Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by immodium

 

What genre it's from is totally irrelevant to whether its a "real" (insert IP) game.

I have never mentioned 'real'. Only that your assumption that an RTS and a RPG are the same genre, which they are not.

I know you didn't, I think it was Sapphen. It's not just hime/her though, there has been others throwing the "real" statement.

Doesn't matter if an IP starts out one genre then changes, all games within that IP are "real".

IMO it's like calling ESO not a "real" ES game because PvP is being introduced. Or becuase I can't pause time in combat. Which is nonsense.

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by Nanfoodle

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

So basically you want them to copy some niche game instead of actually making a real Elder Scrolls game?  It seems to me that you are looking for CU.

FFS, I wish people would just stop with this "real" Elder Scrolls crap.

If Bethesda puts their blessing on that game and they did, then its the real TES MMO. 

I agree. Like Redguard is a "real" TES game. Some people imply that that game and this are some how not "real" TES games for not having certain game mechanics. It's pathetic.

So basically I'm getting attacked by two twerps because of what that guy said he wanted.... fucking pathetic.

How have you come to that conclusion?  -put his response in yellow for reference.

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by Nanfoodle

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

So basically you want them to copy some niche game instead of actually making a real Elder Scrolls game?  It seems to me that you are looking for CU.

FFS, I wish people would just stop with this "real" Elder Scrolls crap.

If Bethesda puts their blessing on that game and they did, then its the real TES MMO. 

I agree. Like Redguard is a "real" TES game. Some people imply that that game and this are some how not "real" TES games for not having certain game mechanics. It's pathetic.

So basically I'm getting attacked by two twerps because of what that guy said he wanted.... fucking pathetic.

How have you come to that conclusion?  -put his response in yellow for reference.

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

But what gets developed in the end is a "real" TES game. I fail to see how what you want over what azzamasin wants makes it more "real".

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by immodium

 

What genre it's from is totally irrelevant to whether its a "real" (insert IP) game.

I have never mentioned 'real'. Only that your assumption that an RTS and a RPG are the same genre, which they are not.

UO did a pretty fair conversion from an RPG to a MMO and they also changed some of the lore to do it.  I say let the game release and then after playing for a bit we can discuss the hows and whys of game design and what went right and what went wrong.

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by immodium

What genre it's from is totally irrelevant to whether its a "real" (insert IP) game.

I have never mentioned 'real'. Only that your assumption that an RTS and a RPG are the same genre, which they are not.

I know you didn't, I think it was Sapphen. It's not just hime/her though, there has been others throwing the "real" statement.

Doesn't matter if an IP starts out one genre then changes, all games within that IP are "real".

IMO it's like calling ESO not a "real" ES game because PvP is being introduced. Or becuase I can't pause time in combat. Which is nonsense.

Battlespire and Redguard aren't considered 'real' TES games by the players or developers.  They said themselves that those games are spin-offs ~ which I think they was wanting to do the same thing to ESO but it came across as more of a DAoC knock-off than a TES spin-off.

Some developers are successful at making a transition between gaming experiences but I wouldn't consider Luigi's Mansion a 'real' Super Mario Bros game.

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

But what gets developed in the end is a "real" TES game. I fail to see how what you want over what azzamasin wants makes it more "real".

No it's not.  Assman asks for a DAoC clone and then says anything short of that is a failed concept.  It doesn't matter if ESO is going to be a "real" TES game or not, he's not asking for that.

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by immodium

What genre it's from is totally irrelevant to whether its a "real" (insert IP) game.

I have never mentioned 'real'. Only that your assumption that an RTS and a RPG are the same genre, which they are not.

I know you didn't, I think it was Sapphen. It's not just hime/her though, there has been others throwing the "real" statement.

Doesn't matter if an IP starts out one genre then changes, all games within that IP are "real".

IMO it's like calling ESO not a "real" ES game because PvP is being introduced. Or becuase I can't pause time in combat. Which is nonsense.

Battlespire and Redguard aren't considered 'real' TES games by the players or developers.  They said themselves that those games are spin-offs ~ which I think they was wanting to do the same thing to ESO but it came across as more of a DAoC knock-off than a TES spin-off.

Some developers are successful at making a transition between gaming experiences but I wouldn't consider Luigi's Mansion a 'real' Super Mario Bros game.

