---

Originally posted by Maelwydd

---

Originally posted by deakon It's not against lore tho, which was he point, Its no more against the lore as having faction specific content in skyrim and morrowind, dragons in skyrim or any other aspect to games that they have added (or even taken away)over the years

---

Oh come on. Someone made some shit up called it lore. Someone else comes along makes some more shit up and created an intricate web of lore articles. Lore for me is.....Orcs en masse would not fight alongside their oppressors. Sure some might but not all of them would. THAT is what to be breaks lore. It isn't that some shit someone made up doesn't fit some shit someone else made up. It is lore breaking in the fact it doesn't hold water when you use common sense! all lore in fantasy games is made up but that doesn't mean disengage brain to believe it.

---

Yes someone made something up and called it lore, thats how fiction works.

TES is full of things some consider hard to swallow, just look at cyrodiil, was a jungle according to lore and didn't change until oblivion, where suddenly its like medieval europe, how was that explained? like this....

"'You have suffered for me to win this throne, and I see how you hate jungle. Let me show you the power of Talos Stormcrown, born of the North, where my breath is long winter. I breathe now, in royalty, and reshape this land which is mine. I do this for you, Red Legions, for I love you.'"

A sentence in a book. Which now they are going to have to add another sentence explaining why it changed from medieval europe to jungle in the first place (my money says sheogorath did it).

Its not that big of a hard sell that orc's would work with the bretons, certainly not harder to swallow than a whole land turning from jungle to forest. Especially as according to the tes wik:

"The Orsimer also have relatively strong historical ties with the Bretons of High Rock. The reasons for this are unclear, yet the relationship most likely originated because the races are cohabitating the same region."

The way I see the orcs and bretons are like the british and the french, We have warred plenty, we kinda don't like each other much but will work together when its in both our interests.

And yes you could be right, that not every orc would be part of the faction, and tbh who's to say there wont be the odd npc from the opposite faction? But I don't think it would be common to see someone from a nation we are at all out war with, which it would be if you could roll an orc on an opposing faction.

Yea not every orc agrees with the "alliance"... theres even an orc whos a deadra worshiper somewhere... and theres a whole house from the dunmer that didnt join the "Great moot" (or ebon heart) either.

And I bet you'll see plenty of other faction npcs... traitors, spies, refugees, etc.

This "faction lock is bad qq" will stop when the game comes out anyway... the day people realize they have a lot more than they can chew on their side, let alone have time or "brain" to even think about how the other faction's trees are...

Originally posted by Maelwydd
Great, NPC Orcs, Elves, Humans...whatever. I want an Orc character that FIGHTS AGAINST the Bretons and their aliance. I want to freedom to determine what MY character wants to fight for. If I cannot make a character that is a blank template to become whatever I want them to become then the game is not a TES game. Simple as that.

Then... don't play it. Simple as that! Want the game to change around whatever you want? No... either you bend to the rules of the game, or you dont play the game.

Don't like poker rules? Don't play it. The WPS will NOT change poker just because you find it unfair how you can be steamrolled even holding a pair of aces. What you want me to tell you?

Dont play it. lol... easy.

---

Originally posted by Maelwydd Great, NPC Orcs, Elves, Humans...whatever. I want an Orc character that FIGHTS AGAINST the Bretons and their aliance. I want to freedom to determine what MY character wants to fight for. If I cannot make a character that is a blank template to become whatever I want them to become then the game is not a TES game. Simple as that.

---

Well you right its not a normal tes game, its an mmo set in the same ip, my guess is tes7 will come in about 2/3 years.

You are still able to create char to become whatever you like, your restrictions are mainly geographic, much like they are in other tes titles, but in this game you have choice to visit other areas and experience the world/story from a different perspective rather than just having one perspective.

Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

Originally posted by Maelwydd
Great, NPC Orcs, Elves, Humans...whatever. I want an Orc character that FIGHTS AGAINST the Bretons and their aliance. I want to freedom to determine what MY character wants to fight for. If I cannot make a character that is a blank template to become whatever I want them to become then the game is not a TES game. Simple as that.

Then... don't play it. Simple as that! Want the game to change around whatever you want? No... either you bend to the rules of the game, or you dont play the game.

Don't like poker rules? Don't play it. The WPS will NOT change poker just because you find it unfair how you can be steamrolled even holding a pair of aces. What you want me to tell you?

Dont play it. lol... easy.

Your advice is apt.  But the problem comes from them claiming it's poker, when it's actually bridge.   They absolutely did this to fit elder scrolls  into DAoC.  Everyone knows it.  They just can't figure out a way to gracefully 'fess up.   Hence Schick trying to spackle over all the inherent problems of these groupings in the backstories.

Now if they're real clever, they'll  include all sorts of stories with nasty internal stresses, backstabbing, and intra-faction connivance.

Originally posted by deakon

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by deakon

Originally posted by HeroEvermore
This lock really is lame and I do not feel it fully fits into the lore of the game. The factions should have been the guilds. Just makes the game sound "unlegit" to me. All that is going to matter is the gameplay and functions anyway.

Before skyrim some people would say dragons coming back was against lore, that is until they wrote the lore to have that happen.

Big difference though. Players requested for a long time to have Dragons. Can't recall every hearing anyone asking to block 2/3 of the game from exploration per character and race lock factions. One lore change improves gameplay, the other doesn't.

It's not against lore tho, which was he point, Its no more against the lore as having faction specific content in skyrim and morrowind, dragons in skyrim or any other aspect to games that they have added (or even taken away)over the years

I don't feel like you're using your head or think that other people can. There's something called believability in a gameworld. The things happening in TES series are believable IMO, while the faction lock in ESO seems like a knee-jerk response to needing 3 races per faction for a DAoC-esque RvR end game. They just said, "we want a 3 faction endgame," and then, "how about 3 races per faction and make up something to please the masses on why they're teamed up together"

Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

Originally posted by Maelwydd
Great, NPC Orcs, Elves, Humans...whatever. I want an Orc character that FIGHTS AGAINST the Bretons and their aliance. I want to freedom to determine what MY character wants to fight for. If I cannot make a character that is a blank template to become whatever I want them to become then the game is not a TES game. Simple as that.

Then... don't play it. Simple as that! Want the game to change around whatever you want? No... either you bend to the rules of the game, or you dont play the game.

Don't like poker rules? Don't play it. The WPS will NOT change poker just because you find it unfair how you can be steamrolled even holding a pair of aces. What you want me to tell you?

Dont play it. lol... easy.

Except now is the time to complain, not after the game is released. Now is the time that developers "have a chance" to drop by fansites and websites like this to read up on how their game is being received. Now is the chance to sway those rules. There's still plenty of time before release. Look at EQNext, they scrapped the original project and started over. 

In short, you have a defeatest attitude where you just roll over and become victim, or your just really a fan of the game as is and want other people to shut up and stop complaining about it, which is just a double standard.

Originally posted by nate1980

Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

Originally posted by Maelwydd
Great, NPC Orcs, Elves, Humans...whatever. I want an Orc character that FIGHTS AGAINST the Bretons and their aliance. I want to freedom to determine what MY character wants to fight for. If I cannot make a character that is a blank template to become whatever I want them to become then the game is not a TES game. Simple as that.

Then... don't play it. Simple as that! Want the game to change around whatever you want? No... either you bend to the rules of the game, or you dont play the game.

Don't like poker rules? Don't play it. The WPS will NOT change poker just because you find it unfair how you can be steamrolled even holding a pair of aces. What you want me to tell you?

Dont play it. lol... easy.

Except now is the time to complain, not after the game is released. Now is the time that developers "have a chance" to drop by fansites and websites like this to read up on how their game is being received. Now is the chance to sway those rules. There's still plenty of time before release. Look at EQNext, they scrapped the original project and started over. 

