The OP is just far too persnickety. If you demand too many required aspects, the chances of you getting a game that fits them all goes way down. It's a personal problem.
I was involved with some boat design once, and everything in it was a trade off. You could design to be stable in the water, but you'd be unstable in the air. You could design for greater space, but you ended up not be able to go into shallower water. You could go real fast, but it'd be real uncomfortable sailing, and you couldn't carry even basic necessities. ETC.
Game designers face these decisions all the time. They try to not go too deleteriously far in any particular direction (unless they are working on a very specific, niche, product). But even things like the call for different servers for different playstyles comes at some dev cost. The extra conversion work, more complicated version control, etc, can add to a developer load that is already stretched to the breaking point.
I'm not that keen on some of the PVE elements mandated by ESO's RVR-centric design. But I can happily settle for no forced PvP, and don't have to be the uber-est character around. I have just opened up a bunch of other games for my possible play as well. I can handle cartoony to realistic art (as long as the art direction is good), just like I can in movies. More games opened up for play.
You're best off, in my opinion, finding the thing closest to your narrow definitions and playing that. Otherwise .... you get to play the waiting game....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Consent and free will violations are pretty much front and center as the basis or "right" for common western morality, so why is it that certain groups of MMO players love oh so much to enforce playstyle they prefer onto people that don't prefer those playstyles.
What instigated this is reading about how some people are against adding a PvE-only Cyrodil campaign in ESO, for example. Or older examples like WoW where they fought to improve the way where one could permanently toggle PvP off.
While this is of course more prominent for PVP'ers in my knowledge this kind of vitriol also comes from PvE'ers (hardcore more often than not), and "hardcore" gamers in general.
I mean I've pretty much accepted that it's the way of human to be blissfully and ignorantly bigoted and try to dominate and subdue people that don't agree with them because of some perceived strength or level of value to their specific opinion simply because...well, because. But at the same time it just gets hard to wrap my head around it.
Why can't you let people just be whoever the hell they want to be? They're themselves anyway, you restricting them doesn't change that in any way. It just makes life shittier from a utilitarian standpoint.
What's worse is the convoluted logic these people will sometimes employ to defend these claims.
And before you post "Of you're complaining about intolerance by being intolerant of intolerance" well god damnit there's no way out of the tolerance paradox that doesn't conflict with my moral standings, flimsy as they may be, so I just say fuck it. If it helps I'm approaching this from a utilitarian POV as well so just take it from there.
One of the reasons that Goonies and other such tend to object to that is obvious... People playing on PvE servers/areas aren't available for ganking and/or griefing. Its really as simple as that.
Some may make different claims, and hand wave about "tradition" and other such nonsense, but it all boils down to that.
PVE cost 50 times more than pvp and only last for a week. Then requires the best rewards or it's worthless. They need level cap increases, new treadmills to constantly take the place of the old. PVP players get hit with all that too.
But we have 50% hardcore pvp players now. Who use progression to win. They are hardcore, not because its an fps based on skill, but because other people were allowed to join the game after them making them better than someone else. This will lead to all kinds of mischief. Guilds forming to literally ruin online games and put people out of work. Then a decade will pass and they're still taking the easy win, the unoriginal.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
The OP is just far too persnickety. If you demand too many required aspects, the chances of you getting a game that fits them all goes way down. It's a personal problem.
I was involved with some boat design once, and everything in it was a trade off. You could design to be stable in the water, but you'd be unstable in the air. You could design for greater space, but you ended up not be able to go into shallower water. You could go real fast, but it'd be real uncomfortable sailing, and you couldn't carry even basic necessities. ETC.
Game designers face these decisions all the time. They try to not go too deleteriously far in any particular direction (unless they are working on a very specific, niche, product). But even things like the call for different servers for different playstyles comes at some dev cost. The extra conversion work, more complicated version control, etc, can add to a developer load that is already stretched to the breaking point.
I'm not that keen on some of the PVE elements mandated by ESO's RVR-centric design. But I can happily settle for no forced PvP, and don't have to be the uber-est character around. I have just opened up a bunch of other games for my possible play as well. I can handle cartoony to realistic art (as long as the art direction is good), just like I can in movies. More games opened up for play.
