So i just watched some video about the elder scroll online and it supposed to have pvp similar to daoc 3 faction fighting against each other and all of them fighting over keeps. You fight over cities as well that give you bonuses like relics did so pumped right now if this is done well and has good pvp its going be a great game heres the video. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3GThZj_Z54&feature=related

Any faction v faction v faction will seem like DAOC.  Take off your Rose Tinted glasses, acknowledge this will be another ToR and deal.

Everytime someone compares this crap to DAOC a puppy dies and a baby is beaten.

Thank you :D

Originally posted by Ikeda

Any faction v faction v faction will seem like DAOC.

Except it's being created by Matt Firor, the maker of DAoC's PvP system.

And it's an ACTUAL 3 faciton PvP.. The real deal.

Originally posted by Ikeda

Any faction v faction v faction will seem like DAOC.  Take off your Rose Tinted glasses, acknowledge this will be another ToR and deal.

 

Everytime someone compares this crap to DAOC a puppy dies and a baby is beaten.

Same goes for everytime ignorant forum posters act like they know what their talking about.

so much trash talk towards ESO for a game that has shown almost nothing, people must have nothing to play.

So what's wrong with DAoC that you need to play TESO for 3 faction pvp?

Originally posted by Coldren

Except it's being created by Matt Firor, the maker of DAoC's PvP system.

And it's an ACTUAL 3 faciton PvP.. The real deal.

Yea,

Clearly you do NOTHING to make your case.

1)  Matt Firor hasn't done crap SINCE DAOC.  That was a decade ago.

2)  If you want to point at people who helped design stuff... what about ....

Mark Jacobs?  Oh wait he went on to create the ABYSMAL WAR.

Rob Denton?  Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2.

Brian Axelson?  Disappeared

Colin Hicks?  WAR

This is CLEARLY not a list of winners.  I'm not going to go down all the designers but this is the LIST of the NAMES. And CLEARLY ....

Edit:  Adding the list of the current Zenimax Dev's just to prove a point:

Paul Sage - Tabula Rasa, Ultima Online, Privateer 2

Bill Dalton - ToR, SWG, Ultima Online

Floyd Grubb - City of Villains, MOO3, tons of miscellaneous crap none of note.

Chris Cowger - Can't find anything.

Tracy Seamster - Free Realms, EQ2

Yep... looking like a GREAT list of good developers here.  Shall we hype this some more or just stoke the flames just a little bit.  Stop hyping garbage for the sake of hype.

Originally posted by Ikeda

Originally posted by Coldren

Except it's being created by Matt Firor, the maker of DAoC's PvP system.

And it's an ACTUAL 3 faciton PvP.. The real deal.

Yea,

Clearly you do NOTHING to make your case.

1)  Matt Firor hasn't done crap SINCE DAOC.  That was a decade ago.

2)  If you want to point at people who helped design stuff... what about ....

Mark Jacobs?  Oh wait he went on to create the ABYSMAL WAR.

Rob Denton?  Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2.

Brian Axelson?  Disappeared

Colin Hicks?  WAR

 

This is CLEARLY not a list of winners.  I'm not going to go down all the designers but this is the LIST of the NAMES. And CLEARLY ....

 

Edit:  Adding the list of the current Zenimax Dev's just to prove a point:

Paul Sage - Tabula Rasa, Ultima Online, Privateer 2

Bill Dalton - ToR, SWG, Ultima Online

Floyd Grubb - City of Villains, MOO3, tons of miscellaneous crap none of note.

Chris Cowger - Can't find anything.

Tracy Seamster - Free Realms, EQ2

 

Yep... looking like a GREAT list of good developers here.  Shall we hype this some more or just stoke the flames just a little bit.  Stop hyping garbage for the sake of hype.

 

I'm hesitant to cheer Frior, since for all I know, he was more responsible for ToA than RvR, but that aside.. UO, SWG, CoV, EQ2.. all decent MMOs, IMHO.  What MMOs would you consider to have been successful enough to warrant developer acclaim, and how short is that list?

As for Frior not doing anything for a decade though.. isn't that because he's been working on DAOC, its expansions, and TESO for the past 10 years?

Originally posted by Vhaln

*snip*.. UO, SWG, CoV, EQ2.. all decent MMOs, IMHO.  *snip* 

As for Frior not doing anything for a decade though.. isn't that because he's been working on DAOC, its expansions, and TESO for the past 10 years?

Yea, I don't know specifics other than he's been at Zenimax for like 5 years now with nothing too huge to note as far as I can tell.

