Population shrinking, please BRING CROSSPLAY QUICK

SolarRune · June 10

Some people don't like change, equally there could be concerns about economy stuff, with more players on PC consoles can expect to see prices move towards the PC prices.

As an example of not liking change the amount of people or even small guilds I am seeing having tried subclassing are now saying it's not for them and are taking a break or are saying they're done with the game is scarey.

I'm enjoying it, although it does make pugs more of a headache as a support main because its not just sets you need to coordinate anymore it's subclasses.

Rungar · June 10

i dont believe crossplay will make the game any better though i dont think it would hurt the game either. I really think they have to modernize some systems to draw in new blood. They have ten years of content with decent graphics and generally low specs and barriers to play... but often high barriers to keep playing.

things i would do
1) create/upgrade npc guilds to bridge the gap between guilded and unguilded players that gives players a new way to find other "same lane" players in an organic way using achievements.
2) modernize advancement into a single "day 1"( classless) system and incorporate achievements into it.
3) update and simplify the cp system to a specialist system. People want to be a "frost mage".... not whatever horror is produced from the cp system. look at how they build characters..
4) update the dungeon design to be more in line with elder scrolls players needs. add dungeon 3 to the iconic original ones in this new format.
5) implement overland invasions which is a thematic rehash of a current zones but much higher difficulty, danger and reward.
6) improve the combat system with an optional single bar setup that "almost but not quite" rivals the current setup.
do all this in one big update and call it Elder scrolls online : Reckoning. Ship with 8 iconic dungeons in the new format made from the existing ones and 6 invasion zones. Since its all made with the mass of existing eso assets it should be pretty cheap to produce.

Thysbe · June 10

XSTRONG wrote: »

I wonder why some people dont want crossplay? I have even seen that some people dont want crossplay between console either.
I would guess that they dont care so they vote No, I mean why wouldnt you want crossplay between console at least.

there are at least 2 reasons why to vote "no" even if you don´t care:

- this this will be a major undertaking draining resources from content creation for a feature many on PC won´t care about

- the merge between NA and EU has the issue of massive lags

If the game really is dying (idk - to me (PC EU) it seems pretty stable on low level, plenty of whales, Steam Charts seccond that assumption), they have to address the root causes for this decline. Crossplay is just a quick fix to merge the dwindling player base on one place so it feels a bit busier but not addressing why it dwindled in the first place.

It´s like treating symptoms instead of the sickness.

MISTFORMBZZZ · June 10

XSTRONG wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

There is a reddit poll up now aswell, feel free to interact

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/s/gfUhjF5oSc

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Thysbe wrote: »

I can´t really understand why a community currently so heavily emphasizing that they play mostly solo care so much about crossplay. You´ll mostly get the same solo minded players who regard ESO as just another ES RPG.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/678081/how-often-do-you-play-solo/p1

47% play 100% solo - only 18% engage in non-solo content. So there is plenty of players on each plattform, you just don´t see them in Cyro, BG and Dungeons and trials because they don´t access it.

Where it currently hurts is not so much the sheer player number but the avoidance of group content for most of them.

I don’t agree with this take at all lol.

While solo play is surely a part of ESO—and an important one—the claim that the majority of the player base engages exclusively in solo content isn’t an accurate reflection of how the game is actually played by most.

a little breakdown

1. Game Design: ESO is Built Around Group Content

ESO is an MMORPG at its core, not just a single-player Elder Scrolls spinoff. Major systems are designed around group interactions:
- Dungeons and Trials are explicitly group-based, with mechanics that require coordinated roles and teamwork.
- Pvp zones like Cyrodiil and Battlegrounds are fundamentally multiplayer environments.
- Daily activities, such as pledges, world bosses, and dolmens, are group-friendly and often encourage spontaneous cooperation.
- The game’s Guild system (e.g. Fighters, Mages, Undaunted) rewards group engagement, particularly the Undaunted which is directly tied to dungeon content.

2. Activity Metrics From ZOS and Community Data

ZeniMax hasn’t released a full internal activity breakdown recently, but some key info has been shared over time:
- In past ESO Live streams, ZOS devs have stated that dungeons and PvP are among the most frequently used systems !!!!
-The Undaunted Celebration and Whitestrake’s Mayhem events consistently show the highest in-game participation rates, as seen in achievement tracking and community events.
-Look at sites like ESO-Hub or ESO Logs: thousands of players upload Trial completion logs, PvP builds, and parse results. This level of external community infrastructure doesn’t exist around solo questing alone.