In short, you have a defeatest attitude where you just roll over and become victim, or your just really a fan of the game as is and want other people to shut up and stop complaining about it, which is just a double standard.

Theres plenty of fish in the sea. Go play another. Dont screw with a game as good as this is starting to become.

---

Originally posted by nate1980

---

Originally posted by deakon

---

Originally posted by Maelwydd

---

Originally posted by deakon

---

Originally posted by HeroEvermore This lock really is lame and I do not feel it fully fits into the lore of the game. The factions should have been the guilds. Just makes the game sound "unlegit" to me. All that is going to matter is the gameplay and functions anyway.

---

Before skyrim some people would say dragons coming back was against lore, that is until they wrote the lore to have that happen.

---

Big difference though. Players requested for a long time to have Dragons. Can't recall every hearing anyone asking to block 2/3 of the game from exploration per character and race lock factions. One lore change improves gameplay, the other doesn't.

---

It's not against lore tho, which was he point, Its no more against the lore as having faction specific content in skyrim and morrowind, dragons in skyrim or any other aspect to games that they have added (or even taken away)over the years

---

I don't feel like you're using your head or think that other people can. There's something called believability in a gameworld. The things happening in TES series are believable IMO, while the faction lock in ESO seems like a knee-jerk response to needing 3 races per faction for a DAoC-esque RvR end game. They just said, "we want a 3 faction endgame," and then, "how about 3 races per faction and make up something to please the masses on why they're teamed up together"  

---

I don't see how warring factions is hard to believe, the only argument you can seem to come up with is that it hasn't been like it in a tes game before, that doesn't make it hard to believe. I think restrictions on where you can go at a time of war is fairly realistic, and the fact that certain races that normally don't work together are is also realistic when you think about the fact thats its 1k years before the other games.

Alliances change and frequently, that is the realistic view, Germany tried to take over europe and beyond twice yet we are now allied with them, a lot of countries that took slaves now work with countries that they took them from etc etc etc, and thats within the last couple of hundred years. In the 800-1k years between this and the single player games, yes its more than believable.

"The fact that alliances can be made and change multiple times in a millenia is completely ridiculous and you must lack the use of your head to think such a thing possible.....Time traveling dragons? Yeah I'll buy that"

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by jtcgs

Originally posted by Dantae87

i for one am leening to yes, now not lost 100% , i will give the game a shot but right off the bat 75% intrest is lost due to this flaw.

 Once I heard factions I knew it was downhill from there because if a company is willing to make one drastic change from the IP, they will be making others, and they have. Closed faction areas, Races limited to factions, PvP limited to PvP zones, Lore changes...this is just DaoC 2 in a TES skin.

Considering there is nothing in the lore that prohibts factions and multiplayer TES has never been done before then I would say you are wrong because we have no history of lore that far back (when the game is set) so for all intents and purposes ESO is crafting the lore that fits within an unknown time frame in Tamriel.

 

Being a DAoC 2 is jsut more icing on the cake that this game is gonna kick ass.

 Incorrect, there is a TON of lore that PROVES there wasnt a 3 dominion fight going on in this time period...this is taking place during the SECOND ERA and judging by their announcement that we will be able to procliam an emperor by taking and holding the PvP lands, it means that it is taking place AFTER 2E 430, the year the last potentate is assissinated leaving no HEIRs and thus an empty throne...yet, according to lore, there are NO WARS and at only ONE TIME does someone try to invade Cyrodiil but its stopped at Morrowind...and that is in the year 2E 572 (over 100 years later!), the imperial lands are not invaded again until TALOS AKA Tiber Septim invades at the end of 2E, 897.