And I'm not saying these are not "no-name" games.  What I am saying is that take an HONEST look at the games:

UO - Oldie, but goodie.  Most of us old-timers love it in our memories.  Would it hold up presently?  No.

SWG - Closed.  Launch was horrible.  NGE.  Not saying it was all him but there were huge failings there.

CoV - Basically a reskined CoH.  Had they been involved with CoH it would have been harder to counter.  I have plenty of good memories of CoH but COV was meh until some of the later releases.

EQ2 - Bombed at launch.  Sometime a couple of years after they made so many changes that EQ2 is not even remotely close to what they presented at launch.   Now, with it's content and the F2P, it's been reborn and good for it.

So ultimately I'm presented with a general consensus of... older dated games, most of which had failed launches, and people are getting excited about this...  I just don't understand the hype.

You are correct though, my short list is getting shorter.  There were some big names knocked out of the running with WAR, TOR, Tabula Rasa, and the like.  But I think it's perhaps because of those launches, I'm more cynical about these people.  Gaming has changed dramatically in 10 years.  

Just my OPINION.

Originally posted by warmaster670

Originally posted by Ikeda

Any faction v faction v faction will seem like DAOC.  Take off your Rose Tinted glasses, acknowledge this will be another ToR and deal.

Everytime someone compares this crap to DAOC a puppy dies and a baby is beaten.

Same goes for everytime ignorant forum posters act like they know what their talking about.

so much trash talk towards ESO for a game that has shown almost nothing, people must have nothing to play.

I agree, we will need more info to even discuss this.

The only thing we know is that there will be 3 faction PvP and that one of the guys behind DaoC is lead designer. Of course GW2 also have people from DaoC and 3 factions and yet it is rather far from DaoC. Even Rift is adding it now (and I wouldn´t be surprised if Wow will as well if GW2 or ESO do fine).

Let's wait with any statemnt here, besides the sandbox fans who are dissapointed. We know enough for that at least.

I think predefined faction conflict is a bit overrated.  Three factions do make the system more complex, but still have the trappings of any contrived alliance system.  I really think original Lineage did it right with contested castles (sieges) and organic alliances that were built from gulids and their alliances.  The conflict for resources, drops, and wealth in that sort of system really creates a better dynamic.

edit:  That aside, I do think Elder Scrolls has the potential to be a really good game and their choosing three factions fits their system.

Originally posted by Torvaldr

I think predefined faction conflict is a bit overrated.  Three factions do make the system more complex, but still have the trappings of any contrived alliance system.  I really think original Lineage did it right with contested castles (sieges) and organic alliances that were built from gulids and their alliances.  The conflict for resources, drops, and wealth in that sort of system really creates a better dynamic.

I don't think it's that it's overrated, just a matter of preference.  Some people prefer pre-defined factions, hands down, no question.  I'm one of them, but I also understand why other people prefer a more open system.

Originally posted by Vhaln

Originally posted by Torvaldr

I think predefined faction conflict is a bit overrated.  Three factions do make the system more complex, but still have the trappings of any contrived alliance system.  I really think original Lineage did it right with contested castles (sieges) and organic alliances that were built from gulids and their alliances.  The conflict for resources, drops, and wealth in that sort of system really creates a better dynamic.

I don't think it's that it's overrated, just a matter of preference.  Some people prefer pre-defined factions, hands down, no question.  I'm one of them, but I also understand why other people prefer a more open system.

I don't think three faction systems don't work, but I say overrated because it's often touted as a way to solve all the problems of a two faction system.  It doesn't necessarily solve those problems though, but it can spread them out and make them less of a factor.  For example, population balance.  If two factions heavily outweigh the third, there is still a balance just like if there were only two and one was far more powerful than the other.  It doesn't solve that problem, but it does spread out the likelihood that the weight is all going to be with one or that the two more poweful factions will that much more heavily weighted.

I see three factions as helping to moderate the more extreme disparity we would see in a two faction system.

So it's only overrated as far as I think it's a bit naive to think it will be a perfect system or trouble free (this is how it seems to be presented most often).  But it is probably much better than a two faction system.

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by Vhaln

Originally posted by Torvaldr

I think predefined faction conflict is a bit overrated.  Three factions do make the system more complex, but still have the trappings of any contrived alliance system.  I really think original Lineage did it right with contested castles (sieges) and organic alliances that were built from gulids and their alliances.  The conflict for resources, drops, and wealth in that sort of system really creates a better dynamic.

I don't think it's that it's overrated, just a matter of preference.  Some people prefer pre-defined factions, hands down, no question.  I'm one of them, but I also understand why other people prefer a more open system.

