Suggestions for next time we have an event like this

Hugie · October 30

Let me start by saying: kudos to ZoS for trying something new. I can appreciate that a lot of work went into making the Writhing Wall event happen, and I think the concept of a cross-server competition has a lot of potential.

In my opinion, though, the event has fallen short of delivering on the hype for several glaring reasons. Here is some feedback about what I perceive to be issues & some ideas that I think could help future events like this one be more positively received.

Problems:

Lack of meaningful rewards. Rewards in ESO are anemic across the board, but they're especially insulting in this event. I really hope the new leadership team will take a hard look at this topic heading into ESO's next decade. Compared to other games, ESO simply doesn't reward investment in the gameplay loops that players are expected to engage with. Dopamine hits are weekly at best instead of hourly. With regard to this event, the non-gold coffers are, simply put, garbage. Overland gear is not exciting. Plunder worth <5k gold is not exciting. I don't expect this complaint to effect change, but I really hope someone at ZoS cares enough to audit rewards in this game and realize that if players don't feel their time is valued, they will leave.
Lack of urgency. The cross-server competition proceeds at a snail's pace. The camps are glorified dolmens; there are no repercussions to winning or "losing". I understand that there is likely a "need" internally to manufacture some longevity into this event/content -- there usually is in MMOs -- but a competition designed to feel like a race is not the place for that. When I log in and do a dozen event dailies, I don't see or feel any discernible difference vs. doing 3 dailies for gold coffers. The progress bar for the server doesn't budge either way; my contribution is far too small to matter given the scale involved. That's a problem, because the rewards for the event activities suck, which means I'm unlikely to engage with the event more than the bare minimum. To me, that suggests poor game design. If I don't feel like my contribution matters AND I don't feel like my contribution yields worthwhile rewards... why should I keep playing beyond habit?

---

Suggestions:

Reward the grind with recognition. Next time, relax limits on contributions per day. Let the grinders grind (and make continued grinding rewarding!). But beyond giving grinders merely something to occupy their time with, give them recognition, too. This event absolutely should have shipped with a Leaderboard to spotlight top contributors, with unique rewards dangled as incentives for the top X contributors per phase per server.
Make it a sprint, not a marathon. Next time, lean harder into the race concept. We had plenty of forewarning that this event was happening as players, and plenty of time to get hyped about it and to ensure we were free to participate. Each phase should be taking a week -- not three! Compressing the timeline makes progress and participation feel more meaningful at an individual and at a server level. It also creates FOMO, which is a critical ingredient in successful MMO design (despite the chorus of casual players who resent it). FOMO IS GOOD. FOMO makes people play your game instead of other games. The only piece of FOMO in this event is the Wall Breaker title, which I think is a fine yet tiny step in the right direction.
Don't doctor the numbers. I understand that certain servers have dramatically higher populations than others, and that the thresholds for participation/progress are adjusted accordingly for fairness and practicality. Well... races aren't fair. Races are about winning. Moreover, the fact that ZoS has seen the need to tweak progress #s along the way to calibrate for desired end date undermines the entire point of the competition. Next time, instead of asking console to jump over a 1' obstacle and PC to jump over a 5' one, consider letting the more populated servers reap the benefits from their numerical advantage & the less populated server enjoyers deal with consequences of playing an online game on a low-populated platform. What's the point of a race if each server is artificially positioned to run vastly different distances? It becomes contrived and meaningless.

TLDR: please, give players a reason to engage with the content you work so hard to design. ESO is a beloved game with so many players who want a reason to keep coming back. Whether it's recognition through event-centric leaderboards (pride, envy), shinier, exclusive rewards (pride, greed), or simply leaning harder into FOMO, there are so many ways to make MMO players feel like the game is "worth playing."

Jinazai · October 30

Atm im just waiting for that arbitrary % to hit 100 so i can play the game i payed for.
Not exactly thrilling.

kargen27 · October 30

Jinazai wrote: »

Atm im just waiting for that arbitrary % to hit 100 so i can play the game i payed for.
Not exactly thrilling.

Knocking down the wall is a part of the game you paid for.

Jinazai · October 30

kargen27 wrote: »

Jinazai wrote: »

Atm im just waiting for that arbitrary % to hit 100 so i can play the game i payed for.
Not exactly thrilling.

Knocking down the wall is a part of the game you paid for.

