MMO does NOT mean Grouping

Paramedicus · 12:55AM

SilverBride wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There are PvPers that only PvP. And that is fine because they are playing how they want to play.

Do you think they should ask ZOS to enable PvP in the Overland?

That is a completely different topic that has no bearing on this discussion.

The purpose of this question was to show that:

the interests of different groups of players may conflict
it is a bit selfish for a group that receives 90% of the game's content to want 100%

Warhawke_80 · 2:59AM

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There are PvPers that only PvP. And that is fine because they are playing how they want to play.

Do you think they should ask ZOS to enable PvP in the Overland?

That is a completely different topic that has no bearing on this discussion.

The purpose of this question was to show that:
the interests of different groups of players may conflict

it is a bit selfish for a group that receives 90% of the game's content to want 100%

Nobody is asking for 100% of everything to revolve around one playstyle. In most games, the real friction tends to come from a small group of highly competitive players who sometimes act as though their way is the only valid way to enjoy the game. Solo and casual players usually just want to experience the game on their own terms, quietly progressing without much fanfare.

They aren't looking for constant praise or special treatment—they simply want reasonable space to enjoy what they paid for, and most are actually quite easy to satisfy when their preferences aren't dismissed or overridden.

Paramedicus · 3:57AM

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There are PvPers that only PvP. And that is fine because they are playing how they want to play.

Do you think they should ask ZOS to enable PvP in the Overland?

That is a completely different topic that has no bearing on this discussion.

The purpose of this question was to show that:
the interests of different groups of players may conflict

it is a bit selfish for a group that receives 90% of the game's content to want 100%

Nobody is asking for 100% of everything to revolve around one playstyle. In most games, the real friction tends to come from a small group of highly competitive players who sometimes act as though their way is the only valid way to enjoy the game. Solo and casual players usually just want to experience the game on their own terms, quietly progressing without much fanfare.

They aren't looking for constant praise or special treatment—they simply want reasonable space to enjoy what they paid for, and most are actually quite easy to satisfy when their preferences aren't dismissed or overridden.

My experience with ESO is quite different. Just read the feedback for the night market, where solo players ask (demand?) for this somewhat challenging content to be nerfed. There is a constant expectation that everything will be easy to beat in semi-AFK mode (isn't the Overland difficulty the best proof of this?). And of course, it's true that you'll encounter overzealous players who will nitpick your build that does 10% less damage than the meta, but if you're contributing 20% of what other players can do, you shouldn't be surprised to be called out on it.

You'll see far more players who don't know how to play the game and have the attitude that everyone should conform to their expectations because “they can play however they want”, than those annoying elitists (I think most of them left the game a while ago). I truly believe that the reason ZOS doesn't add any challenge to the story content (or at least better tutorials with skill checks) is because they are scared poopless of this very vocal causal part of community. Of course, this may be completely untrue, but you know, you kinda want to believe that there is a reason why ZOS keeps players so clueless, and that it's not just negligence.

cyberjanet · 7:09AM

You know, it takes a lot of time to enjoy a good story. There are bits you miss the first time. I'm sure many of you rewatch films you enjoy. I originally made a second character to pick up bits of the quests I never got in the first playthrough.

Quite frankly, if you're rushing through a dungeon at top speed, skipping the side and secret bosses, and the chests and heavy sacks, to get to your transmute crystals at the end, you're not even playing the game. I still have no idea what I'm even doing in Castle Thorn, how did I get there and what right do I have to be there to take her stuff, kill her staff and then get rid of her. And why does she suddenly want blood, I thought she was a void vampire.

Did anyone else even notice they just took out a whole bit of story in Spindleclutch, years ago?

So story mode dungeons to explain it to people who want to spend an evening enjoying the story, and play the game, with side quests in the dungeon, please. And able to bring a friend but not required.

The problem with group content too, it's for four or twelve people. Nothing for in-between. Archive is for two people, but that's a RNG nest, random bosses in random arenas with random visions and random verses.

Nobody's yelling about solo arenas killing the game either. There's not much story in those though, the challenge lies in overcoming difficulty in solo mode.

As Sharp-as-night says.. ugh. People.

The MMO part of an MMO RPG lets you play with friends. It's not there to force you into bed (that's a metaphor, by the way) with complete strangers who aren't actually interested in being there.

robwolf666 · 10:56AM

cyberjanet wrote: »

Quite frankly, if you're rushing through a dungeon at top speed, skipping the side and secret bosses, and the chests and heavy sacks, to get to your transmute crystals at the end, you're not even playing the game.

