Originally posted by Distopia
I don't agree with Sapphen but if he/she wants to limit his/her gaming options based on whatever criteria, that's his/her choice not sure what objective a person could have in mind by arguing with it.

Fine by me but same goes for you.  If you want to limit your gaming experience by supporting faction locked  races and areas then that is your choice.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Lol that's one desparate straw man you put up there.

You guys have to stop misusing that word.  In no way did I misinterpret his argument but only stated my rebuttal.  In fact your response is a straw man by making it appear that my response was not valid.  Just because you think the word sounds cool you can't use it to dismiss my post.

A straw man is an intentional misrepresentation of an opponent's position, often used in debates with unsophisticated audiences to make it appear that the opponent's arguments are more easily defeated than they are.

I  may have misinterpreted deakon's meaning in the below post but that was unintentional:

Originally posted by deakon

Its not complete freedom no, its still more freedom than the ip has ever had before tho and its not like you cant see all the land it just gives a reason to roll an alt (much like the faction choices in previouse titles have)

In my interpretation having a larger area to explore does not equal more freedom.  He admits that it is not complete freedom.  So he's comparing two different types of freedom in his response to me; the freedom to go anywhere compared to the size of the area.  I do not accept his argument as valid and my response to him was:

Originally posted by sapphen

It is in NO WAY more freedom than the IP has ever had before.

I did not draw the connection that having a larger area is "more freedom" than letting a person go anywhere they want in a created world.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Really equating faction locked areas in a game with racism in real life. Really?

People become their cars like they become their characters.  If the donut is in the shop then we should be able to buy it without changing our appearence.  If the land is there then we should explore it without creating an alt.  You can't assume that everyone wants to create an alt, therefore why should they have to change in order to explore the world?

At it's core, it is the same.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Ambros123

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Those opposed to 3 factions, how would YOU do pvp in TESO then?
 

Glad you asked.  I seen this suggested in another thread and I thought it was a great start.  Basically they would need to change the setting to account for it:

I have revised some of the lore on their website to help fix these problems that they are having;

It is a time of strife and unrest. Armies of revenants and dark spirits manifest in every corner of Tamriel. Winters grow colder and crops fail. Mystics are plagued by nightmares and portents of doom. In the midst of this chaos, three armies; the Daggerfall Covenant, the Aldmeri Dominion and the Ebonheart Pact will take up arms against the Empire, and against each other, to wrest control of the Imperial City and White-Gold Tower from the dark forces of Oblivion itself.

** The setting I am imagined is unorderly. There is strife within and between all the races of Tamriel. The nations are beginnig to come together but many are still resisting complete conformity. Three leaders rise in hopes to unite their people and rally others to their cause.


Daggerfall Covenant

High King Emeric is a Brenton merchant lord whose shrewd policies and masterful diplomacy earned him the trust of most of the Kings of High Rock. He has a vast fortune and purchased a large army of Redguard soldiers. The Orcs pose some threat but they are unorganized. This leaves them vulnerable, many are captured as slaves and forced to serve in the war for their freedom.

* Brentons, Redguards and Orcs receive a bonus for joining this faction - suggested 5% increase in currency gain and reduction in vendor prices.


Ebonheart Pact

Jorun, of Eastern Skyrim, is acting High King of the Great Moot, but he does not rule absolutely. Many disagree with his Dark Elf councilor and challenge his right to the throne. Argonians still defend their borders against intruders and each other but some have aligned themselves with the High King in hopes to gain his favor.

* Nords, Dunmers and Argonians receive a bonus for joining this faction - suggested 5% increase in health.


Aldmeri Dominion

Queen Ayrenn is intelligent and honorable, with a genuine humility rarely seen among her people but she is also a decisive leader with a stubborn streak. She spent much of the first part of her life roaming the lands and seas of Tamriel, seeking adventure. She has befriended many Bosmer and Khajiit in her travels, even against the wishes of her people.

* Altmer, Bosmer and Khajiit receive a bonus for joining this faction - suggested 5% increase in xp and pvp points gain.


With these revisions they could alter what they already have to account for no faction locks. The bonus would help encourage people to join the planned factions but would also allow people to choose which faction they would like to join.

EDIT IN: I feel that race/area faction locks should be removed. We can travel to all PvE areas freely without fear of being attacked. Player can choose to manually flag themselves for faction PvP or FFA PvP.

With this change there would be no reason for race/area faction locks.  Then players can freely travel anywhere they want.  I say in order to keep PvP out of PvE, players would have to manually flag themselves for PvP.  There would be two different choices to flag for 'open world faction PvP' or 'open world free for all PvP'.

Players would have to choose a faction to earn the full amount of rewards from PvP.  They can go in as mercenaries, joining other groups but without declairing a faction they wouldn't reap the full rewards.  They would also only be able to flag themselves for 'open world free for all PvP'.

