U47 Changes

Ragnarok0130 · July 11

Avalon wrote: »

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

Most accounts don’t last longer than six weeks. Those are Rich’s words.

And, just tossing ideas... any thoughts on 'why'?

I mean, the game has tons of content, really well-done content, fully voiced over, relatively good combat mechanics, and more.

So... why might new players only play 6 weeks? 6 weeks seems to be long enough to get into pretty deep gameplay... so... hmm, wonder... possibly unnecessarily complex combat methodology? Just a thought...

Excessive monetization and no-sub limitations can't help the retention. It's hard to convince people to stay let alone buy loot boxes if you can't use a crafting bag or do other basic things without a sub; I say this as a long time subscriber. If someone's first taste of a game isn't good they won't stay. There are obviously other factors like this is an MMO not Skyrim with friends so people may expect a TES game and find ESO doesn't scratch their need as an MMO.

AaronGuilder · July 11

fizzylu wrote: »

All I know is that I just read the patch notes and saw that my pure class build is getting beat hard with the nerf stick. I could only get some of the things I'm losing back by subclassing, which means I have even less interest in playing the game than I already did.

I partially agree.
We all knew subclassing was going to have a drastic effect on DPS and that everyone who made or used a subclass build was going to make a Nightblade/Arcanist/Templar DPS monster, and now that that has happened, the nerf stick is being waved, that was obvious, but what is wrong is that the builds a number of us use and enjoy because they are not subclassed for exciting trial content are also going to be struck with the nerf cannon.

I am not complaining that the subclassing has to be restricted/reworked and generally being brought back into line, but not at the death knell of the non sub classed characters.
The nerfs on most are negligible, but it will still affect my 'Templar' or my 'Nightblade' or my 'Arcanist'.
The changes should ony come into effect for the subclassing and because there are so many different sets available, they now look to penalise the major passives of a Class, instead of the mixed class ability/passives.

Will this stop me playing, no, of course it wont, but ZOS need to look at how subclassing has not improved the game, just muddied the waters and the ripples are now going to be felt throughout.

Avalon · July 11

fizzylu wrote: »

But we'll focus one here: WoW.

Using the prime example of 'most popular MMO'? Auto-fail. Try coming back with a generic MMO and show how THEY did these sorts of actions and succeeded in the long term. If you can't then, this is a BAD decision on the part of ZOS. Using the most popular, historically, MMO (which is for reasons NOT like what we are dealing with) then you are unfairly comparing.

Desiato wrote: »

Honestly, what can a casual player not do in u47 that they could do in u45?

Wrong comparison. Try:

What can a casual player do in U46 that they couldn't in U45. What can a casual player do in U47 that they couldn't do in U46. Don't skip just so it makes your argument. That is not a fair comparison. There is a flow. Casual players went from U45 to U46, from U46 to U47. They didn't just jump straight from U45 to U47.

Ragnarok0130 wrote: »

It's hard to convince people to stay let alone buy loot boxes if you can't use a crafting bag or do other basic things without a sub

Honestly, the craft bag itself is a huge reason to subscribe. I think way too many downplay the huge perceived necessity of that singular detail and bonus. Very much like Fallout 76 and the Scrap Stash. People sub JUST for that reason alone.

fizzylu · July 12

Avalon wrote: »

fizzylu wrote: »

But we'll focus one here: WoW.

Using the prime example of 'most popular MMO'? Auto-fail.

Let's see, what did I touch upon (although I doubt you even read what I wrote to begin with).

1. "MMOs as they age can't make everyone happy, all MMO forums are more negative."
FFXIV, GW2, RuneScape, BDO, Albion Online; those are all some examples of ageing MMOs that still relatively have positive forums or at least a more balanced amount of people liking and disliking implemented changes, and again, just less "hopeless" vibes.

2. "MMOs can't make fundamental changes that many players want because it costs too much or is simply impossible."
RuneScape, GW2, FFXIV, Albion Online are all examples of MMOs doing this. Mind you, while not the same as WoW, they have had an increase to cash shop items and/or an increase in sub charge (excluding FFXIV).... but they at least make changes, and of course QoL updates, that are deemed "unrealistic" to expect on these forums or by the devs themselves.

3. "Games don't ask people why they quit or are playing less."
RuneScape does surveys regularly. Albion Online does player surveys. Destiny 2 does surveys. FFXIV and RuneScape sub cancelation gives you options to explain why you are doing so just like WoW does, same with DCUO on some platforms/via ways of canceling your DCUO membership.