How about Mario Kart? :)

I just find it unusual people only class something not 'real' when they don't like something. You never hear someone say "WoW is an amazing game, but it's not a Warcraft game" or "The new Star Wars triliogy is EPIC, but it's not Star Wars"

I just get the impression if those two games did better people would class them as 'real' ES games. They'd still class them as spin-offs though.

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

But what gets developed in the end is a "real" TES game. I fail to see how what you want over what azzamasin wants makes it more "real".

No it's not.  Assman asks for a DAoC clone and then says anything short of that is a failed concept.  It doesn't matter if ESO is going to be a "real" TES game or not, he's not asking for that.

There is no such thing as a real TES game, thats my point.

Originally posted by Yyrkoon_PoM

 

UO did a pretty fair conversion from an RPG to a MMO and they also changed some of the lore to do it.  I say let the game release and then after playing for a bit we can discuss the hows and whys of game design and what went right and what went wrong.

Bit late once the horse has bolted. This is probably the only TES MMO that will be made and I am gonna stick with pointing out why I don't like their design while we are still in the development stages. Remember, Beta has not yet started for the general public and if their beta data suggest theri have fucked up the design according to their prospective playerbase then that is the time to change it.

Admittedly Alpha is the litmus test for core design features but if the people who are ment to be buying the game don't like those core design features then it is simply a case that your Alpha test criteria was incorrect. The greatest product in the world is only the greatest because people wanted to buy the product, not because you think it is the greatest.

Originally posted by immodium

 "The new Star Wars triliogy is EPIC, but it's not Star Wars"

 

One name...Jar Jar Binks!

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by immodium

 "The new Star Wars triliogy is EPIC, but it's not Star Wars"

 

One name...Jar Jar Binks!

Hayden Christensen was more annoying IMO.

Actually, I have heard people claim something isn't 'real' but enjoyed it, The Lord of the Rings triliogy. Great action/adventure film but it's not Lord of the Rings.

It still baffles me.

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

So basically you want them to copy some niche game instead of actually making a real Elder Scrolls game?  It seems to me that you are looking for CU.

So a game which featured 250K subscribers at its peak and had the 2nd highest subscriber base in the west was a niche game?  Not to mention it is by most polls considered to be the best PvP game of all time.

Let us not also forget the PvE elements are what make a great game, and is why I will never play CU.  ESO's PvE is exactly like Skyrim but in a bigger area so its the best of both worlds.

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by Yyrkoon_PoM

 

UO did a pretty fair conversion from an RPG to a MMO and they also changed some of the lore to do it.  I say let the game release and then after playing for a bit we can discuss the hows and whys of game design and what went right and what went wrong.

Bit late once the horse has bolted. This is probably the only TES MMO that will be made and I am gonna stick with pointing out why I don't like their design while we are still in the development stages. Remember, Beta has not yet started for the general public and if their beta data suggest theri have fucked up the design according to their prospective playerbase then that is the time to change it.

Admittedly Alpha is the litmus test for core design features but if the people who are ment to be buying the game don't like those core design features then it is simply a case that your Alpha test criteria was incorrect. The greatest product in the world is only the greatest because people wanted to buy the product, not because you think it is the greatest.

Nothing is gonna change, and only a select boistorous individuals are in denial.  Msot are on here, but some are on the Bethesda forums.  However there are like 6 podcasts running weekly and several huge fanbase forum sites which has countless fans talking about the game.  The fans of the game as it currently stands far outwieghs any boackground noise the critics espouse.

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

But what gets developed in the end is a "real" TES game. I fail to see how what you want over what azzamasin wants makes it more "real".

No it's not.  Assman asks for a DAoC clone and then says anything short of that is a failed concept.  It doesn't matter if ESO is going to be a "real" TES game or not, he's not asking for that.

Typo or low grade hitjob?  I won't report either way but to answer your question.

I am not nor have I ever asked for a DAoC clone.  What I asked for is a true Elder Scrolls Game in an MMO format and that is what we get.  Having the best and arguably most loved form of PvP is a plus.  What I said was in order to have PvP in the game, which is a huge selling point for MMO's you need to do something original.  To have anything short of RvR conflict is to have another clone thats been done on numerious occasions all with mixed results but most being not favorible. 

