peacenote wrote: »

Not to mention that many people who play video games are introverts and are legitimately shy or nervous getting into group content. I absolutely was, in my first MMO, and to this day I'll still find certain groups or activities intimidating, or find I don't have the energy on a specific day to interact in a group chat scenario, even though generally speaking I enjoy group play. I never would have stepped a virtual foot into an MMO if a friend hadn't brought me in, with much encouragement. But I'm so glad they did.

I think it's actually a pretty big responsibility of the devs, yes though ESO is a video game, to understand human behavior, and use that understanding to make content that is enjoyable by as many people as possible, while not using that understanding to manipulate people and feed into addictions, FOMO, etc. I think ethics belong everywhere, even in games.

Hey peacenote! Happy to see you join in on the conversation. I remember you from the AWA thread way back in update 33. You brought some much needed perspective to those talks when it came to different play styles, and I see you doing the same thing now. I'm going to grab bits and pieces of various posts from you that I found interesting. Apologies in advance for any confusion!

So, first of all-I have to say that I do agree with you to a certain extent. Encouragement is a great thing when it comes from friends. My playstyle shifted drastically after AWA was implemented due to the friends I made in Cyrodiil at the time. I went from a solo/mostly roleplayer to also being a PVP/PVE endgame player because they liked me and wanted to teach me what they knew. I'm grateful for that experience and how their encouragement bolstered me.

But I think encouragement tends to hit differently when it comes from a company. Some might feel as though ZOS is treating them like children who must be coaxed into changing their natural habits, even though they already know what they like and want to do in game. Where as the encouragement of a friend comes from a place of positivity, having it come from a company can feel like they’re trying to mold you into their ideal customer rather than necessarily having your best interests in mind. I’m not sure it actually results in people really enjoying the content. Rather, they feel pushed one way, then another, as the company pulls them back and fourth between different types of content. It doesn’t really let the player settle into their own rhythm.

peacenote wrote: »

So I'm really not sure why people are jumping straight to the "you must be holding an anti-solo'er sentiment" when the suggestion is that rewards should be different. I could kind of see them being the same rewards (maybe) if normal and vet dungeons dropped the same rewards, and if normal and vet trials dropped the same rewards... but they do not. If yet another "flavor" of a dungeon in addition to "normal, 1 - 4 players, scaled to a group" and "vet, 1 - 4 players, scaled to a group" is released, I should think that it, too, would have its own reward pool. I don't think I said it should necessarily be a lesser reward, but I did advocate that it is different than the other rewards from the other modes, so as not to detract from the value of running the other modes.

I’m a bit confused by that too. While I’m advocating for solo content, and am pretty excited for it, I actually want the rewards to be different. I’m definitely not anti-solo at all. I just think it would be interesting to have something else to strive for along side the storymode. Maybe even separate kinds of gear that cater to solo play styles. (And separate cosmetics/achievements, of course.)

Even so I do understand why they want some of the rewards to be the same. I empathize completely with wanting to do the content themselves. Ultimately, I wouldn’t mind if they did get those rewards through solo content. I’d just like something new as a reward. But that’s only because I have access to both modes. I realize they don’t.

peacenote wrote: »

I did want to be clear what I meant, and that what I was saying was that it is unfair to assume that all people who don't think solo dungeons should have identical rewards to their grouped mode are coming from a place of disparaging solo players or wanting to deny them good rewards or is assuming they are lazy or untalented... and that one of those players is me. :P

Sorry about that, I think I’m partially responsible for that perspective spreading due to a prior post. I definitely wasn’t directing that at -all- of those players, just those that felt that there should be no rewards whatsoever. The idea that there should be no reward at all seemed to come from a place of disdain for players who like storymode content. I've always respected you for being an advocate for multiple play styles, and I know you don't think that way.

peacenote wrote: »

I like getting achievements. I like cosmetics. If people are going to be given an environment scaled to being alone, difficulty-wise, that's one thing. But if we aren't allowed to enter with friends, even though we can quest with friends in almost every other way, ESPECIALLY if the content isn't hard or scored like arenas... that will irritate me greatly. I will not enjoy being forced to do something solo that a) technically I've done already, tons of times and b) is not NECESSARY to do alone, just to obtain those rewards and achievements. Now, if the solo dungeons are some kind of scored, challenging solo bragging rights environment, then I'd understand that they are more like mini-arenas... but if they turn out to be that, I feel like ZOS will have completely missed the boat on their audience.