Avalon wrote: »

Try coming back with a generic MMO and show how THEY did these sorts of actions and succeeded in the long term. If you can't then, this is a BAD decision on the part of ZOS. Using the most popular, historically, MMO (which is for reasons NOT like what we are dealing with) then you are unfairly comparing.

So where is the unfair comparison? Especially considering ESO isn't even a "generic MMO" itself, sharing a title with one of the most successful RPG game series. And.... if WoW is doing all of these things (ESO does not do) and maintains a mostly positive forum community (ESO does not have), then clearly it all does help to make it "the most popular MMO"—unless you're just that deep into the "must cover for Zenimax and ESO" Kool Aid pitcher. I mean, seriously; you would think one would simply see it as ways Zenimax should be changing.... yet here we are instead trying to find more excuses for them, a common theme here I also don't ever see on other forums, by saying it's just so unfair. Although to actually be fair, I think it's too late at this point anyway.... but whatever, haha.
Also lets note: RuneScape, FFXIV, and Albion Online are mentioned in all three of the, what I will refer to as, "excuses categories" listed above. I didn't choose WoW because it was the only one doing the things ESO does not, I simply chose it since it's the most recognizable. And RuneScape is even a once upon a time browser game still kicking rather strongly and Albion Online IS a "generic MMO" the majority of people do not know about unless they really love MMOs and PvP.

gc0018 · July 12

90% casual players contribute ~5-30% of game income in MMO, therefore the rest of your reasoning means nothing to Zeni.

Avalon · July 12

fizzylu wrote: »

Avalon wrote: »

fizzylu wrote: »

But we'll focus one here: WoW.

Using the prime example of 'most popular MMO'? Auto-fail.

Let's see, what did I touch upon (although I doubt you even read what I wrote to begin with).

1. "MMOs as they age can't make everyone happy, all MMO forums are more negative."

2. "MMOs can't make fundamental changes that many players want because it costs too much or is simply impossible."

3. "Games don't ask people why they quit or are playing less."

You start by quoting my argument, then go on to utilize things I never said or agreed with, but point out the flaws with those comments as if I said them? I mean, I've seen straw men, but wow this is ridiculous. The people talking about forums being negative were others, my only mentions about costs are dealing with how Microsoft terminated a bunch of people and might affect things at ZOS (and not sure if I even mentioned THAT on this thread), and I don't think I ever said anything about games not asking players why they quit (only supposed potential answers based on amount of time they played).

I DID read your post(s)- however, based on this last one, I seriously doubt you are reading mine, OR you aren't paying attention to WHO is the person writing them, and if that- then you are simply reading to argue against. Very much like a person who isn't hearing what others say, only listening to respond, IE. waiting for silence and catching keywords to fuel an argument.

The problem is that creates scenarios like the one you just gave, where you give arguments that I actually have solidly agreed with, thus NOT being arguments against my stance, yet you seem to think they are, which shows you really aren't reading for comprehension, maybe not even paying attention to the 'who' for authors of the posts. A lot like dealing with Microsoft Support anymore, it's all AI, and all it ever does is look for keywords to respond with scripted comments. It never actually listens or comprehends- just replies.

Avalon · July 12

gc0018 wrote: »

90% casual players contribute ~5-30% of game income in MMO, therefore the rest of your reasoning means nothing to Zeni.

True... but, if you were a business, would you want to lose 30% of your revenue due to boneheaded decisions? That other 70%... it's there, and it's really gonna be there for a LONG time. Those players are invested. They've bought expensive condos and settled their families in that land. They're not going anywhere.

That 30%? They're fickle. They're not invested...they are a hair's breadth from jumping ship and heading to greener pastures. The changes ZOS is proposing will greatly worsen THEIR experiences in the game. That's not a good idea. Making them happier, even at the cost of a small % of the others' enjoyment? Helps secure that 30%, especially since all the 70% is going to do is complain and grumble, then go right back to trials and Cyrodiil.

fizzylu · July 12

Avalon wrote: »

fizzylu wrote: »

Avalon wrote: »

fizzylu wrote: »

But we'll focus one here: WoW.

Using the prime example of 'most popular MMO'? Auto-fail.

Let's see, what did I touch upon (although I doubt you even read what I wrote to begin with).

1. "MMOs as they age can't make everyone happy, all MMO forums are more negative."

2. "MMOs can't make fundamental changes that many players want because it costs too much or is simply impossible."