You're best off, in my opinion, finding the thing closest to your narrow definitions and playing that. Otherwise .... you get to play the waiting game....
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
.... and yet three people have posted lists of criteria and no one has come up for a game for any of them.
So? May be their preferences are so out of the norm that no devs want to cater to them.
No one owe them a game they like 100%.
For once I'm in complete agreement with Narius.. here. No one can get a game that fits them %100 and trying to change an aspect of a game that is the dev's own vision (in this case as example is the PvP zone of Cyrodiil) is actually trying to 'force' others to their playstyle (those that are looking forward to it).
This is the game being made. It's what's being 'sold' to the players. The choice to play it or not is really simple and up to the individual. No company can cater to everyone, it's just not possible. There will always be someone not liking something another loves, the sheer numbers of games out there kinda proves it.
My point is that there are a lot of different play styles out there and when you sort those 642 games into categories there are an awful lot of them in a very few categories and quite a number of categories with no games in them at all.
No you did not offer to research games for people but you said that there existed games for every play style and when people point out that there are play styles without games you at least imply that it is their fault for wanting a game to meet their play style.
.... and yes that is a personal attack.
So your saying it's not my fault if I can't find what I'm looking for? That I should give that responsibility to someone or something else? I believe that finding what I enjoy is my responsibility.
It may or not be your fault if you can't find what you are looking for, nor is it the responsibility of others to provide what you are looking for.
However, it is a personal attack to suggest that someone has a problem for having an aspiration that has yet to be met.
BTW you still have not substantiated your claim that there is a game for every play style.
I really don't understand that if you can't find a game to enjoy out of hundreds after a 2 year search, then it is your problem. Who else's problem would it be? There is no perfect MMO. Playing in an MMO means we have to adjust and adapt to playing with a community in order to find enjoyment. MMO's constantly change as well as gamers. I still do believe there is a game for every playstyle, and yes all this is my opinion and not a claim.
.... and yet three people have posted lists of criteria and no one has come up for a game for any of them.
No the "hundreds of games" soon get whittled down to none when you apply a set of criteria to them that is not the current main stream.
Yes I have a game I play, not because it is a 10 out 10 but because as a 5 out of 10 it is the best match I have found at the moment. I and others do select from what is out there but still hope for a game to come along that is a better match than the current crop. To suggest that there is a game "for every play style" is naive at best and deliberately provocative at worst.
To take this site's list of nearly 700 games and apply a couple of criteria to the list and see how fast it dwindles.
Released since 1/1/2010
Full 3d
High fantasy (no spaceships, no fire arms and no robots or mech suits)
No twitch combat
How many do you think would be left?
Remember this is just the start of a selection criteria and not the end.
The problem with a list is that there is always something left out. For example nowhere in the lists does it refer to preferences for playing with others. Solo questing? Group questing? Dungeon groups only? No PVP anywhere or anywhere near PVE areas? Full 3D as with 3D glasses and compatible graphics card? No twitch as in turned based? No twitch as in ranged DPS group support based? It's far to easy to say here is my list of games that fit your list then you would clarify what you actually meant and the list would grow towards your quest for the perfect MMO. We all have a list in our heads about what we like or don't like in games and I don't think I've ever heard someone say they've found the perfect MMO which they have been playing for the last two to five years, well maybe except for some people who play WOW.
I did the work and found a lot of games I like to play. None are perfect but yes I can play them and have fun most of the time. If you are playing a game then it does fit your play style, maybe not 100% but my statement included nothing about to what degree. I was actually thinking in general terms, pve preferred play, a pvp play style, solo or grouped preferred questing centric MMO's, etc. Which I thought the title of the thread was about.
Actually a good idea for a company would be one that matched players to games. You could fill out an evaluation form which could be run through a complete database of current games and produce a list of games based on your play style. Sounds like a kickstarter project.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
.... and yet three people have posted lists of criteria and no one has come up for a game for any of them.
No the "hundreds of games" soon get whittled down to none when you apply a set of criteria to them that is not the current main stream.