Back when these ideas were first being discussed, I was actually hoping for various scaled levels of difficulty if story mode ever existed. I wanted them to make something with a lower difficulty for those who liked playing through the quests, while offering a scored challenge mode for endgamers. Infinite Archive sort of scratched that itch for most, so I suppose it would be redundant at this point. Still, I think it would be interesting to see for trials. With a different reward pool/achievements, of course.

I’d actually like to be able to play through entire quest lines again in a sort of Veteran mode, but that’s a different conversation entirely.

I really, really like solo challenges, so I’m in an odd position where I’m all for the RP mode, but would also like a separate, harder mode for myself that still gives that RP experience. (I can solo a lot of content, but certain mechanics and pressure plates keep me from going further)

Cooperharley wrote: »

Rewards need to match the difficulty of content.

Precisely. MHK and MoS are already soloable, so the solo changes will drop the difficulty. I am guessing at most the veteran solo mode is going to be barely a normal difficulty in group mode.

So if you veteran solo something that is easier than the originally easiest normal difficulty, should you get veteran rewards?

Cooperharley wrote: »

That's like saying if you do veteran vateshran, a solo arena, you should get delve rewards. If you are doing veteran difficult solo content, you absolutely should be rewarded as such.

No, VH is designed to be a solo arena. 4 player dungeons are designed to be for 4 players. To make them soloable, I am guessing they are lowering the difficulty a lot. Neither MHK or MoS have any mechanics that will stop a solo player, so it's not going to be anything like removal of two pressure plates you need to stand on simultaneously.

The changes to those two dungeons will be mostly less incoming damage and less boss health. Mechanics-wise, my guess is that in MHK the Golden Hedge Guardian will have fewer spriggans, and the end boss will have fewer enemies while having to stand in the coloured circles. And in MoS maybe the end boss hunt phase will be slightly easier. And this is me being optimistic. Realistically speaking, I doubt even the most difficult solo mode will be much more difficult than normal difficulty in group mode. They are taking an already soloable dungeons and making them easier to solo.

If you do vet Vateshran, and then they add "stroll in the park" mode to it, should players who complete Vateshran in "stroll in the park" mode get the same rewards as you? Even if we didn't call it "a stroll in the park" mode, but "difficult mode"?

Syldras wrote: »

JustLovely wrote: »

The arguments against solo mode are not weak. The only way solo/story mode doesn't break the game for players who play MMO's for grouping and socializing is if there are no rewards.

Do they want to group and socialize with people who don't want to group and socialize but only participate in dungeons for the rewards? Doesn't sound like fun to me.

Yeah, the issue with these arguments is that people saying solo dungeons will kill the game don't get that making people do group play doesn't enforce any kind of socialization either. I've been playing this game for ten years and 90% of the dungeons I'm in these days no one talks and everyone just charges the bosses. Half the time it causes the in combat glitch that then makes it impossible to use doors.

Solo dungeons would just be another way to enjoy the game. If you're forcing people to play groups when so many of them just run off silently anyway then you aren't forcing people to socialize, you're forcing them to skip dungeon experiences so sprinters have player mules to make it easier to skip everything.

It's just more of the "play MY way or you're killing the MMO." Come on.

Apollosipod wrote: »

Yeah, the issue with these arguments is that people saying solo dungeons will kill the game don't get that making people do group play doesn't enforce any kind of socialization either. I've been playing this game for ten years and 90% of the dungeons I'm in these days no one talks and everyone just charges the bosses. Half the time it causes the in combat glitch that then makes it impossible to use doors.

So, another element here is the game play Dungeons are designed for: learn through failure. That is what 'mechanics' are about. Often you need to learn how to coordinate in very specific circumstances. You cannot expect to turn up at a dungeon you have never played before and survive. Sometimes not even on Normal. My point is that by magnifying the impact of experience, both apprehension for new players and irritation for veterans is baked into the design.

Muizer wrote: »

Apollosipod wrote: »

Yeah, the issue with these arguments is that people saying solo dungeons will kill the game don't get that making people do group play doesn't enforce any kind of socialization either. I've been playing this game for ten years and 90% of the dungeons I'm in these days no one talks and everyone just charges the bosses. Half the time it causes the in combat glitch that then makes it impossible to use doors.

So, another element here is the game play Dungeons are designed for: learn through failure. That is what 'mechanics' are about. Often you need to learn how to coordinate in very specific circumstances. You cannot expect to turn up at a dungeon you have never played before and survive. Sometimes not even on Normal. My point is that by magnifying the impact of experience, both apprehension for new players and irritation for veterans is baked into the design.