If you'[re going to have PvP in an MMO (which you should) then do the form that has been done the least (1 time) and had the greatest results.  You can place open PvP, Instanced PvP, 2 faction PvP or RvR with 3 factions.  Besides WoW & EVE (which are anomolys the only logical choice is to put RvR as your PvP of choice.  To do so means you make choices, some subtle and some not so much.  I take the words of Arena Net to heart.  Which is why my choice reflects my opinion.  If you do something, then you go ALL IN. so in other words to do RvR you need to foster the elements that made DAoC successful, therefore openeing up all the factions zones will dilute and poison the RvR aspect in the long run because of the whole Realm Pride issue.  As a caveat to closing 2 other factions for your exploration the Devs seen fit to include 2 additional areas of exploration per faction whic hin the grand scheme of things is more PvE then you get in the single player game.  Hence my term best of both worlds.

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

But what gets developed in the end is a "real" TES game. I fail to see how what you want over what azzamasin wants makes it more "real".

No it's not.  Assman asks for a DAoC clone and then says anything short of that is a failed concept.  It doesn't matter if ESO is going to be a "real" TES game or not, he's not asking for that.

Typo or low grade hitjob?  I won't report either way but to answer your question.

I am not nor have I ever asked for a DAoC clone.

Typo, I meant to write Azzman... not sure it's reportable but I wouldn't do me any favors.

It sounds like you are asking for a DAoC clone here:

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

Not only do you say you want them to copy DAoC but you claim that if they had done it ANY OTHER WAY, it would be a failed concept.  You hardly mention TES, much less ask for a "true" Elder Scrolls game.

If you'[re going to have PvP in an MMO (which you should) then do the form that has been done the least (1 time) and had the greatest results.  You can place open PvP, Instanced PvP, 2 faction PvP or RvR with 3 factions.  Besides WoW & EVE (which are anomolys the only logical choice is to put RvR as your PvP of choice.  To do so means you make choices, some subtle and some not so much.  I take the words of Arena Net to heart.  Which is why my choice reflects my opinion.  If you do something, then you go ALL IN. so in other words to do RvR you need to foster the elements that made DAoC successful, therefore openeing up all the factions zones will dilute and poison the RvR aspect in the long run because of the whole Realm Pride issue.  As a caveat to closing 2 other factions for your exploration the Devs seen fit to include 2 additional areas of exploration per faction whic hin the grand scheme of things is more PvE then you get in the single player game.  Hence my term best of both worlds.

Basically here you ask "What game should they copy", like all MMOs have to copy something in order to be successful.  A true TES game DOES NOT NEED DAoC or any other game to be successful.  You're whole mentatlity about this project is more concerned with recreating DAoC rather than making a 'real' TES game.

You don't know what elements made DAoC successful, or fail for that matter.  Realm Pride is nothing but a buzz word, it's a lot harder to recreate DAoC than you think (if not near impossible considering how the community has changed).  GW2 and TSW both have taken a stab at 3 faction combat so I don't see how you say that this is something new and exciting.

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by immodium

Originally posted by sapphen

Because he is basically saying he wants ESO to be exactly like DAoC.  He never mentions anything about TES other than having "the world" to play out his DAoC fantasies.  He claims that if they do anything different from DAoC, it would be a failed concept.  I came to the conclusion that he wants a DAoC clone instead of a 'real' TES game. 

But what gets developed in the end is a "real" TES game. I fail to see how what you want over what azzamasin wants makes it more "real".

No it's not.  Assman asks for a DAoC clone and then says anything short of that is a failed concept.  It doesn't matter if ESO is going to be a "real" TES game or not, he's not asking for that.

Typo or low grade hitjob?  I won't report either way but to answer your question.

I am not nor have I ever asked for a DAoC clone.

Typo, I meant to write Azzman... not sure it's reportable but I wouldn't do me any favors.

It sounds like you are asking for a DAoC clone here:

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

Not only do you say you want them to copy DAoC but you claim that if they had done it ANY OTHER WAY, it would be a failed concept.  You hardly mention TES, much less ask for a "true" Elder Scrolls game.

If you'[re going to have PvP in an MMO (which you should) then do the form that has been done the least (1 time) and had the greatest results.  You can place open PvP, Instanced PvP, 2 faction PvP or RvR with 3 factions.  Besides WoW & EVE (which are anomolys the only logical choice is to put RvR as your PvP of choice.  To do so means you make choices, some subtle and some not so much.  I take the words of Arena Net to heart.  Which is why my choice reflects my opinion.  If you do something, then you go ALL IN. so in other words to do RvR you need to foster the elements that made DAoC successful, therefore openeing up all the factions zones will dilute and poison the RvR aspect in the long run because of the whole Realm Pride issue.  As a caveat to closing 2 other factions for your exploration the Devs seen fit to include 2 additional areas of exploration per faction whic hin the grand scheme of things is more PvE then you get in the single player game.  Hence my term best of both worlds.