Yes I have a game I play, not because it is a 10 out 10 but because as a 5 out of 10 it is the best match I have found at the moment. I and others do select from what is out there but still hope for a game to come along that is a better match than the current crop. To suggest that there is a game "for every play style" is naive at best and deliberately provocative at worst.
To take this site's list of nearly 700 games and apply a couple of criteria to the list and see how fast it dwindles.
Released since 1/1/2010
Full 3d
High fantasy (no spaceships, no fire arms and no robots or mech suits)
No twitch combat
How many do you think would be left?
Remember this is just the start of a selection criteria and not the end.
The problem with a list is that there is always something left out. For example nowhere in the lists does it refer to preferences for playing with others. Solo questing? Group questing? Dungeon groups only? No PVP anywhere or anywhere near PVE areas? Full 3D as with 3D glasses and compatible graphics card? No twitch as in turned based? No twitch as in ranged DPS group support based? It's far to easy to say here is my list of games that fit your list then you would clarify what you actually meant and the list would grow towards your quest for the perfect MMO. We all have a list in our heads about what we like or don't like in games and I don't think I've ever heard someone say they've found the perfect MMO which they have been playing for the last two to five years, well maybe except for some people who play WOW.
I did the work and found a lot of games I like to play. None are perfect but yes I can play them and have fun most of the time. If you are playing a game then it does fit your play style, maybe not 100% but my statement included nothing about to what degree. I was actually thinking in general terms, pve preferred play, a pvp play style, solo or grouped preferred questing centric MMO's, etc. Which I thought the title of the thread was about.
Actually a good idea for a company would be one that matched players to games. You could fill out an evaluation form which could be run through a complete database of current games and produce a list of games based on your play style. Sounds like a kickstarter project.
That is a much more considered response than I have seen previously. I left out the PvP/PPvE question because that differentiated me from the other two posters that had made criteria lists.
Your idea of creating a matrix that players could fill in and be matched against existing games has merit. It would be nice to see such a matrix with 10,000 or so responses that could demonstrate the gaps in the existing market. It may even lead to some games getting developed to fill the gaps.
BTW I would like to see a game that had questing options for variable numbers of players between 1 and 12. More than 12 and the "bio breaks" and other organizational problems take too much time out of the hour. No twitch as in recognizing that 350ms latency and slowing reflexes does not make 'dodge ball' games much fun.
Consent and free will violations are pretty much front and center as the basis or "right" for common western morality, so why is it that certain groups of MMO players love oh so much to enforce playstyle they prefer onto people that don't prefer those playstyles.
What instigated this is reading about how some people are against adding a PvE-only Cyrodil campaign in ESO, for example. Or older examples like WoW where they fought to improve the way where one could permanently toggle PvP off.
While this is of course more prominent for PVP'ers in my knowledge this kind of vitriol also comes from PvE'ers (hardcore more often than not), and "hardcore" gamers in general.
I mean I've pretty much accepted that it's the way of human to be blissfully and ignorantly bigoted and try to dominate and subdue people that don't agree with them because of some perceived strength or level of value to their specific opinion simply because...well, because. But at the same time it just gets hard to wrap my head around it.
Why can't you let people just be whoever the hell they want to be? They're themselves anyway, you restricting them doesn't change that in any way. It just makes life shittier from a utilitarian standpoint.
What's worse is the convoluted logic these people will sometimes employ to defend these claims.
And before you post "Of you're complaining about intolerance by being intolerant of intolerance" well god damnit there's no way out of the tolerance paradox that doesn't conflict with my moral standings, flimsy as they may be, so I just say fuck it. If it helps I'm approaching this from a utilitarian POV as well so just take it from there.
So what you are asking, if I understand it correctly is, why would someone come into a game that has a PvP zone as it's endgame and try and force their PvE only playstyle on others who don't want that playstyle?
Something to remember; the perfect is the enemy of the good.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
But it boils down to gaming is about preferences, and free market, and so no matter what they are saying, it is moot at the end, since the market is going to do what it does anyway.
And no one should compromise on their preferences. I always play games my way .. and if devs don't want to cater to me, i will do something else.
It is that simple.
If only the market truly were free. AS it stands right now, I LOVE the theme and feel of ESO but absolutely cannot stand PvP, so essentially I will have no end-game as end-game is heavily crafting influenced and all good end-game mats and recipes come from PvP areas.