3. Steam Player Achievement Data

Steam achievements offer a snapshot of player behavior:
-A large percentage of Steam players have achievements for group dungeons and Trials, which require group coordination. For instance:
-“Dungeon Savior” (complete veteran dungeons) has been earned by a significant portion of players.
-“Alliance War Recruit” (enter PvP) also appears in a broad share of accounts.

That doesn’t go along with the idea that nearly half of players never touch group content, AT ALL.

4. MMO Player Psychology

Even players who identify as solo players often still engage in group activities:
- They join guilds for trading, use group finders for dailies, and team up for events even if they don’t use voice chat or play in static teams.
- Many solo-leaning players still value social connection, and crossplay directly supports this by expanding access to friends and guildies across platforms.

So yes, some people do treat ESO like a single-player game, and that’s perfectly valid—ZOS has made that style viable. But it’s simply not the full picture. The reality is that ESO’s most engaged and socially active base participates in a mix of solo and group content, and many players would love to do more if crossplay removed the barrier of platform-lock.

Crossplay isn’t just about grouping for dungeons—it’s about being in the same guilds, sharing the economy, being able to chat, run events, and just inhabit the same version of ESO/ Tamriel together.

Also about the poll about solo playing, the way that question is set up is completely misleading.
It's so evidently a leading question to make it look like everyone who answers it plays a lot of solo play.

And aswell someone could play 100% of the time solo in cyro or bgs.
Still requires other players and doesn't exclusively mean solo questing.

Made a reprsentive poll about crossplay on reddit.
Feel free to use it too.

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/s/zavUV8vfkm

I wonder why some people dont want crossplay? I have even seen that some people dont want crossplay between console either.

I would guess that they dont care so they vote No, I mean why wouldnt you want crossplay between console at least.

Honestly, I don’t get the resistance to crossplay. It’s not like it would ruin the game or change what ESO actually is. It would just let more people play together, which is kind of the whole point of an MMO. I’ve got friends on other platforms I can’t even play with unless I rebuy the whole game or start over. Makes no sense in 2025.

And the idea that “PC players won’t care” or it’ll somehow mess things up is a stretch. If anything, it helps everyone—shorter queues, more active guilds, better PvP matchmaking. Other MMOs already do it. FFXIV has full cross-platform and it’s doing fine.

Also, it’s not just one poll saying people want this. Look around—Reddit, YouTube, Discord—most polls show the majority are in favor of crossplay. Yeah, not every poll is perfect, but they’re all showing the same thing. The support’s clearly there.

And let’s be real: ESO has been a bit stale. Same systems, same lag, not much innovation lately. Crossplay is one of the few big changes that could actually bring life back into the game and get people playing again.

I just don’t see a good reason to be against it. More players, more options, less fragmentation. Seems like a no-brainer.

SolarRune · June 10

I agree, cross play has been asked for/talked about for a long time, being on PCEU and only ever played on PCEU, I am not the target audience for this, previously I was answering the question posed as to why some people may vote against it.

However, if the issue is eso feeling stake its only ever going to be a temporary fix, and if, for example, all EU servers merge into one EU uber-mega server, are they going to provide 3x the traders (for example)? There is lots to be worked through, at the moment they have confirmed they are working on the backend parts of it, but they will need to think about the inpa ts to the actual ge world too.

moderatelyfatman · June 10

If PS and X-box were full, they'd be no interest in crossplay.
It's a bandaid solution and not a fix to the real problem of population decline.

amiiegee · June 10

I get where you’re both coming from, but I think this view kinda downplays what crossplay actually offers. Yeah, it’s not a magic fix for every issue ESO has, but it’s also not just a band-aid either.

Crossplay is about more than just population size—it’s about unifying fragmented communities. I’m on console and have friends on PC that I literally can’t play with unless one of us starts over. That sucks in 2025. Even if servers were “full,” people would still want to play with their friends across platforms. That’s just standard in modern multiplayer games now.