Not to mention when you look at guides for farming sets, PvP etc on YouTube or watch a stream - because yes, I sometimes do it - and they bring up the map to show where exactly where they are in a zone, you see they've done absolutely nothing except farm specific locations. How can you tell, you ask? There are no map icons except for where they farm. Or the dungeons. Or the trials. (Not everyone obviously, but a lot)

Not really the games fault they have nothing to do if they're not engaging with it.

frogthroat · 11:05AM

cyberjanet wrote: »

Quite frankly, if you're rushing through a dungeon at top speed, skipping the side and secret bosses, and the chests and heavy sacks, to get to your transmute crystals at the end, you're not even playing the game.

Absolutely right. If I do that, I want the transmutes and the set pieces so that I can make a new build in order to do the content I want to do, but I am stuck in these dungeons not playing what I want until I have farmed enough.

Meet the other side of the coin.

cyberjanet · 11:08AM

As an afterthought, there was a lot of hype about story mode dungeons should not get rewards. By rewards they are speaking about the sets that drop in the dungeon.

I think story mode dungeons should drop rewards. Like Furnishing Plans. Furniture. Antiquity Leads. Rewards that are relevant to other aspects of the total game, not just speedracing.

Jestir · 2:31PM

cyberjanet wrote: »

As an afterthought, there was a lot of hype about story mode dungeons should not get rewards. By rewards they are speaking about the sets that drop in the dungeon.

I think story mode dungeons should drop rewards. Like Furnishing Plans. Furniture. Antiquity Leads. Rewards that are relevant to other aspects of the total game, not just speedracing.

I think it should just share the same coffer + skill point you would get from doing the dungeon quest

As it's supposed to be an alternative for that quest.

reazea · 4:23PM

This thread perfectly outlines what the biggest problem on this forum is.

freespirit · 4:34PM

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

reazea · 4:36PM

freespirit wrote: »

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

Your guild isn't a group? Guilds are groups of up to 500 players, sharing information and helping each other out and maintaining a common bank. Being a member of a guild is being a member of a group.

freespirit · 4:41PM

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

Your guild isn't a group? Guilds are groups of up to 500 players, sharing information and helping each other out and maintaining a common bank. Being a member of a guild is being a member of a group.

If you scroll back, there are a few posts suggesting the only way to learn group stuff, is to group, I was merely pointing out that is patently untrue.

reazea · 4:51PM

freespirit wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

Your guild isn't a group? Guilds are groups of up to 500 players, sharing information and helping each other out and maintaining a common bank. Being a member of a guild is being a member of a group.

If you scroll back, there are a few posts suggesting the only way to learn group stuff, is to group, I was merely pointing out that is patently untrue.

I read every post in this thread.

What you just pointed out is the importance of grouping, not the other way around. Guilds are groups of people who share resources and information, as you just pointed out. To learn mechanics you have to form dungeon/trial groups and go into the dungeon/trial, but guilds are a form of grouping too.

robwolf666 · 4:58PM

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

Your guild isn't a group? Guilds are groups of up to 500 players, sharing information and helping each other out and maintaining a common bank. Being a member of a guild is being a member of a group.

If you scroll back, there are a few posts suggesting the only way to learn group stuff, is to group, I was merely pointing out that is patently untrue.

I read every post in this thread.

What you just pointed out is the importance of grouping, not the other way around. Guilds are groups of people who share resources and information, as you just pointed out. To learn mechanics you have to form dungeon/trial groups and go into the dungeon/trial, but guilds are a form of grouping too.

I think you need to read it again then - they were very clearly saying they were discussing it in Guild chat not while they were playing in a group. You can very easily be running around solo while chatting in a Guild chat.

reazea · 5:13PM

robwolf666 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

Your guild isn't a group? Guilds are groups of up to 500 players, sharing information and helping each other out and maintaining a common bank. Being a member of a guild is being a member of a group.

If you scroll back, there are a few posts suggesting the only way to learn group stuff, is to group, I was merely pointing out that is patently untrue.

I read every post in this thread.

What you just pointed out is the importance of grouping, not the other way around. Guilds are groups of people who share resources and information, as you just pointed out. To learn mechanics you have to form dungeon/trial groups and go into the dungeon/trial, but guilds are a form of grouping too.

I think you need to read it again then - they were very clearly saying they were discussing it in Guild chat not while they were playing in a group. You can very easily be running around solo while chatting in a Guild chat.

Being in a guild is being a member of a group. Guilds are groups of players. It's not a trial or dungeon group, but it is a group used for sharing information and resources.

Guilds ARE groups. Everyone in a guild is a member of a group.

reazea wrote: »

This thread perfectly outlines what the biggest problem on this forum is.

luc76985 · 5:24PM

reazea wrote: »

robwolf666 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

freespirit wrote: »

Last night I spent a lovely couple of hours engaging in the guild chat of one of my guilds.

We discussed builds, scribing, subclassing, what a "tool tip" actually tells us, good sets and where to get them and so much more!