My giving them money is not a fact that makes it exciting to do something objectivly boring.

aussie500 · October 30

Reward us for completing each stage, then we might actually get more enthusiastic, like a real reward, not just unlocking at the end of the event something we already paid for.

colossalvoids · October 30

aussie500 wrote: »

Reward us for completing each stage, then we might actually get more enthusiastic, like a real reward, not just unlocking at the end of the event something we already paid for.

Still would require an actually open competition, with clearly set goal and leaderboard that's open for everyone to see, and not a vague percentage meter without any indication of actual player made progress.

Onomos · October 30

Thanks to this excessively tedious and unrewarding grind with no hope of completion in sight, I have decided to join the Worm Cult. Maybe that will grant me access to the area I paid for and downloaded but can't access because of some arbitrary corporate decision.

Renato90085 · October 30

Well done. dont do it again next time...

lostineternity · October 30

You forgot about one very very exciting reward Coldharbour Surreal Estate (the house that was in the game for ages, to be clear 8 years, you can buy it anytime for 1 mil. gold).
Yeah it's a reward and probably valuable but you can't avoid allegations of over the top usage of recycled content for this event.
I mean if you marketing this event as a huge and unique thing, maybe you should create unique and not so easy accessible reward for that purpose?
Another issue is a lot (I mean really a lot) of dedicated players already have this house and what compensation did they get? Maybe something valuable and exciting?
Yeah, right, 10k gold compensation... How exciting...

Barovia87 · October 30

Being explicitly told on PC servers that ZoS was going to hobble us a ton compared to everyone else really took the wind out of everybody's sails, IMO.

Like... it doesn't feel good to be forced into a race while also being publicly singled out to carry a bag of rocks. People are demoralized and bitter over here on PCNA. People feel misled, even ripped off if they bought the Season Pass.

It's not great, y'all. Anyone with an ounce of common sense could have seen this coming a mile away. People have been paid to be this inept, it's wild. This whole event has been so poorly managed, so poorly thought through, so riddled with bugs.

This is the first time since Beta I've genuinely wondered if this is the nail in the proverbial coffin. I'm not actually sure if ESO is going to recover from the perceived naked greed of the Season Pass debacle, combined with the near-universal negative press of this Once in a Lifetime(!) event they heavily promoted the aforementioned dubious Season Pass model under.

Even exodus events in the past - like U35 - didn't violate the Golden Rule. Namely: don't tick off the casuals.

Love 'em or hate 'em: casuals keep this game breathing when the more fickle hardcore gamer crowd has moved on to greener pastures.

It's hard to understand how they borked it all this badly. A hint of common sense sprinkled over the blatant late-stage Capitalism here would've gone a long way.

Edit: a word

Mathius_Mordred · October 30

If the progress counter had ten decimal places, then perhaps you'd be able to see your contribution at 0.00000001%

Treeshka · October 30

I totally agree that we need leaderboard for these sort of events.
Then when event concludes, or phases conclude. One should get extra rewards based on their contribution. Lets say different tiers for contribution.
For example you are at top %10 and you will get something. Top %50 gets less of the same reward etc.

alternatelder · October 30

The only suggestion is for them not to do an event like this ever again.

Hugie · October 30

Treeshka wrote: »

I totally agree that we need leaderboard for these sort of events.
Then when event concludes, or phases conclude. One should get extra rewards based on their contribution. Lets say different tiers for contribution.
For example you are at top %10 and you will get something. Top %50 gets less of the same reward etc.

Yup! Wouldn't have taken much to incentivize much higher levels of continued participation and excitement, and players already understand such a system from existing weekly trial / monthly cyrodiil rewards. Missed opportunity.

tomofhyrule · October 30

Hugie wrote: »

Suggestions for next time we have an event like this

Don't.

That's it. Don't do this kind of thing ever again.

Veinblood1965 · October 30

lostineternity wrote: »

You forgot about one very very exciting reward Coldharbour Surreal Estate (the house that was in the game for ages, to be clear 8 years, you can buy it anytime for 1 mil. gold).
Yeah it's a reward and probably valuable but you can't avoid allegations of over the top usage of recycled content for this event.
I mean if you marketing this event as a huge and unique thing, maybe you should create unique and not so easy accessible reward for that purpose?
Another issue is a lot (I mean really a lot) of dedicated players already have this house and what compensation did they get? Maybe something valuable and exciting?
Yeah, right, 10k gold compensation... How exciting...