And yeah, there’d be backend work—trading, guilds, economy—but every successful crossplay MMO has had to solve this stuff. ZOS could too, especially if they phased it in smartly (e.g. cross-server before full platform merge, or merging same-platform regions first).

Saying “we only want this because of population decline” is kind of backwards. People are leaving because of isolation, server disparities, and feeling locked into small communities. Crossplay could help stop that bleed.

So no, it’s not the full cure for ESO’s long-term issues, but it’s one of the few realistic, player-positive steps ZOS can take right now that actually excites people.

Arrow312 · June 11

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

If PS and X-box were full, they'd be no interest in crossplay.
It's a bandaid solution and not a fix to the real problem of population decline.

That is a fact. I switched after 8 years from Xbox EU to PC EU. I only saw the same people everywhere i was a X EU. Cyrodiil, IC, trials, random dungeons. I often thought there was just around 100 Players on X EU. Most of my guilds on Xbox were dead and only around 10-20 players online. Often we had problems to get a complete group for a trial.

We all know that there are other issues,too. e.g. Bgs on X EU took so long that you thought the queue was bugged. I have still a few friends whose playing on X EU because they dont want to start again on PC and sink € and time to get on the actual X EU level.

moderatelyfatman · June 11

Arrow312 wrote: »

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

If PS and X-box were full, they'd be no interest in crossplay.
It's a bandaid solution and not a fix to the real problem of population decline.

That is a fact. I switched after 8 years from Xbox EU to PC EU. I only saw the same people everywhere i was a X EU. Cyrodiil, IC, trials, random dungeons. I often thought there was just around 100 Players on X EU. Most of my guilds on Xbox were dead and only around 10-20 players online. Often we had problems to get a complete group for a trial.

We all know that there are other issues,too. e.g. Bgs on X EU took so long that you thought the queue was bugged. I have still a few friends whose playing on X EU because they dont want to start again on PC and sink € and time to get on the actual X EU level.

I wonder if the solution to many of these problems is to allow players to do a one time copy of their console account onto PC?
(I know dedicated console players will hate moving to PC but it will help the game survive in the short to medium term).

amiiegee · June 11

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

Arrow312 wrote: »

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

If PS and X-box were full, they'd be no interest in crossplay.
It's a bandaid solution and not a fix to the real problem of population decline.

That is a fact. I switched after 8 years from Xbox EU to PC EU. I only saw the same people everywhere i was a X EU. Cyrodiil, IC, trials, random dungeons. I often thought there was just around 100 Players on X EU. Most of my guilds on Xbox were dead and only around 10-20 players online. Often we had problems to get a complete group for a trial.

We all know that there are other issues,too. e.g. Bgs on X EU took so long that you thought the queue was bugged. I have still a few friends whose playing on X EU because they dont want to start again on PC and sink € and time to get on the actual X EU level.

I wonder if the solution to many of these problems is to allow players to do a one time copy of their console account onto PC?
(I know dedicated console players will hate moving to PC but it will help the game survive in the short to medium term).

The solution to many of this problems is to enable cross play / cross server

Rkindaleft · June 11

I agree that console cross play is probably the best move, however I think people need to acknowledge that cross play is at best a temporary solution.

The fact of the matter is, if they released cross play today without changing anything else, I can almost guarantee you we will be having this same conversation about declining player base again in 3 years time, because ZOS hasn’t fixed one of the reasons why cross play is needed to begin with.

Bad updates, change fatigue, poor performance, reduction of content (especially looking to the future with the new seasons model and how small the new zone appears to be), whatever the reason may be for someone to stop playing, unless the design philosophy of those things change the game will continue to lose players.

Cooperharley · June 11

Thysbe wrote: »

I can´t really understand why a community currently so heavily emphasizing that they play mostly solo care so much about crossplay. You´ll mostly get the same solo minded players who regard ESO as just another ES RPG.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/678081/how-often-do-you-play-solo/p1

47% play 100% solo - only 18% engage in non-solo content. So there is plenty of players on each plattform, you just don´t see them in Cyro, BG and Dungeons and trials because they don´t access it.

Where it currently hurts is not so much the sheer player number but the avoidance of group content for most of them.

Disagree heavily.

While I play a lot of solo, I still play with others a decent bit and would play with others more if I had access to my friends on PC-N.A. for instance.