How is the market not free? Devs are free to make whatever they want. You are free to decide if you want to play or not.
No one forces you to play ESO, and no one owes you a design you like 100%.
The day where new MMOs are coming out all the time to suit all types of playstyles is when I'll be happy but right now the genre feels so shallow to me in the upcoming year.
With hundreds of MMOs currently available covering countless playstyles and plenty more in development, if you can't find an MMO that caters to your playstyle, the problem isn't MMOs.
Problem is graphical fidelity and up-to-date engines and mechanics and such are fundamental to my enjoyment. I've found that I'm the type of person that can't play a game that's older than 3 years without just feeling disgusted a few minutes in and dropping it altogether.
Heck I can't even play Skyrim anymore.
Not to mention that new MMOs are breaking ground in small ways with every announcement. ESO for example emphasizes exploration unlike any other MMO I've ever seen, and is a sub game which is a must for me. However end-game is PvP based, which literally is a game breaker for me.
And the problem can't not be MMOs. A persons opinion of what they prefer for themselves cannot be a problem, it can't even be wrong.
If you can't play Skyrim because of graphical fidelity then you have a serious problem IMO.
You aren't playing games. You are just a techno guy who likes to be able to see how a game "runs" on your rig and after that you toss it and move on to the next one. And if a game has things you want and something you don't want, such a s PvP end game, what is wrong with just playing the part you want? Sounds like 90 % of ESO suits your play style but you aren't playing because because of the minor issue of PvP endgame? Don't the PvP players deserve to have a little fun too?
People certainly have different values today when it comes to games I am afraid. Anything that came out last month is just so last year now , it seems. And anything that doesn't cater exactly to my play style is a bad game. Sad.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
. And anything that doesn't cater exactly to my play style is a bad game. Sad.
well .. "bad" is subjective.
And why is this sad? We are talking about entertainment here .. why should i play anything but those who cater to my play style?
I don't see a reason to compromise on how to have fun, and I don't.
I agree - but I'm not sure this is the issue here.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I am in the market for a new vehicle.
I want a 4X4 pick-up.
I look at a Ford truck and let's say I also look at a Toyota Prius.
Obviously, I would buy the Ford as it caters to my needs, just as you said.
But it seems to me the OP thinks instead that I should demand that Toyota change the Prius to be a 4X4 truck. To hell with all those who want the Prius the way it is - why can't they just let me have it my way?
So, ESO was not designed for the OP's playstyle - the logical thing would be to play a different game, imho.
. And anything that doesn't cater exactly to my play style is a bad game. Sad.
well .. "bad" is subjective.
And why is this sad? We are talking about entertainment here .. why should i play anything but those who cater to my play style?
I don't see a reason to compromise on how to have fun, and I don't.
I agree - but I'm not sure this is the issue here.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I am in the market for a new vehicle.
I want a 4X4 pick-up.
I look at a Ford truck and let's say I also look at a Toyota Prius.
Obviously, I would buy the Ford as it caters to my needs, just as you said.
But it seems to me the OP thinks instead that I should demand that Toyota change the Prius to be a 4X4 truck. To hell with all those who want the Prius the way it is - why can't they just let me have it my way?
So, ESO was not designed for the OP's playstyle - the logical thing would be to play a different game, imho.
I agree with you ... that it is plain silly to ask Toyota to make Prius a truck. But at the same time, i think it is fair to say "i like trucks, prius is not, so i don't like it".
And it is not like devs will really change their games based on a single (or even many) posts in a forum.
I always like to go back to the free market argument. You can like whatever, but no one is obligated to make it for you, and you are not obligated to play any games being made.
I agree - but I'm not sure this is the issue here.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I am in the market for a new vehicle.
I want a 4X4 pick-up.
I look at a Ford truck and let's say I also look at a Toyota Prius.
Obviously, I would buy the Ford as it caters to my needs, just as you said.
But it seems to me the OP thinks instead that I should demand that Toyota change the Prius to be a 4X4 truck. To hell with all those who want the Prius the way it is - why can't they just let me have it my way?