Lol, I wonder who came up with the 10k reward? I mean you are fleshing out what rewards to give and someone comes up with giving the ColdHarbor home. BUT for those that already have it, I have an idea, let's give them 10k gold. I said it in another post, it really feels like people are being enticed to leave the game. It's a lack of respect for customers is what it is and that usually only ends up one way. Out of business.

DenverRalphy · October 30

Barovia87 wrote: »

Being explicitly told on PC servers that ZoS was going to hobble us a ton compared to everyone else really took the wind out of everybody's sails, IMO.

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?

The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

spartaxoxo · October 30

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Barovia87 wrote: »

Being explicitly told on PC servers that ZoS was going to hobble us a ton compared to everyone else really took the wind out of everybody's sails, IMO.

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?

The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

While this is true, there may have been some issues in how ZOS estimated how many would be active. They may have given an overly generous handicap to XBOX EU, for example.

Yet, I suspect this event landed better with more casual users than more core ones. I'm using casual in this case for the types of activities they enjoy vs playtime. I know in the past the devs have talked about how console is significantly more casual in its playtime and how that shaped the development of the game.

That’s the thing about an online game. It’s alive, in a sense. It’s in a dialogue with players, who are often more than happy to tell game makers what they like and what they don’t. And the creators of ESO were listening and changing. Those changes altered the core of how players on every platform would experience the game, and they were inspired, in part, by watching console players.

“When traditional MMOs add new content, typically it was only if you completed all the other content could you actually go into the new content,” Firor said. “And so we had these two diametrically opposed philosophies.”

Some people thought they should cater to hardcore fans, while others thought that it was better to cast a wider net.

“ESO on console,” he said, “was veering much more towards the ‘just log in and play and have fun world’ and veering away from the traditional MMO model. So we thought long and hard about that. And that’s why our first big expansion, DLC—whatever you want to call it—Orsinium, was not level-based. You could just go in and play no matter what level you were. Because we knew it was great content, we wanted lower-level players to be able to go in and have fun. But we wanted max-level players to go in and continue their journey. And so we just made level scaling work in that zone, and then suddenly everyone could play together. And it was probably the best decision we made in the game up to that point, because then we realized, ‘Oh, my God, level scaling is the way to go, because it makes the game much more social.’”

DenverRalphy · October 30

spartaxoxo wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Barovia87 wrote: »

Being explicitly told on PC servers that ZoS was going to hobble us a ton compared to everyone else really took the wind out of everybody's sails, IMO.

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?

The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

While this is true, there may have been some issues in how ZOS estimated how many would be active. They may have given an overly generous handicap to XBOX EU, for example.

Yeah, I suspect this event landed better with more casual users than more core ones. I'm using casual in this case for the types of activities they enjoy vs playtime. I know in the past the devs have talked about how console is significantly more casual in its playtime and how that shaped the development of the game.

That’s the thing about an online game. It’s alive, in a sense. It’s in a dialogue with players, who are often more than happy to tell game makers what they like and what they don’t. And the creators of ESO were listening and changing. Those changes altered the core of how players on every platform would experience the game, and they were inspired, in part, by watching console players.

“When traditional MMOs add new content, typically it was only if you completed all the other content could you actually go into the new content,” Firor said. “And so we had these two diametrically opposed philosophies.”

Some people thought they should cater to hardcore fans, while others thought that it was better to cast a wider net.

“ESO on console,” he said, “was veering much more towards the ‘just log in and play and have fun world’ and veering away from the traditional MMO model. So we thought long and hard about that. And that’s why our first big expansion, DLC—whatever you want to call it—Orsinium, was not level-based. You could just go in and play no matter what level you were. Because we knew it was great content, we wanted lower-level players to be able to go in and have fun. But we wanted max-level players to go in and continue their journey. And so we just made level scaling work in that zone, and then suddenly everyone could play together. And it was probably the best decision we made in the game up to that point, because then we realized, ‘Oh, my God, level scaling is the way to go, because it makes the game much more social.’”

They didn't give out individual handicaps though. It's based on the average active population of each server. So if all servers fielded the exact same percentage of their active population doing the exact same number of daily quests per player, then they should all finish at the same time. That's the theory anyway.

Now if one server has an overabundant number of players who do little more than ogin, do the bare minimum to collect their daily rewards, and logout. Well that's on the players themselves. Not really on ZOS.