Tandor · June 11

Polls are completely unnecessary, ZOS have made it clear that they are well aware of the level of demand for cross play, that's why they're actively investigating whether it's possible.

amiiegee · June 12

Tandor wrote: »

Polls are completely unnecessary, ZOS have made it clear that they are well aware of the level of demand for cross play, that's why they're actively investigating whether it's possible.

agree and the poll does back that statement up a lot

moderatelyfatman · June 12

I think crossplay is desirable and would be a net benefit for the game.

But I also think it is also ZOS's latest version of the 'Year of Performance' now that literally no one who has been playing the game for more than a few months believes the old claims. I expect that every year for the next 5 years there will be a yearly statement pledging to bring crossplay to the game. It's a key that they jangle in front of the eyes of players knowing that a percentage will get excited and forget about everything else.

moderatelyfatman · June 12

SolarRune wrote: »

Some people don't like change, equally there could be concerns about economy stuff, with more players on PC consoles can expect to see prices move towards the PC prices.

As an example of not liking change the amount of people or even small guilds I am seeing having tried subclassing are now saying it's not for them and are taking a break or are saying they're done with the game is scarey.

I'm enjoying it, although it does make pugs more of a headache as a support main because its not just sets you need to coordinate anymore it's subclasses.

I don't think it's as simple as not liking change. Introducing a new class that isn't overpowered and is fun to play is a change that very few people will object to.

Making crafting writes stackable, chromium plating affordable, the Armory System, the Sticker Book and many other QoL changes throughout the years is a change very few people object to.

Subclassing is tearing up the existing system and replacing it with something else. People aren't objecting to this simply because it is a change but because it's a whiplash change that will totally change the power balance in the game. It is a change that will render most of their pureclass builds obsolete once the inevitable nerfs come to balance the subclass builds.

People dislike changes that force them to play they game in ways they do not enjoy, or even worse, changes they are forced to grind through just to keep doing the things they love (just look at hybridisation, patch 35 and endgame).

amiiegee · June 13

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

I think crossplay is desirable and would be a net benefit for the game.

But I also think it is also ZOS's latest version of the 'Year of Performance' now that literally no one who has been playing the game for more than a few months believes the old claims. I expect that every year for the next 5 years there will be a yearly statement pledging to bring crossplay to the game. It's a key that they jangle in front of the eyes of players knowing that a percentage will get excited and forget about everything else.

While the numbers are declining more and more, this would not be smart

SkaiFaith · June 13

Since a lot of players are solo and group activities are what's suffering, the upcoming rework of overland difficulty could make miracles: games in the style of elden ring and monster hunter are popular these days; ESO could take advantage of its massive quantity of content, like overland bosses and public dungeons, that when upgraded to a difficulty that pose a challenge could retain more players and make them interact with each other, helping everyone to go in the group activities direction and making the world feel more alive.

Arrow312 · June 13

SkaiFaith wrote: »

Since a lot of players are solo and group activities are what's suffering, the upcoming rework of overland difficulty could make miracles: games in the style of elden ring and monster hunter are popular these days; ESO could take advantage of its massive quantity of content, like overland bosses and public dungeons, that when upgraded to a difficulty that pose a challenge could retain more players and make them interact with each other, helping everyone to go in the group activities direction and making the world feel more alive.

i know what you mean and for me personal the open world is just a joke. But on the other hand you have so many players crying that they must interact with other or this state of open world is to difficult for them. I have the feeling that the next step will go more to Solo play. I mean look what we got the last years companions, subclassing more and more time stealing solo events.

MISTFORMBZZZ · June 14

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

Pixiepumpkin · June 14

Part of the issue is a core aspect of the games design and that being that zones scale to level making older zones nearly as valuable as new zones for replay.

One one hand, this is a smart thing to do as it makes sure older content is still somewhat relevant.
On the other hand, it spreads out the player base more and more as the game gets larger making it harder for casual players to get warband quests done or anything that may require multiple players. It a double negative effect in that also makes the world feel dead wherever you are playing.

ESO has a lot of good things going for it, but it also has old design decisions that do not work so well for the game. Development over the past 10 years always feels to me like they have to work around past design decisions. It's always feels like "fake it till you make it" or "thow things at a wall and see what sticks". That is the impression I get anyway.