I learned some stuff and helped out a couple of newer players with answers to their questions.

We also had some silliness and real belly laughter..... guess what??

No grouping was necessary!!

Your guild isn't a group? Guilds are groups of up to 500 players, sharing information and helping each other out and maintaining a common bank. Being a member of a guild is being a member of a group.

If you scroll back, there are a few posts suggesting the only way to learn group stuff, is to group, I was merely pointing out that is patently untrue.

I read every post in this thread.

What you just pointed out is the importance of grouping, not the other way around. Guilds are groups of people who share resources and information, as you just pointed out. To learn mechanics you have to form dungeon/trial groups and go into the dungeon/trial, but guilds are a form of grouping too.

I think you need to read it again then - they were very clearly saying they were discussing it in Guild chat not while they were playing in a group. You can very easily be running around solo while chatting in a Guild chat.

Being in a guild is being a member of a group. Guilds are groups of players. It's not a trial or dungeon group, but it is a group used for sharing information and resources.

Guilds ARE groups. Everyone in a guild is a member of a group.

reazea wrote: »

This thread perfectly outlines what the biggest problem on this forum is.

Ok how many more rounds are you going argue semantics in here

SilverBride · 5:28PM

reazea wrote: »

Being in a guild is being a member of a group. Guilds are groups of players. It's not a trial or dungeon group, but it is a group used for sharing information and resources.

Guilds ARE groups. Everyone in a guild is a member of a group.

This is true. There are a lot of ways that players group. But there are players that post that if a player isn't grouping specifically for end game group content then they should go play a single player game instead "because this is an MMO and MMO means grouping".

Warhawke_80 · 5:33PM

Paramedicus wrote: »

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There are PvPers that only PvP. And that is fine because they are playing how they want to play.

Do you think they should ask ZOS to enable PvP in the Overland?

That is a completely different topic that has no bearing on this discussion.

The purpose of this question was to show that:
the interests of different groups of players may conflict

it is a bit selfish for a group that receives 90% of the game's content to want 100%

Nobody is asking for 100% of everything to revolve around one playstyle. In most games, the real friction tends to come from a small group of highly competitive players who sometimes act as though their way is the only valid way to enjoy the game. Solo and casual players usually just want to experience the game on their own terms, quietly progressing without much fanfare.

They aren't looking for constant praise or special treatment—they simply want reasonable space to enjoy what they paid for, and most are actually quite easy to satisfy when their preferences aren't dismissed or overridden.

My experience with ESO is quite different. Just read the feedback for the night market, where solo players ask (demand?) for this somewhat challenging content to be nerfed. There is a constant expectation that everything will be easy to beat in semi-AFK mode (isn't the Overland difficulty the best proof of this?). And of course, it's true that you'll encounter overzealous players who will nitpick your build that does 10% less damage than the meta, but if you're contributing 20% of what other players can do, you shouldn't be surprised to be called out on it.

You'll see far more players who don't know how to play the game and have the attitude that everyone should conform to their expectations because “they can play however they want”, than those annoying elitists (I think most of them left the game a while ago). I truly believe that the reason ZOS doesn't add any challenge to the story content (or at least better tutorials with skill checks) is because they are scared poopless of this very vocal causal part of community. Of course, this may be completely untrue, but you know, you kinda want to believe that there is a reason why ZOS keeps players so clueless, and that it's not just negligence.

SMH....

Ahh yes, the Mythical Toxic casual—because apparently wanting ESO content that's actually playable without a 300-page meta guide and a raid-or-die mindset makes you the villain of the story.

No... the data tells the opposite story: the Night Market PTS feedback is flooded with players—many solo—calling it far too difficult, dying instantly, unable to progress without groups, begging for nerfs or adjustable difficulty so casuals aren't locked out. ZOS isn't cowering to casuals; they're responding to a genuine outcry against content that's punishing for the average player.

The real vocal minority pushing back? The ones insisting it stays hard because "we need challenge" or "no new dungeons this year." But the volume of complaints leans heavily toward "this is excluding too many people," not "make it easier because I'm lazy.

"ZOS keeps story content accessible because that's what retains the massive casual base that funds the game—not negligence, and not fear of a handful of elitists. If anything, the pattern is clear: introduce bite, hear the backlash from the majority who just want to enjoy the lore without dying in one-shots, then soften it. That's business, not capitulation.

Respectfully: the casual "conquest" isn't a takeover—it's the playerbase ZOS built the game around. Demanding they suddenly pivot to vet-level everywhere risks emptying servers, not saving them.

Paramedicus · 5:41PM

I'm confused. Maybe it's because I have the flu and this topic is me having a fever dream, but I find it hard to understand why some people from the largest group of players (solo casuals) always try to portray themselves as an oppressed minority? Don't you feel any empathy towards those poor PvPers who haven't received any solid piece of content in a long time?