Sure, in theory, but how often do you join a random group that hits a wall and people don't just leave? The design doesn't work because people don't have the patience. Typically players are going into bet dungeons with groups that actually communicate. Players aren't doing this with random groups. Additionally, half the time you want to do a specific dungeon through the group finder you may have to wait for hours and still never get it. All that does is breed frustration with players who might be after some lead, gear, or just want to play the story. Making them do that in groups doesn't force socializing or strategy, it just forces players out

robwolf666 wrote: »

This is certainly true of me, to the extent I even have problems in every day life interacting with people it's been so much of a problem. So it's a big factor in why I don't do Group content or PvP - even if was in such a scenario I would be saying nothing in the chat... that on top of the fact I simply don't like that kind of game content.
Games like Elder Scrolls - as in Skyrim etc - are a form of escapism for me, a way to not have to deal with people irl. Unhealthy maybe, unhelpful even, but it helps me relax. And it's also one of the biggest factors in why I want ESO to go more in the solo direction.
Even so, I genuinely can't think of any incentive ZOS could offer that would get me to play it.

Thank you for contributing to the discussion with your perspective. I mean it. And please don't get me wrong, I have no intention of being rude. But I think it's important to differenciate between introversion and social anxiety or socialphobia in discussions. It's possible that a person has both, but it's not automatically the case.

There is this huge misunderstanding that comes up all the time that introversion meant "being afraid of social interaction". For introverts where this is not the case, this always leads to annoying debates, because people then think if it's shyness or anxiety, it's possible - or even necessary - to heal it by confronting yourself with even more social stuff. Which is annoying to no end if there's just no "shyness" problem, but the intoverted person just has no interest in social interaction (in a game, beyond the interaction they have in their everyday work life anyway), or is literally already exhausted from it in their after work hours, so they really can't stand more of that.

As I wrote in an earlier post, introversion means "getting exhausted from social interaction" - while extraverted people are the opposite and gain energy from social interaction. Both are inborn personality types and not changeable. It's just how the brain works, and in case of introverts, nagging about "trying to be more social" only leads to one thing - even more exhaustion. The same way, extraverts will not be happy if they feel a strong need for social activity and you'd try to talk them out of that (with "rewards" to "encourage" them or not). That just doesn't normally happen because extraverts are the majority and society is largely designed for their disposition.

Blood_again wrote: »

Patterns may be stepped away from. Yes. And encouragement helps.

But why if people might be absolutely happy with these "patterns"?

Blood_again wrote: »

You said "I can check the achievement list and look what to do". The same way I can open the endeavors list and check what to do. Same? No? Achievement are the encouragement system too.
The differences between endeavors and achievements features aside the time factor are usually: less work, less reward and less variants to choose from.

I personally look at the achievement section of the UI as an informative list. I use it to look whether I have missed some content in a new zone (for example those random encounters, some boss in the open dungeons or delves, or how many style pages I still miss of one style) because there's no other list where I could see that. I don't care for achievement points at all (I have no clue how many I have), and I normally don't look at the "rewards" either.

Blood_again wrote: »

You should go and open endeavors in UI willingly the same way as achievements. Nobody toss it in your face (not like the leads for example).
So why do you demonize endeavors, but not achievements? People moaned about mounts or costumes behind the achievement way before the endeavors were implemented, you know.

Where have I "demonized" endeavors? I never used the word "endeavors" in this thread before. Let alone I never "demonized" anything here - I asked a question out of curiosity whether people generally feel the need for "encouragement" or not, to try out new things. Because for someone from my culture this seems unusual ("Do they really need help for that?", "Why would anyone want others to tell them what to do?"), but I'm aware that stances on this differ worldwide, so I wanted to know how people of other cultures or countries view this topic.

What I originally replied on, asking whether people truly wish for "encouragement", was this statement of yours, by the way:
"PvP has it, that too. Rewards like unlocking certain abilities that are useful in PvE and PvP that encourage PvE players to try PvP, just a little bit."
This is clearly funneling people into an activity they might not care for or even really dislike to get something completely unrelated.

peacenote wrote: »

I'm trying to explain that I think it is a good thing that different kinds of content in ESO give different kinds of rewards. I'm trying to say that this is true ALL OVER ESO, and I think ZOS should be consistent about this when they roll out solo dungeons. I don't expect to get tel var stones from a trial. I don't expect to farm trial gear from a fishing hole. So I'm really not sure why people are jumping straight to the "you must be holding an anti-solo'er sentiment" when the suggestion is that rewards should be different. I could kind of see them being the same rewards (maybe) if normal and vet dungeons dropped the same rewards, and if normal and vet trials dropped the same rewards... but they do not. If yet another "flavor" of a dungeon in addition to "normal, 1 - 4 players, scaled to a group" and "vet, 1 - 4 players, scaled to a group" is released, I should think that it, too, would have its own reward pool. I don't think I said it should necessarily be a lesser reward, but I did advocate that it is different than the other rewards from the other modes, so as not to detract from the value of running the other modes.