So, ESO was not designed for the OP's playstyle - the logical thing would be to play a different game, imho.
To be fair, it's more like the OP is looking for the flying DeLorean from Back to the Future. He can't find the game he wants to play, because it doesn't actually exist. (And may never exist.)
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
I agree - but I'm not sure this is the issue here.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I am in the market for a new vehicle.
I want a 4X4 pick-up.
I look at a Ford truck and let's say I also look at a Toyota Prius.
Obviously, I would buy the Ford as it caters to my needs, just as you said.
But it seems to me the OP thinks instead that I should demand that Toyota change the Prius to be a 4X4 truck. To hell with all those who want the Prius the way it is - why can't they just let me have it my way?
So, ESO was not designed for the OP's playstyle - the logical thing would be to play a different game, imho.
To be fair, it's more like the OP is looking for the flying DeLorean from Back to the Future. He can't find the game he wants to play, because it doesn't actually exist. (And may never exist.)
But it boils down to gaming is about preferences, and free market, and so no matter what they are saying, it is moot at the end, since the market is going to do what it does anyway.
And no one should compromise on their preferences. I always play games my way .. and if devs don't want to cater to me, i will do something else.
It is that simple.
If only the market truly were free. AS it stands right now, I LOVE the theme and feel of ESO but absolutely cannot stand PvP, so essentially I will have no end-game as end-game is heavily crafting influenced and all good end-game mats and recipes come from PvP areas.
That's what killed ESO for me as well. I didn't play TES for PvP, but for a deeply immersive PvE world. Add PvP, what's the point? If they stuck to their roots, the game could've had a wider appeal (especially for those who played since 2003), as it would resemble their offline counterpart.
Comments
Cyrodil PvE only safe zone and rest of the world open PvP on.
WTB.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
The OP is just far too persnickety. If you demand too many required aspects, the chances of you getting a game that fits them all goes way down. It's a personal problem.
I was involved with some boat design once, and everything in it was a trade off. You could design to be stable in the water, but you'd be unstable in the air. You could design for greater space, but you ended up not be able to go into shallower water. You could go real fast, but it'd be real uncomfortable sailing, and you couldn't carry even basic necessities. ETC.
Game designers face these decisions all the time. They try to not go too deleteriously far in any particular direction (unless they are working on a very specific, niche, product). But even things like the call for different servers for different playstyles comes at some dev cost. The extra conversion work, more complicated version control, etc, can add to a developer load that is already stretched to the breaking point.
I'm not that keen on some of the PVE elements mandated by ESO's RVR-centric design. But I can happily settle for no forced PvP, and don't have to be the uber-est character around. I have just opened up a bunch of other games for my possible play as well. I can handle cartoony to realistic art (as long as the art direction is good), just like I can in movies. More games opened up for play.
You're best off, in my opinion, finding the thing closest to your narrow definitions and playing that. Otherwise .... you get to play the waiting game....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
So? May be their preferences are so out of the norm that no devs want to cater to them.
No one owe them a game they like 100%.
PVE cost 50 times more than pvp and only last for a week. Then requires the best rewards or it's worthless. They need level cap increases, new treadmills to constantly take the place of the old. PVP players get hit with all that too.
But we have 50% hardcore pvp players now. Who use progression to win. They are hardcore, not because its an fps based on skill, but because other people were allowed to join the game after them making them better than someone else. This will lead to all kinds of mischief. Guilds forming to literally ruin online games and put people out of work. Then a decade will pass and they're still taking the easy win, the unoriginal.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
For once I'm in complete agreement with Narius.. here. No one can get a game that fits them %100 and trying to change an aspect of a game that is the dev's own vision (in this case as example is the PvP zone of Cyrodiil) is actually trying to 'force' others to their playstyle (those that are looking forward to it).
This is the game being made. It's what's being 'sold' to the players. The choice to play it or not is really simple and up to the individual. No company can cater to everyone, it's just not possible. There will always be someone not liking something another loves, the sheer numbers of games out there kinda proves it.