Take PSNA for example.. started strong, then faltered a bit for about a week. Last couple of days the playerbase seemed to kick it into gear and give it more effort. One thing I'm seeing a lot of on PSNA now, are characters constantly leveling up at the questgivers in the fellowship camp. Which to me shows that more players are breaking out their lowbies, or creating new characters, to push that bar. And the results are starting to show.

Syldras · October 30

DenverRalphy wrote: »

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?
The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

If metrics were set fairly, how probably would it be that, within the same timespan, one server would gain 12% and the other only 4%? Shouldn't differences be much smaller? It's looks like things were miscalculated.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Yet, I suspect this event landed better with more casual users than more core ones. I'm using casual in this case for the types of activities they enjoy vs playtime. I know in the past the devs have talked about how console is significantly more casual in its playtime and how that shaped the development of the game.

I'm not sure if anyone enjoys doing the same fetch and crafting quests every day for reward boxes that contain nothing useful.

Even for people who play this game like a singleplayer game or just to hang around in Tamriel, these quests have nothing interesting to them, I'd think. The (rather limited) background lore and dialogues might be okay the first time, but after that they're also not interesting anymore. Then it's just crafting things or tediously searching for what ever you're supposed to fetch, for barely any good reward in return.

DenverRalphy · October 30

Syldras wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?
The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

If metrics were set fairly, how probably would it be that, within the same timespan, one server would gain 12% and the other only 4%? Shouldn't differences be much smaller? It's looks like things were miscalculated.

My guess? PC players resting on their laurels cuz "We da bomb! We gotz the most players. Nobody can beatz us! Let's all take a nap, wake us when it's done."

Classic tortoise and the hare.

spartaxoxo · October 30

DenverRalphy wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Barovia87 wrote: »

Being explicitly told on PC servers that ZoS was going to hobble us a ton compared to everyone else really took the wind out of everybody's sails, IMO.

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?

The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

While this is true, there may have been some issues in how ZOS estimated how many would be active. They may have given an overly generous handicap to XBOX EU, for example.

Yeah, I suspect this event landed better with more casual users than more core ones. I'm using casual in this case for the types of activities they enjoy vs playtime. I know in the past the devs have talked about how console is significantly more casual in its playtime and how that shaped the development of the game.

That’s the thing about an online game. It’s alive, in a sense. It’s in a dialogue with players, who are often more than happy to tell game makers what they like and what they don’t. And the creators of ESO were listening and changing. Those changes altered the core of how players on every platform would experience the game, and they were inspired, in part, by watching console players.

“When traditional MMOs add new content, typically it was only if you completed all the other content could you actually go into the new content,” Firor said. “And so we had these two diametrically opposed philosophies.”

Some people thought they should cater to hardcore fans, while others thought that it was better to cast a wider net.

“ESO on console,” he said, “was veering much more towards the ‘just log in and play and have fun world’ and veering away from the traditional MMO model. So we thought long and hard about that. And that’s why our first big expansion, DLC—whatever you want to call it—Orsinium, was not level-based. You could just go in and play no matter what level you were. Because we knew it was great content, we wanted lower-level players to be able to go in and have fun. But we wanted max-level players to go in and continue their journey. And so we just made level scaling work in that zone, and then suddenly everyone could play together. And it was probably the best decision we made in the game up to that point, because then we realized, ‘Oh, my God, level scaling is the way to go, because it makes the game much more social.’”

They didn't give out individual handicaps though. It's based on the average active population of each server. So if all servers fielded the exact same percentage of their active population doing the exact same number of daily quests per player, then they should all finish at the same time. That's the theory anyway.

Now if one server has an overabundant number of players who do little more than ogin, do the bare minimum to collect their daily rewards, and logout. Well that's on the players themselves. Not really on ZOS.

Take PSNA for example.. started strong, then faltered a bit for about a week. Last couple of days the playerbase seemed to kick it into gear and give it more effort. One thing I'm seeing a lot of on PSNA now, are characters constantly leveling up at the questgivers in the fellowship camp. Which to me shows that more players are breaking out their lowbies, or creating new characters, to push that bar. And the results are starting to show.

Yeah that's true. I have noticed the same uptick on PSNA. I do wonder if it's calculated correctly though when the difference is so dramatic between XBOX EU and everyone else. I do also wonder if some of it has to do with the devs thinking they were a long shot iirc. That kind of thing can definitely stir people into action.

spartaxoxo · October 30

Syldras wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?
The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

If metrics were set fairly, how probably would it be that, within the same timespan, one server would gain 12% and the other only 4%? Shouldn't differences be much smaller? It's looks like things were miscalculated.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Yet, I suspect this event landed better with more casual users than more core ones. I'm using casual in this case for the types of activities they enjoy vs playtime. I know in the past the devs have talked about how console is significantly more casual in its playtime and how that shaped the development of the game.