It wasn't about what you said regarding rewards. It's because people who like to solo get fed up of being told that forcing us to try group content and spread our wings will be a beautiful thing. For a few players, maybe, but a lot of us have been gaming for a long time. This isn't our first MMO rodeo. We know what we like and what we don't like, so it's annoying when other players think we're just cowering in a corner afraid to group, and if we would just try it, we'd love it. It was you pulling out the same tired, "But making people group encourages people to try new things," line that we've heard a million times already. If someone has never tried grouping before, tries it to get the shiny they want, and likes it, that's great. But for most soloers, been there, done that, tried it, have forced ourselves to do it, not interested, the end.

As to rewards, there are people in this thread arguing that the solo and story mode dungeons should receive NO REWARDS. That's what I'm arguing against, and I'm glad to hear you're not in that camp. However, as I've said before, if the solo mode doesn't drop the leads and have the lorebooks, it'll be useless to me. A huge frustration for those of us who prefer to solo is that we can't complete collections. We can't complete the lorebook library. We can't complete the antiquities codex. Not unless we group, which we don't like doing. And as far as leads go, it's horrible because you don't have to force yourself to run a dungeon with a pug just once. You might have to do it 50 times - PER LEAD. So as I said in an exchange with frogthroat, I'm fine with solo mode not dropping transmutes or the usual set pieces because then there will still be a reason to pug for those who care about those things. But if solo mode doesn't give soloers a way to complete the antiquities codex and pick up lorebooks, I'll wonder why ZOS bothered.

Anyway, I see you around a lot on the forums and I enjoy your posts..

Same. None of this is personal. We're just players who love the game and want to give all types of players a reason to stick around and play it. A healthy population is good for everyone. Those wanting to punish solo players by denying them rewards will only end up hurting themselves.

GloatingSwine wrote: »

Yeah, randomly matchmade dungeons are like the least likely place to get socialisation in the MMO, because most people in them are there to smash through to get their RND reward and just want to do that as fast as possible.

If you're extremely lucky you'll get a gg at the end.

For those cases I got macros in my keyboard to say:

hey : 3

and:

gg and bb ^-^

AzuraFan wrote: »

It's because people who like to solo get fed up of being told that forcing us to try group content and spread our wings will be a beautiful thing. For a few players, maybe, but a lot of us have been gaming for a long time. This isn't our first MMO rodeo. We know what we like and what we don't like, so it's annoying when other players think we're just cowering in a corner afraid to group, and if we would just try it, we'd love it. It was you pulling out the same tired, "But making people group encourages people to try new things," line that we've heard a million times already. If someone has never tried grouping before, tries it to get the shiny they want, and likes it, that's great. But for most soloers, been there, done that, tried it, have forced ourselves to do it, not interested, the end.

Honestly, I don't even get why there's this urge to "encourage" other people to try new things. For a video game studio it's clear - getting people to play more means more money and better engagement stats. But why do other people do it?

Real life example: I'm personally someone who travels to a different location every time I travel - except for if it's a city I visit because I have friends there, go there for a specific event or activity type that's only available there, or something close to my home anyway, of course. But if I travel far solely to see a place, a town, a landscape, I choose as many different locations as possible. Mostly not even the same country twice, but if so, then different regions at least. I want to experience as many different things as possible in this limited time we have for travelling in our lives, because I'm curious about this world and different cultures and traditions.

But: While I enjoy this a lot and couldn't imagine going to the same place every time, I don't know why I would be bothered about what choice other people make. It's their free time, their life, they can do what ever they want! It's not my business to interfere or give them any "advice". So if my neighbor travels to the same village in Southern France every year, why would I not just let him? If it makes him happy, why would I bother him about it?

AzuraFan wrote: »

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

Blood_again wrote: »

JustLovely wrote: »

The arguments against solo mode are not weak. The only way solo/story mode doesn't break the game for players who play MMO's for grouping and socializing is if there are no rewards.

If there are not the same rewards as in a group dungeon, but for less time or less work.
Fixed it for you.

Different rewards for solo and group modes make it totally OK.

No effort should lead to no rewards.

I assume then, that you'd support ZOS implementing a new rewards system for groups. If the DPS doesn't do a certain percentage of the total DPS of the group, no rewards. If the tank doesn't know how to tank, no rewards. If the healer sucks, no rewards. If someone lets themselves be carried, no rewards. If someone speedruns and skips trash mobs that others fight, no rewards. All group members would have to reach a certain threshold of effort to receive any rewards.