3. "Games don't ask people why they quit or are playing less."

You start by quoting my argument, then go on to utilize things I never said or agreed with, but point out the flaws with those comments as if I said them? I mean, I've seen straw men, but wow this is ridiculous. The people talking about forums being negative were others, my only mentions about costs are dealing with how Microsoft terminated a bunch of people and might affect things at ZOS (and not sure if I even mentioned THAT on this thread), and I don't think I ever said anything about games not asking players why they quit (only supposed potential answers based on amount of time they played).

I DID read your post(s)- however, based on this last one, I seriously doubt you are reading mine, OR you aren't paying attention to WHO is the person writing them, and if that- then you are simply reading to argue against. Very much like a person who isn't hearing what others say, only listening to respond, IE. waiting for silence and catching keywords to fuel an argument.

The problem is that creates scenarios like the one you just gave, where you give arguments that I actually have solidly agreed with, thus NOT being arguments against my stance, yet you seem to think they are, which shows you really aren't reading for comprehension, maybe not even paying attention to the 'who' for authors of the posts. A lot like dealing with Microsoft Support anymore, it's all AI, and all it ever does is look for keywords to respond with scripted comments. It never actually listens or comprehends- just replies.

What in the world are you talking about. My original post that you replied to was quoting DreamyLu and consisted of direct replies to what they were saying that covered the 1-3 you just quoted above. You replied to what I wrote about those three things, again, in response to what DreamyLu said, just dismissing whatever I wrote just because it was based on WoW. So, I replied back to you giving you other examples of older MMOs since clearly using the "most popular MMO" wasn't reasonable in your mind (which still makes no sense). So who is straw manning who here exactly? Not that I'll be replying to anything else you say from here on out because you really just outed yourself with that last reply anyway.

Also, nice way of avoiding facing the facts that Zenimax could be doing more to help maintain a happier and more satisfied playerbase.

Avalon · July 12

fizzylu wrote: »

Avalon wrote: »

fizzylu wrote: »

Avalon wrote: »

fizzylu wrote: »

But we'll focus one here: WoW.

Using the prime example of 'most popular MMO'? Auto-fail.

Let's see, what did I touch upon (although I doubt you even read what I wrote to begin with).

1. "MMOs as they age can't make everyone happy, all MMO forums are more negative."

2. "MMOs can't make fundamental changes that many players want because it costs too much or is simply impossible."

3. "Games don't ask people why they quit or are playing less."

You start by quoting my argument, then go on to utilize things I never said or agreed with, but point out the flaws with those comments as if I said them? I mean, I've seen straw men, but wow this is ridiculous. The people talking about forums being negative were others, my only mentions about costs are dealing with how Microsoft terminated a bunch of people and might affect things at ZOS (and not sure if I even mentioned THAT on this thread), and I don't think I ever said anything about games not asking players why they quit (only supposed potential answers based on amount of time they played).

I DID read your post(s)- however, based on this last one, I seriously doubt you are reading mine, OR you aren't paying attention to WHO is the person writing them, and if that- then you are simply reading to argue against. Very much like a person who isn't hearing what others say, only listening to respond, IE. waiting for silence and catching keywords to fuel an argument.

The problem is that creates scenarios like the one you just gave, where you give arguments that I actually have solidly agreed with, thus NOT being arguments against my stance, yet you seem to think they are, which shows you really aren't reading for comprehension, maybe not even paying attention to the 'who' for authors of the posts. A lot like dealing with Microsoft Support anymore, it's all AI, and all it ever does is look for keywords to respond with scripted comments. It never actually listens or comprehends- just replies.

What in the world are you talking about. My original post that you replied to was quoting DreamyLu and consisted of direct replies to what they were saying that covered the 1-3 you just quoted above. You replied to what I wrote about those three things, again, in response to what DreamyLu said, just dismissing whatever I wrote just because it was based on WoW. So, I replied back to you giving you other examples of older MMOs since clearly using the "most popular MMO" wasn't reasonable in your mind (which still makes no sense). So who is straw manning who here exactly? Not that I'll be replying to anything else you say from here on out because you really just outed yourself with that last reply anyway.

Maybe learn how to do quotes from multiple people in a single reply? You obviously know how to quote ME multiple times... so, why not grab the quotes from the other person to make things clear as to what you are talking about? Not complicated. Instead, by quoting me twice in that one reply, it makes it look like you are quoting ME in the references as well.