I'm not sure if anyone enjoys doing the same fetch and crafting quests every day for reward boxes that contain nothing useful.

Even for people who play this game like a singleplayer game or just to hang around in Tamriel, these quests have nothing interesting to them, I'd think. The (rather limited) background lore and dialogues might be okay the first time, but after that they're also not interesting anymore. Then it's just crafting things or tediously searching for what ever you're supposed to fetch, for barely any good reward in return.

I would assume someone has to enjoy it because so many games have grind. But, it's not me or mine so idk.

tomofhyrule · October 30

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?
The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

If metrics were set fairly, how probably would it be that, within the same timespan, one server would gain 12% and the other only 4%? Shouldn't differences be much smaller? It's looks like things were miscalculated.

My guess? PC players resting on their laurels cuz "We da bomb! We gotz the most players. Nobody can beatz us! Let's all take a nap, wake us when it's done."

Classic tortoise and the hare.

And yet there wasn’t a flurry of activity when people realized that was the case. In fact, it’s been pretty steady since the last “readjustment” even though PC saw how far behind they were and the number of people who were going hard on the “let me do all dailies on all 20 characters across my 3 accounts!” thing.

Or - hear me out - it’s contrived.

ZOS’ plan for this “server competition” really is dividing people, which I guess was the goal?

DenverRalphy · October 30

spartaxoxo wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Barovia87 wrote: »

Being explicitly told on PC servers that ZoS was going to hobble us a ton compared to everyone else really took the wind out of everybody's sails, IMO.

How exactly were the PC servers hobbled?

The metrics are setup based on active population on each server. If the PC servers have a lower percentage of their active population working to push the progress bar, how is that on ZOS?

While this is true, there may have been some issues in how ZOS estimated how many would be active. They may have given an overly generous handicap to XBOX EU, for example.

Yeah, I suspect this event landed better with more casual users than more core ones. I'm using casual in this case for the types of activities they enjoy vs playtime. I know in the past the devs have talked about how console is significantly more casual in its playtime and how that shaped the development of the game.

That’s the thing about an online game. It’s alive, in a sense. It’s in a dialogue with players, who are often more than happy to tell game makers what they like and what they don’t. And the creators of ESO were listening and changing. Those changes altered the core of how players on every platform would experience the game, and they were inspired, in part, by watching console players.

“When traditional MMOs add new content, typically it was only if you completed all the other content could you actually go into the new content,” Firor said. “And so we had these two diametrically opposed philosophies.”

Some people thought they should cater to hardcore fans, while others thought that it was better to cast a wider net.

“ESO on console,” he said, “was veering much more towards the ‘just log in and play and have fun world’ and veering away from the traditional MMO model. So we thought long and hard about that. And that’s why our first big expansion, DLC—whatever you want to call it—Orsinium, was not level-based. You could just go in and play no matter what level you were. Because we knew it was great content, we wanted lower-level players to be able to go in and have fun. But we wanted max-level players to go in and continue their journey. And so we just made level scaling work in that zone, and then suddenly everyone could play together. And it was probably the best decision we made in the game up to that point, because then we realized, ‘Oh, my God, level scaling is the way to go, because it makes the game much more social.’”

They didn't give out individual handicaps though. It's based on the average active population of each server. So if all servers fielded the exact same percentage of their active population doing the exact same number of daily quests per player, then they should all finish at the same time. That's the theory anyway.

Now if one server has an overabundant number of players who do little more than ogin, do the bare minimum to collect their daily rewards, and logout. Well that's on the players themselves. Not really on ZOS.

Take PSNA for example.. started strong, then faltered a bit for about a week. Last couple of days the playerbase seemed to kick it into gear and give it more effort. One thing I'm seeing a lot of on PSNA now, are characters constantly leveling up at the questgivers in the fellowship camp. Which to me shows that more players are breaking out their lowbies, or creating new characters, to push that bar. And the results are starting to show.

Yeah that's true. I have noticed the same uptick on PSNA. I do wonder if it's calculated correctly though when the difference is so dramatic between XBOX EU and everyone else. I do also wonder if some of it has to do with the devs thinking they were a long shot iirc. That kind of thing can definitely stir people into action.