I don't think three faction systems don't work, but I say overrated because it's often touted as a way to solve all the problems of a two faction system.  It doesn't necessarily solve those problems though, but it can spread them out and make them less of a factor.  For example, population balance.  If two factions heavily outweigh the third, there is still a balance just like if there were only two and one was far more powerful than the other.  It doesn't solve that problem, but it does spread out the likelihood that the weight is all going to be with one or that the two more poweful factions will that much more heavily weighted.

I see three factions as helping to moderate the more extreme disparity we would see in a two faction system.

So it's only overrated as far as I think it's a bit naive to think it will be a perfect system or trouble free (this is how it seems to be presented most often).  But it is probably much better than a two faction system.

Daoc was not made ''3 realm'' to fix every problem. Daoc was created in 1999-2001 not in 2012. I think the concept of three realm was more in line with adding diversity and a  ''home', feeling... In daoc you could not speak with your enemy or even see their nickname. Which I always though was a magnificient great idea.  Yes you could see ' You target ''X Name'' and  he belong to an enemy realm but anyway. I think many daoc player just scrolled down their fight after they died and that when you noticed who owned your ass and created more bitterness :P. It`s all the little thing like that .

It's reinforced the '' US VS YOU'' and this is my realm and not yours ! It`s created rivalry like no other game.

Ug to think I still remember the L'A nerf. I was so frigging pissed that day. Because the tree hugger for me had won  with all the QQ and Wyyrd QQ test. LA was shit .. SO shit that 2H was  more dps .. So I was bassically a warrior without chain armor and defense. Until charge and banelord.

I really don`t think that ESo will bring back the magic. DaoC was daoc and we`re to deep into the next generation. People don`t want to grind, people don`t want to do any effort and people want ''instant'' everything and people don`t want to pay anything. But the most important is that publisher don`t want to finance the niche market.

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by warmaster670

Originally posted by Ikeda

Any faction v faction v faction will seem like DAOC.  Take off your Rose Tinted glasses, acknowledge this will be another ToR and deal.

Everytime someone compares this crap to DAOC a puppy dies and a baby is beaten.

Same goes for everytime ignorant forum posters act like they know what their talking about.

so much trash talk towards ESO for a game that has shown almost nothing, people must have nothing to play.

I agree, we will need more info to even discuss this.

The only thing we know is that there will be 3 faction PvP and that one of the guys behind DaoC is lead designer. Of course GW2 also have people from DaoC and 3 factions and yet it is rather far from DaoC. Even Rift is adding it now (and I wouldn´t be surprised if Wow will as well if GW2 or ESO do fine).

Let's wait with any statemnt here, besides the sandbox fans who are dissapointed. We know enough for that at least.

Well from what I hear, The 3 faction comabt is not instanced like Fusang or WvW. My take is that on the normal non pvp servers there will be 3 kindoms for each faction. Each kingdom will have their land, and portion of that land will overlap with the other kingdoms land. That overlapping area will be the contested pvp area. Kinda like this.

On a pvp server if they have them, I would assume that more of the land if not all will be flagged. 

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by warmaster670

Originally posted by Ikeda

Any faction v faction v faction will seem like DAOC.  Take off your Rose Tinted glasses, acknowledge this will be another ToR and deal.

Everytime someone compares this crap to DAOC a puppy dies and a baby is beaten.

Same goes for everytime ignorant forum posters act like they know what their talking about.

so much trash talk towards ESO for a game that has shown almost nothing, people must have nothing to play.

I agree, we will need more info to even discuss this.

The only thing we know is that there will be 3 faction PvP and that one of the guys behind DaoC is lead designer. Of course GW2 also have people from DaoC and 3 factions and yet it is rather far from DaoC. Even Rift is adding it now (and I wouldn´t be surprised if Wow will as well if GW2 or ESO do fine).

Let's wait with any statemnt here, besides the sandbox fans who are dissapointed. We know enough for that at least.

Well from what I hear, The 3 faction comabt is not instanced like Fusang or WvW. My take is that on the normal non pvp servers there will be 3 kindoms for each faction. Each kingdom will have their land, and portion of that land will overlap with the other kingdoms land. That overlapping area will be the contested pvp area. Kinda like this.

 

On a pvp server if they have them, I would assume that more of the land if not all will be flagged. 

I hope the pvp in ESO plays out the way you've explained it, unfortunately they mentioned that factions will be bound to their predefined provinces. However each faction will have a HUGE amount of land to explore so hopefully it won't feel as though you're trapped.