ADarklore · June 14

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

Rungar · June 14

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

i would wager they do, the content just isnt good enough to be worth it.

MISTFORMBZZZ · June 14

Rungar wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

i would wager they do, the content just isnt good enough to be worth it.

agree, they would if the content was good.

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

Its maybe time to understand this isnt skyrim 2.0
It‘s a multiplayer game.
If you decide to treat it like a single player game thats on you, but this does not appear for everyone.

Anilahation · June 14

I just havent got back into ESO after the content changes cause it is confusing so i see no reason to pull out my wallet for it.

Season pass
ESO+
no more buy chapter new class.

I don't understand what ESO is promising with its new content formula so I am just not interested. the only thing that interests me is the cross/class system but from my vague understanding i can't engage with the content unless I basically level up every skill line to max on a new character and the fact certain sites are showing that some classes should really just grab X or Y skill line it solidified my worried that the system wouldn't give more player agency but simply very blatant meta combinations.

JustLovely · June 14

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

i would wager they do, the content just isnt good enough to be worth it.

agree, they would if the content was good.

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

Its maybe time to understand this isnt skyrim 2.0
It‘s a multiplayer game.
If you decide to treat it like a single player game thats on you, but this does not appear for everyone.

At first I was horribly disappointed that ESO wasn't skyrim 2.0. But after about six months I got good enough to PvP and began to realize how exponentially better ESO is than skyrim specifically because it's an MMO with a heavy social side to the game. Now ZOS seems to want to essentially eliminate PvP as we knew it and U35 killed the end game PvE.

MISTFORMBZZZ · June 15

JustLovely wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

i would wager they do, the content just isnt good enough to be worth it.

agree, they would if the content was good.

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

Its maybe time to understand this isnt skyrim 2.0
It‘s a multiplayer game.
If you decide to treat it like a single player game thats on you, but this does not appear for everyone.

At first I was horribly disappointed that ESO wasn't skyrim 2.0. But after about six months I got good enough to PvP and began to realize how exponentially better ESO is than skyrim specifically because it's an MMO with a heavy social side to the game. Now ZOS seems to want to essentially eliminate PvP as we knew it and U35 killed the end game PvE.

The first two years of playing i thought it is skyrim but online and i was treating the game exactly like that. I didnt use any sets because i wasnt aware there were sets (there were no sets in skyrim), i just went for the better looking outfit, i was just questing, focusing on the story & i was mad when someone else killed the boss i was hitting for minutes with my low damage, because i wanted to kill them on my own.

Then i started battlegrounds wich were funny af, and to get better sets there started dungeons, trials, trading to get gold & later pvp in cyrodiil. I never had so much fun before in ESO.

I met some really nice friends, have a own sucessful guild now and can enjoy the game as its intended.

I respect people who want to treat this as a solo game, because i did the same thought in my case it was because i didnt knew better, never played a mmo before & skyrim was my first elderscrolls game.

But ESO is not a single player game and i know from my own history that the single player questers who play here and there are not the ones, who keep the game alive in terms of bringing cash, or contributing more then the multiplayers to the games economy.

Again this is not Skyrim and the game struggles a lot population wise. So i really hope zos does the step forward crossplay soon.

mrreow · June 15

Solution to shrinking population is to make changes that change eso from an OK MMO to good MMO.

The truth is that single player gamers looking for content in eso will never be satisfied because it has to be dumbed down severely for mmo. They will just play some mindnumbingly easy quests and take a break and repeat 4 times in a year or so.

The players who stay, the players who play every day, the players who pay, will always be the mmo aspect players that want solid group gameplay. Whether cooperative or competitive.

By cannibalizing group play for better singleplayer experience you just shoot yourself in the foot and see population shrinkage.

Because simply no MMO can compete against single player games and shouldn’t even try not at the cost of bread and butter

Cooperharley · June 15

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

I think it's both. I don't think it's one or the other personally.

fizzybeef · June 15

So great, in my guilds (ps eu) discord another player just announced he stops playing because its so empty and dead in the endgame content we are participating (pvp in greyhost, 2 bars max at prime time on a sunday). 👍👍👍👍 Great how the devs take care of their game.