The problem with a list is that there is always something left out. For example nowhere in the lists does it refer to preferences for playing with others. Solo questing? Group questing? Dungeon groups only? No PVP anywhere or anywhere near PVE areas? Full 3D as with 3D glasses and compatible graphics card? No twitch as in turned based? No twitch as in ranged DPS group support based? It's far to easy to say here is my list of games that fit your list then you would clarify what you actually meant and the list would grow towards your quest for the perfect MMO. We all have a list in our heads about what we like or don't like in games and I don't think I've ever heard someone say they've found the perfect MMO which they have been playing for the last two to five years, well maybe except for some people who play WOW.
I did the work and found a lot of games I like to play. None are perfect but yes I can play them and have fun most of the time. If you are playing a game then it does fit your play style, maybe not 100% but my statement included nothing about to what degree. I was actually thinking in general terms, pve preferred play, a pvp play style, solo or grouped preferred questing centric MMO's, etc. Which I thought the title of the thread was about.
Actually a good idea for a company would be one that matched players to games. You could fill out an evaluation form which could be run through a complete database of current games and produce a list of games based on your play style. Sounds like a kickstarter project.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
That is a much more considered response than I have seen previously. I left out the PvP/PPvE question because that differentiated me from the other two posters that had made criteria lists.
Your idea of creating a matrix that players could fill in and be matched against existing games has merit. It would be nice to see such a matrix with 10,000 or so responses that could demonstrate the gaps in the existing market. It may even lead to some games getting developed to fill the gaps.
BTW I would like to see a game that had questing options for variable numbers of players between 1 and 12. More than 12 and the "bio breaks" and other organizational problems take too much time out of the hour. No twitch as in recognizing that 350ms latency and slowing reflexes does not make 'dodge ball' games much fun.
So what you are asking, if I understand it correctly is, why would someone come into a game that has a PvP zone as it's endgame and try and force their PvE only playstyle on others who don't want that playstyle?
That about right?
www.90and9.net
www.prophecymma.com
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
WTB for more than him!
I'd eat raw crow to play that ES game.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
How is the market not free? Devs are free to make whatever they want. You are free to decide if you want to play or not.
No one forces you to play ESO, and no one owes you a design you like 100%.
If you can't play Skyrim because of graphical fidelity then you have a serious problem IMO.
You aren't playing games. You are just a techno guy who likes to be able to see how a game "runs" on your rig and after that you toss it and move on to the next one. And if a game has things you want and something you don't want, such a s PvP end game, what is wrong with just playing the part you want? Sounds like 90 % of ESO suits your play style but you aren't playing because because of the minor issue of PvP endgame? Don't the PvP players deserve to have a little fun too?
People certainly have different values today when it comes to games I am afraid. Anything that came out last month is just so last year now , it seems. And anything that doesn't cater exactly to my play style is a bad game. Sad.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
well .. "bad" is subjective.
And why is this sad? We are talking about entertainment here .. why should i play anything but those who cater to my play style?
I don't see a reason to compromise on how to have fun, and I don't.
I agree - but I'm not sure this is the issue here.
Here's a hypothetical scenario:
I am in the market for a new vehicle.
I want a 4X4 pick-up.
I look at a Ford truck and let's say I also look at a Toyota Prius.
Obviously, I would buy the Ford as it caters to my needs, just as you said.
But it seems to me the OP thinks instead that I should demand that Toyota change the Prius to be a 4X4 truck. To hell with all those who want the Prius the way it is - why can't they just let me have it my way?
So, ESO was not designed for the OP's playstyle - the logical thing would be to play a different game, imho.
I agree with you ... that it is plain silly to ask Toyota to make Prius a truck. But at the same time, i think it is fair to say "i like trucks, prius is not, so i don't like it".
And it is not like devs will really change their games based on a single (or even many) posts in a forum.
I always like to go back to the free market argument. You can like whatever, but no one is obligated to make it for you, and you are not obligated to play any games being made.
To be fair, it's more like the OP is looking for the flying DeLorean from Back to the Future. He can't find the game he wants to play, because it doesn't actually exist. (And may never exist.)
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
That's what killed ESO for me as well. I didn't play TES for PvP, but for a deeply immersive PvE world. Add PvP, what's the point? If they stuck to their roots, the game could've had a wider appeal (especially for those who played since 2003), as it would resemble their offline counterpart.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.