If they try some slight of hand and mess with the lore by making it before 2E 430 when the Aldmeri Dominion are fighting the Aleesian order to fit what they are making, they are then breaking the lore by allowing a situation where the Imperials can lose, when they didnt, thus basically saying, anything that happens after our DaoC RvR cheap PvP game, like in those TES games, means nothing, because we just changed it all.

Afterall, how can Talos ever become a general in a land that is in chaos from an empty imperial throne, if that throne is taken over by the Dominion and his own lands have long been in captivity thus making him born a servant and altering his life.

Either way TESO is royally effing with TES lore.

Originally posted by deakon

 

---

I don't see how warring factions is hard to believe, the only argument you can seem to come up with is that it hasn't been like it in a tes game before, that doesn't make it hard to believe. I think restrictions on where you can go at a time of war is fairly realistic, and the fact that certain races that normally don't work together are is also realistic when you think about the fact thats its 1k years before the other games.

Alliances change and frequently, that is the realistic view, Germany tried to take over europe and beyond twice yet we are now allied with them, a lot of countries that took slaves now work with countries that they took them from etc etc etc, and thats within the last couple of hundred years. In the 800-1k years between this and the single player games, yes its more than believable.

 

"The fact that alliances can be made and change multiple times in a millenia is completely ridiculous and you must lack the use of your head to think such a thing possible.....Time traveling dragons? Yeah I'll buy that"

The argument isn't that warring factions are hard to believe, at least it isn't with me. The problem is it is totally uneccessary. Lets look at this as if TESO was being discussed for the first time...

OK so we have a basic premise of 3 factions at war fighting over the crown. Lets look at the TES games and see what will work with that...

OK so TES games have historically had Great houses and guilds that players can join. Can we creat a 3 faction war out of that?

Sure, how about we have 3 great houses, lets say a Breton merchant lord, an elven faction and Nord perhaps seeing as Skyrim was the last game.

OK so we have 3 houses fighting for control of the crown. These 3 houses will want allies so that will probably allow us to use guilds, both the normal guilds (like Mage, Fighter, Dark brotherhood and thieves guild, incorporate some of the quests available to do work for a house of the players choosing and slowly building up character progression to getting each player to choose a faction to join) and player run guilds who can sign up for a particular house of their choosing (give the guild house related quests as well so that players can earn guild points to increse their standing in the guild and the house).

OK so we have 3 faction warfare, player run guild quests to serve the houses, NPC run guild quests to serve the houses, all nicely linked together to keep the freedom of choice, the freedom of movement and involvement in the PvP if people so desire.

See why I have a problem believeing this game will be anything more then a bog standard MMO lacking any imagination or creativity....

Seriously, it was piss easy to come up with something that sticks to the current lore, doesn't remove the player freedoms people expect from a TES game, maintain 3 faction warfare and have none of this bullshit caused by their system to have 3 faction warfare fuck around with the PvE. They have been mulling this over since 2007 - 6 years to come up with an atrociously bad design concept that is totally uneccessary. That is the worst thing, it is totally uneccessary to have all these restrictions and could have been done to fit with what TES players expect without ANY issues.

---

Originally posted by Maelwydd

---

Originally posted by deakon   I don't see how warring factions is hard to believe, the only argument you can seem to come up with is that it hasn't been like it in a tes game before, that doesn't make it hard to believe. I think restrictions on where you can go at a time of war is fairly realistic, and the fact that certain races that normally don't work together are is also realistic when you think about the fact thats its 1k years before the other games. Alliances change and frequently, that is the realistic view, Germany tried to take over europe and beyond twice yet we are now allied with them, a lot of countries that took slaves now work with countries that they took them from etc etc etc, and thats within the last couple of hundred years. In the 800-1k years between this and the single player games, yes its more than believable.   "The fact that alliances can be made and change multiple times in a millenia is completely ridiculous and you must lack the use of your head to think such a thing possible.....Time traveling dragons? Yeah I'll buy that"

