

Overly monetized

Forced Implementation of something half the players don't want

Implementation of something that players suggested but contorted/misunderstood the actual desire into something completely different.

Or lastly it's just broken with bugs or it's too overpowering.

So please understand that when I am critical of some new idea my goal is often to press it so that ZOS and others can see the downsides of the new idea so we can try to avoid the pitfalls of the past ones.

VoxAdActa wrote: »

disky wrote: »

See, this is exactly why I didn't provide a specific idea. It doesn't matter what I say, this will be the response.

And even knowing that, you didn't think that maybe you're getting this specific response because the idea (such as it is) would be very, very unpopular?

Or did that even factor in to the decision-making process? Well, I mean, it did at least factor in a little; you mentioned Stardew Valley as a model but steadfastly refused to describe that model because it would be dramatically rejected if people knew precisely what was being suggested.

disky wrote: »

VoxAdActa wrote: »

disky wrote: »

See, this is exactly why I didn't provide a specific idea. It doesn't matter what I say, this will be the response.

And even knowing that, you didn't think that maybe you're getting this specific response because the idea (such as it is) would be very, very unpopular?

Or did that even factor in to the decision-making process? Well, I mean, it did at least factor in a little; you mentioned Stardew Valley as a model but steadfastly refused to describe that model because it would be dramatically rejected if people knew precisely what was being suggested.

*looks at the title of the thread* I knew it would be unpopular.

I'm not here to seek your approval. I'm here to present my interest to ZOS. Feedback is secondary.

VoxAdActa wrote: »

disky wrote: »

VoxAdActa wrote: »

disky wrote: »

See, this is exactly why I didn't provide a specific idea. It doesn't matter what I say, this will be the response.

And even knowing that, you didn't think that maybe you're getting this specific response because the idea (such as it is) would be very, very unpopular?

Or did that even factor in to the decision-making process? Well, I mean, it did at least factor in a little; you mentioned Stardew Valley as a model but steadfastly refused to describe that model because it would be dramatically rejected if people knew precisely what was being suggested.

*looks at the title of the thread* I knew it would be unpopular.

I'm not here to seek your approval. I'm here to present my interest to ZOS. Feedback is secondary.

Oh, I see. You meant to type "/feedback" in-game, but accidentally posted a forum thread instead. Happens to the best of us.

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

disky wrote: »

Arizona_Steve wrote: »

Sometimes the mindlessness of fishing is an effective counterpoint to fighting mobs and bosses.

People enjoy things in different ways. I am not interested in sitting back and waiting, I want something fun to do, and fishing could be really fun if there were substantial changes.

But there are SO MANY other things in the game that are not about ‘sitting back and waiting’, and are ‘fun to do’.

Go do them.

disky wrote: »

SerafinaWaterstar wrote: »

disky wrote: »

Arizona_Steve wrote: »

Sometimes the mindlessness of fishing is an effective counterpoint to fighting mobs and bosses.

People enjoy things in different ways. I am not interested in sitting back and waiting, I want something fun to do, and fishing could be really fun if there were substantial changes.

But there are SO MANY other things in the game that are not about ‘sitting back and waiting’, and are ‘fun to do’.

Go do them.

2. "Just do something else, this isn't for you" - But it could be. I like fishing minigames in general. I wouldn't even call this a minigame, honestly.