That... is an utterly faulty reasoning.  All this will cause is one overly dominate faction and all others so minor that it would render factions insignificant.

And...."Brentons, Redguards and Orcs receive a bonus for joining this faction - suggested 5% increase in currency gain and reduction in vendor prices" talk about a completely pointless and useless faction bonus compared to a 5% health.  Ohhh I wonder oh wonder what faction bonus will be be the least favorable.

Faulty reasoning, wth are you talking about?  It's a suggestion to change the setting to accomadate 3 factions with mixed races in order to give players a choice to which side they want to join.  There was little to none reasoning in the post.

Who's to say that the current system will prevent dominate factions?  What makes you think everyone wants to join the same faction in the first place?

The perks was only a suggestion made by another poster so stop freaking out on me.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Ambros123

I'm actually seeing a lot of things that deviates from the "generic MMO box" like public dungeons, combat combos, any weapon any armor, PvP potentially  being what GW2 should have been, actual exploration.  All of these aren't "generic" in MMOs.

...in your opinion.

Originally posted by Ambros123

And really how arrogant for fans to think that they have the right to say what the game should be directed towards.  This is made by Zenimax NOT Bethesda.  This isn't TES series but an MMO version.  This is done by a seperate company which is taking nothing away from the series.  There will be more TES games but Bethesada has other projects to work on, like they just finished Dishonored.  Likely they'll go back to the Fallout series then back to an TES title.  Fans need to quite going ape shit because their panties are in a bundle.

How arrogant for you to think you have a right to tell us what we can talk about.  I am a TES fan and MMO player and neither one of me likes the direction this game is going.  You should stop going ape shit because you don't like what you read.

Originally posted by QuicklyScott

What a bunch of drama queens.

Threads like these like to bring out the Chris Crocker in people

Indeed it does, I'm almost ashamed to be in this thread crockering out myself.  I'm trying to be reasonable and post only my opinion yet I keep getting attacked by enraged fanatics of a game that no one has even played yet.  My only issues is ESO locking races/areas to factions and it seems everyone elses problem is my opinion.

You are now breathing manually.

that is all.

Originally posted by evilastro

Regarding the racial faction locks, they should just add a faction betrayal quest akin to Everquest 2.

Betraying your people in a time of war shouldnt be easy, but it should be possible.

This would be a nice feature ^

I would like to be able to travel to Valenwood as a Dunmer, simply because I like to explore and a enemy faction shouldn't restrict which areas I can explore because there is a war going on.

E.g. if a go to Valenwood as a Dunmer, the players and NPCs of the Aldmeri Dominion should be able to attack me, and vice versa, because the Aldmeri Dominion and the Ebonheart Pact both are in a conflict to control Cyrodiil along with the Daggerfall Covenant.

What I don't like about the fact that I can be killed while exploring and questing in Valenwood, is that there is a possibility that I wouldn't be able to do anything in Valenwood since I would probably be hunted down by the enemy faction in the area.

An example is taken from Rift, where the two factions of said game would have crossing quest paths in certain areas, and I experienced several occasions where I couldn't finish a questline due to being killed by the enemy faction each time I tried to proceed in a given quest. The idea behind this isn't bad, but only to a certain degree IMO.

A solution to the above problem, would be to implement a faction system bound to each player, similar to the faction system in EverQuest II. In ESO you would, as a Dunmer, start off being neutral to all three playable factions (or neutral to the Aldmeri Dominion and the Daggerfall Covenant while being an ally of the Ebonheart Covenant), and of course be an enemy to the antagonist of the game which is the Imperials in Cyrodiil. You would then improve or worsen your faction standing with all factions in the game depending on what actions you make during your exploration and questing in Tamriel.

This solution would give the opportunity to actually go and explore Valenwood as a Dunmer without being targeted as an enemy. Of course as a player progress in the game, faction standings would increase and decrease if a player participated in the main war, the player would have a bad standing to the other two factions and thereby have difficulties exploring every area of Tamriel.

This system also opens up for the possibility to exile your character into another faction. E.g. a Dunmer could betray his/her starting faction and move to the Daggerfall Covenant. This also solves the problem of restricting races to each faction thus making it possible for people to play together with their prefered races, given one player would play as a Dunmer and another as a Breton and still be able to team up.

In addition to the EverQuest II faction system, here is a quick explanation to give an insigt to what I describe above;

Each creature belongs to a faction, and you have a standing with each faction. Many of the actions you take in Norrath, whether completing a quest or killing a monster, will cause you to gain or lose faction with one group or another. These groups can be Racial, Tribal, Political or Territorial.

Faction is described by a number, but is also simplified into several labels, which you can see in the tooltip when you target a creature. The faction labels are as follows;