---

The argument isn't that warring factions are hard to believe, at least it isn't with me. The problem is it is totally uneccessary. Lets look at this as if TESO was being discussed for the first time...   OK so we have a basic premise of 3 factions at war fighting over the crown. Lets look at the TES games and see what will work with that... OK so TES games have historically had Great houses and guilds that players can join. Can we creat a 3 faction war out of that? Sure, how about we have 3 great houses, lets say a Breton merchant lord, an elven faction and Nord perhaps seeing as Skyrim was the last game. OK so we have 3 houses fighting for control of the crown. These 3 houses will want allies so that will probably allow us to use guilds, both the normal guilds (like Mage, Fighter, Dark brotherhood and thieves guild, incorporate some of the quests available to do work for a house of the players choosing and slowly building up character progression to getting each player to choose a faction to join) and player run guilds who can sign up for a particular house of their choosing (give the guild house related quests as well so that players can earn guild points to increse their standing in the guild and the house). OK so we have 3 faction warfare, player run guild quests to serve the houses, NPC run guild quests to serve the houses, all nicely linked together to keep the freedom of choice, the freedom of movement and involvement in the PvP if people so desire. See why I have a problem believeing this game will be anything more then a bog standard MMO lacking any imagination or creativity.... Seriously, it was piss easy to come up with something that sticks to the current lore, doesn't remove the player freedoms people expect from a TES game, maintain 3 faction warfare and have none of this bullshit caused by their system to have 3 faction warfare fuck around with the PvE. They have been mulling this over since 2007 - 6 years to come up with an atrociously bad design concept that is totally uneccessary. That is the worst thing, it is totally uneccessary to have all these restrictions and could have been done to fit with what TES players expect without ANY issues.  

---

I get that you don't like it, I also understand there were ways they could have done it where we all have access to everything on one character and all faction looked the same etc

Thing is, I don't want that, I played a mmo recently with a good story per faction but everything else was pretty much shared, didn't work out too well.

Complaining about something thats such a big part of the story line this late in development is pointless, it would be like asking for no dragons in skyrim less than 12 months from release, it would almost mean starting again from scratch.

And in that theory... does the Breton share the Mages guild with the Nord and the Elf? You and your enemies constantly cross paths but because its a safe haven, theres no fighting? Thing is... you and your enemies share the same guild? What the... what?

This isnt wow... you dont go deliver quests where the Orc is delivering his... theres no "dalaran"... no safe haven. Want to stay safe? Stay at home. You know... behind your borders. Where THEY cant go.

Plus there will be more than enough pve content shared in cyrodiil as well...

I dont see how this is such a tough concept for ppl that didnt play DAoC... seriously. Is this really that hard? Why are we discussing something that makes perfect sense?

Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

And in that theory... does the Breton share the Mages guild with the Nord and the Elf? You and your enemies constantly cross paths but because its a safe haven, theres no fighting? Thing is... you and your enemies share the same guild? What the... what?

This isnt wow... you dont go deliver quests where the Orc is delivering his... theres no "dalaran"... no safe haven. Want to stay safe? Stay at home. You know... behind your borders. Where THEY cant go.

Plus there will be more than enough pve content shared in cyrodiil as well...

I dont see how this is such a tough concept for ppl that didnt play DAoC... seriously. Is this really that hard? Why are we discussing something that makes perfect sense?

Do you not get that it is an artificial wall?   And folks around here just love artificial walls. 

Build your own world, and you can come up with some (strained) excuses for this.  The problem is they want to appeal to Elder Scrolls fans, who kinda expect a somewhat Elder Scrolls consistant world.   They can't let other opposing races wander about, because that would lead to asshat gankers.   They have to have three factions with contiguous land.  They just went and divvied up the map, and tried to come up with an excuse.

It's a meta game decision that made things much easier for the developers.  But they are working with an established background, which makes some of their choices rankle.  Doesn't mean I won't play, if it is good.  But it is definitely a fudged set up to fit their defined mechanic.