SilverBride · 5:54PM

Paramedicus wrote: »

I'm confused. Maybe it's because I have the flu and this topic is me having a fever dream, but I find it hard to understand why some people from the largest group of players (solo casuals) always try to portray themselves as an oppressed minority? Don't you feel any empathy towards those poor PvPers who haven't received any solid piece of content in a long time?

Players have issues that effect their enjoyment of the game, so they bring it to the forums looking for a resolution. That doesn't mean they don't have empathy for other players and their issues, but it's not reasonable to expect them to bring up everything that needs addressed in every thread they post.

Paramedicus · 6:04PM

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

There are PvPers that only PvP. And that is fine because they are playing how they want to play.

Do you think they should ask ZOS to enable PvP in the Overland?

That is a completely different topic that has no bearing on this discussion.

The purpose of this question was to show that:
the interests of different groups of players may conflict

it is a bit selfish for a group that receives 90% of the game's content to want 100%

Nobody is asking for 100% of everything to revolve around one playstyle. In most games, the real friction tends to come from a small group of highly competitive players who sometimes act as though their way is the only valid way to enjoy the game. Solo and casual players usually just want to experience the game on their own terms, quietly progressing without much fanfare.

They aren't looking for constant praise or special treatment—they simply want reasonable space to enjoy what they paid for, and most are actually quite easy to satisfy when their preferences aren't dismissed or overridden.

My experience with ESO is quite different. Just read the feedback for the night market, where solo players ask (demand?) for this somewhat challenging content to be nerfed. There is a constant expectation that everything will be easy to beat in semi-AFK mode (isn't the Overland difficulty the best proof of this?). And of course, it's true that you'll encounter overzealous players who will nitpick your build that does 10% less damage than the meta, but if you're contributing 20% of what other players can do, you shouldn't be surprised to be called out on it.

You'll see far more players who don't know how to play the game and have the attitude that everyone should conform to their expectations because “they can play however they want”, than those annoying elitists (I think most of them left the game a while ago). I truly believe that the reason ZOS doesn't add any challenge to the story content (or at least better tutorials with skill checks) is because they are scared poopless of this very vocal causal part of community. Of course, this may be completely untrue, but you know, you kinda want to believe that there is a reason why ZOS keeps players so clueless, and that it's not just negligence.

SMH....

Ahh yes, the Mythical Toxic casual—because apparently wanting ESO content that's actually playable without a 300-page meta guide and a raid-or-die mindset makes you the villain of the story.

Ok, so toxic elitists are real, but toxic causal is a myth. Got it

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

No... the data tells the opposite story: the Night Market PTS feedback is flooded with players—many solo—calling it far too difficult, dying instantly, unable to progress without groups, begging for nerfs or adjustable difficulty so casuals aren't locked out. ZOS isn't cowering to casuals; they're responding to a genuine outcry against content that's punishing for the average player.

Night Market PTS feedback topic is flooded by few players asking to nerf it to the ground.

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

The ones insisting it stays hard because "we need challenge" or "no new dungeons this year." But the volume of complaints leans heavily toward "this is excluding too many people," not "make it easier because I'm lazy.

And they do so for a good reason. It's hard to understand why, in order to keep this game alive, ZOS has to create a variety of content, including challenging one, so that players can play it multiple times (due to its difficulty level). Creating only solo-friendly content is impossible in the long run. ZOS has to cater to the needs of different groups of players.

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

"ZOS keeps story content accessible because that's what retains the massive casual base that funds the game—not negligence, and not fear of a handful of elitists. If anything, the pattern is clear: introduce bite, hear the backlash from the majority who just want to enjoy the lore without dying in one-shots, then soften it. That's business, not capitulation.

Yes, a short-sighted business strategy.

Warhawke_80 wrote: »

Respectfully: the casual "conquest" isn't a takeover—it's the playerbase ZOS built the game around. Demanding they suddenly pivot to vet-level everywhere risks emptying servers, not saving them.

Everywhere? Who is asking for that?

Paramedicus · 6:18PM

SilverBride wrote: »

Paramedicus wrote: »

I'm confused. Maybe it's because I have the flu and this topic is me having a fever dream, but I find it hard to understand why some people from the largest group of players (solo casuals) always try to portray themselves as an oppressed minority? Don't you feel any empathy towards those poor PvPers who haven't received any solid piece of content in a long time?

Players have issues that effect their enjoyment of the game, so they bring it to the forums looking for a resolution. That doesn't mean they don't have empathy for other players and their issues, but it's not reasonable to expect them to bring up everything that needs addressed in every thread they post.

Some of these players should accept the fact that not every part of the game has to be available to everyone.