I've heard from more than a few Xbox players who said that their mindset from the get go was to make sure they get to phase 3 as quick as possible so that it can start the moment U48 lands on consoles.

Syldras · October 30

DenverRalphy wrote: »

My guess? PC players resting on their laurels cuz "We da bomb! We gotz the most players. Nobody can beatz us! Let's all take a nap, wake us when it's done."
Classic tortoise and the hare.

I play on PC and know lots of other people who do, and no one of them has this attitude. It honestly feels completely outlandish to me to think people care for what system they use - or even about this competition no one asked for.

Generally I find it a rather strange belief that people had fundamentally different mindsets or ideas based on something as arbitrary as which console or pc they might use or whether they live on the East or the West of an ocean. In the end, the system and server people use will mostly depend on what they have available and what fits their time zone best. I'd expect there to be roughly the same amount of people who like to grind or don't like to grind, who enjoy competitions or not, who are lazy or diligent. That's why I'd expect that percentages should increase about the same (with tiny differences, maybe 1-3% - not one server only reaching a third of what another has reached within the same time) - if everything had been calculated correctly.

Of course we can have pointless debates now. There's no way we can prove anything as not even the numbers of the counters are transparent. A percentage says nothing if there is no hint on how it is calculated. And spontanously "adjusting" the percantages at will makes it even worse.

Islyn · October 30

Jinazai wrote: »

Atm im just waiting for that arbitrary % to hit 100 so i can play the game i payed for.
Not exactly thrilling.

This! I literally hate it - and if I'd known.....

Islyn · October 30

Syldras wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

My guess? PC players resting on their laurels cuz "We da bomb! We gotz the most players. Nobody can beatz us! Let's all take a nap, wake us when it's done."
Classic tortoise and the hare.

I play on PC and know lots of other people who do, and no one of them has this attitude. It honestly feels completely outlandish to me to think people care for what system they use - or even about this competition no one asked for.

Generally I find it a rather strange belief that people had fundamentally different mindsets or ideas based on something as arbitrary as which console or pc they might use or whether they live on the East or the West of an ocean. In the end, the system and server people use will mostly depend on what they have available and what fits their time zone best. I'd expect there to be roughly the same amount of people who like to grind or don't like to grind, who enjoy competitions or not, who are lazy or diligent. That's why I'd expect that percentages should increase about the same (with tiny differences, maybe 1-3% - not one server only reaching a third of what another has reached within the same time) - if everything had been calculated correctly.

Of course we can have pointless debates now. There's no way we can prove anything as not even the numbers of the counters are transparent. A percentage says nothing if there is no hint on how it is calculated. And spontanously "adjusting" the percantages at will makes it even worse.

I agree - that poster often has IMO ridiculous takes on things. BUT: I am only doing the 3 gold boxes daily b/c I hate this event thoroughly, and play like it's not eve happening. I have limited spare time and I'm just not interested in this event or its rewards.

Syldras · October 30

Islyn wrote: »

I am only doing the 3 gold boxes daily b/c I hate this event thoroughly, and play like it's not eve happening. I have limited spare time and I'm just not interested in this event or its rewards.

Same. And I believe many players think like this, no matter whether they play on EU or US, and on pc or console. I don't think there are big mindset differences depending on server; some people grind, others find the whole event to be nonsense. The percentages should be about the same everywhere.

warich · October 30

These are some great ideas and valid criticisms, thank you Hugie.

I personally found myself unmotivated to continue playing in the event after I unlocked the golden pursuit mount within the first couple days. It was monotonous and with very little reward or variation made for a situation that prompted me to log off and just go play another game instead.

wolfie1.0. · October 30

The problem with races is that for them to work you need clear and defined metrics, rules, objectives, and a way to measure individual performance, incentive, and a time limit.

This event lacks all of that.

What should have happened:
All servers given same goals and targets expressed in actual numbers. Not in %'s

All content should have been ready and made avaliable prior to starting the event. That consoles have to wait till an update for phase 3 shouldnt even be a thing.

Each participant should have a way to gauge their own participation. Players need to feel like contributing matters.

If the event is going to be truly unique then unique rewards should be available for the event. And I mean truly unique. Not a reskinned mount. But something different, or just more.

There needs to be better testing. Honestly, there does. A one off event needs to just work and not have bugs, or even the perception of bugs. Its the type of thing that if its not ready, then delay it. Push it back.