Those in solo dungeons would always receive rewards because they put in 100% of the effort.

You're not assuming. You're presenting a straw man argument.

There should be no rewards for story mode dungeons for sure. NOTHING. Some very minor reward for a solo dungeon might be ok, but it should be virtually nothing, and certainly not monster helms or anything else that can be gotten from group dungeons. Solo dungeons should drop overland gear, not dungeon specific gear.

Less effort should lead to smaller rewards. And no effort should result in no rewards. (story mode should not give any rewards)

Syldras wrote: »

Honestly, I don't even get why there's this urge to "encourage" other people to try new things. For a video game studio it's clear - getting people to play more means more money and better engagement stats. But why do other people do it?

I think for this situation specifically, i.e. players wanting to encourage people to group, it goes back to something discussed up-thread. It's not about wanting players to broaden their horizons. It's about wanting people to group with. Which is a reasonable desire for someone who enjoys grouping. Unfortunately, wanting to force people to group means they just want more bodies for their groups, whether those people want to be there or not. A better situation would be that they have people to group with and all those people want to be there. Then everyone in the group is doing something they enjoy, which is great when we're talking about a game.

I understand the fear that nobody will want to pug, which is why I think incentives need to remain for those who like to group to do the group dungeons. So I'm not advocating for identical rewards in both types of dungeons. But there should be rewards.

Pevey wrote: »

Ultimately, what's best for the game is whatever keeps more people playing it.

Exactly.

I think we should wait for more information on the rewards before getting all worried with doom and gloom.

The biggest thing hurting dungeon queues right now is the lack of people wanting to tank, I don't blame them. ZoS needs to come up with some ideas to make tanking more fun. Limiting "fun" builds aka Tormentor isn't a good start. I don't think there is much issue in normals, as a dps can basically tank those if they slot some mitigation and a taunt.

Orbital78 wrote: »

I think we should wait for more information on the rewards before getting all worried with doom and gloom.

The biggest thing hurting dungeon queues right now is the lack of people wanting to tank, I don't blame them. ZoS needs to come up with some ideas to make tanking more fun. Limiting "fun" builds aka Tormentor isn't a good start. I don't think there is much issue in normals, as a dps can basically tank those if they slot some mitigation and a taunt.

I think this is a good point. I'm sure there are lots of contributing factors, but for me personally, the main thing keeping me from wanting to tank more is the difficulty I have seeing what is going on amidst all the visual effects. I can't see the enemy I'm supposed to be tanking.

My eyes aren't the best in the world, but I also don't have any specific visual difficulties (at least none have ever shown up on an exam). I can only imagine what it's like for people with worse eyes.

An option to turn off these visual effects coming from other players might help. (Yes, I know about the addon that uses the bug. I'm talking about an in-game option, and one where you could still see your group members, just not all their special effects being directed toward the boss and making it impossible to see the timing of the boss's attacks.)

Addressing this and other reasons there are so few tanks would have far greater impact on the queue times. My guess is that people interested in story mode dungeons don't overlap much with people who are currently queuing as tanks, so I don't see story mode as harming queue time at all. If anything, it could improve it.

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

ESO is an MMO with group content being the end game activities.

The casual solo crowd just keep lobbying for changes that will make life much harder for those of us who play for the group content.

Solo and story modes discourage grouping, which is the opposite of what ZOS should do if they want to maintain a viable ESO going forward.

And I'm sick and tired of people trying to claim ESO is the latest edition of Elder Scrolls. It's not. ESO wasn't even created by the same studio that produces Elder Scrolls games. ESO is an MMO and grouping is a vital aspect of the game.

ESO already caters almost exclusively to the casual crowd and it's been very detrimental already. Just look at the exodus of players after U35 hit. U35 killed the end game trial community. But the casual solos don't care because it doesn't effect them. Yet the population continues to decline further and further the more ZOS caters to the casual solo players.

Trials and vet dungeons are a blast when they click. But let's be real: the vast majority of ESO players are solo or duo folks, not raid chasers. Reddit polls and threads consistently show 90%+ of content is soloable, and most players stick to overland, quests, or arenas with a buddy—group stuff is a small slice.

The real grouping killer? Hardcore guilds and PUGs kicking anyone under perfect DPS or mechanics.

Newbies and casuals get burned once, then nope out forever—sticking to solo where it's chill. That's why queues feel dead: the pool of potential groupers left awhile back because they were told they were "Bads"....ZOS catering to the solo/duo crowd keeps the 26M player base alive and growing.

More casuals = more funding for your trials. Win-win but honestly there has to be folks actually showing up for them and that has been a issue.