Basically here you ask "What game should they copy", like all MMOs have to copy something in order to be successful.  A true TES game DOES NOT NEED DAoC or any other game to be successful.  You're whole mentatlity about this project is more concerned with recreating DAoC rather than making a 'real' TES game.

You don't know what elements made DAoC successful, or fail for that matter.  Realm Pride is nothing but a buzz word, it's a lot harder to recreate DAoC than you think (if not near impossible considering how the community has changed).  GW2 and TSW both have taken a stab at 3 faction combat so I don't see how you say that this is something new and exciting.

While I do agree with this assessment and I would of preferred a ZERO PvP game, that isn't within the spirit of the past 3 Elder Scrolls Games since you can pretty much kill any NPC you want.  Yes I know its not true PvP but it is in spirit the same concept.  Plus I think we can agree to not include PvP is a bad thing if you want to have a bigger population.  My only concern is, to include PvP you can only do it so many ways, all of which are bad game designs based on past performance so if you're going to include PvP you do the one form that has only been done one other time (DAoC).  You still have more PvE content to explore then any of the single player games which is soemthing you nicely try to avoid altogether.  As I've said in countless other posts.  Taking Eboneart pact as an example (since its easier to show) You get the content of the 3 previous Elder Scrolls titles.  Skyrim, Oblivian and Morrwind.  Huge plus for the PvE crowd.  that in my nutshell is why I do not need ot hapr on creating what you call a "true" elder Scrolsl game.  As theres no need, I get 3 Elder Scrolls Games worth of PvE content!!!!!

I do know what made DAoC successful, and anyone who played DAoC will tell you. Realm Pride.  It isn't jsut a buzz word, especially considering Mark Jacobs has a lengthy blog talking about it on his CU site.  GW2 and TSW failed to capture the spirit of RvR in its entire core concept.  GW2's factions were not factions at all, I could kill a Charr as a Charr or an Asura as an Asura.  I could see the exact same areas and level * pvE in the same exact areas as my enemy's, hell I could even guest with them, run dungeons with them and that did nothing to foster realm pride.  At the end of the day though the biggest mistake GW2's WvW failed to do was give any meaning or structure, basically you RvR'ed for funsies as the buffs were meaningless.  As for TSW, Same deal, I could play with and do dungeons with my enemies....HUGE deal breaker!!!!  Plus the PvP flat out sucked and was remiss with 1 shots and horrible balance.

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

So basically you want them to copy some niche game instead of actually making a real Elder Scrolls game?  It seems to me that you are looking for CU.

So a game which featured 250K subscribers at its peak and had the 2nd highest subscriber base in the west was a niche game?  Not to mention it is by most polls considered to be the best PvP game of all time.

 

Let us not also forget the PvE elements are what make a great game, and is why I will never play CU.  ESO's PvE is exactly like Skyrim but in a bigger area so its the best of both worlds.

4th highest subscriber base. EQ1, Lineage and SWG all had bigger sub bases. DAOC ranked around UO and AC but above AO.

If DAOC was so great, why did it only get 250k subs at peak? Why did it only come in 4th? To call something "the best" Id think it would have to place 1 or 2. Not 4th.

If DAOCs RvR was so great then why hasnt it been copied until now? Why isnt it the "gold standard" for PvP? Why arent other Devs following their "so awesome" style of PvP?

*edit- BTW the only Devs to "copy" DAOCs RvR style are..surprise surprise... Matt Firor and Mark Jacobs. The guys who made it.

So in actuality, NO other Devs have EVER copied DAOC. They are only remaking what they already did.

Seems like they are the only Devs who think that style of PvP is good.

Polls dont mean jack. DAOCs RvR wasnt the best MMO PvP. There isnt one. They have all sucked.

DAOC was a small niche game with a few fanatical fans.

Originally posted by azzamasin

While I do agree with this assessment and I would of preferred a ZERO PvP game, that isn't within the spirit of the past 3 Elder Scrolls Games since you can pretty much kill any NPC you want.  Yes I know its not true PvP but it is in spirit the same concept.  Plus I think we can agree to not include PvP is a bad thing if you want to have a bigger population.  My only concern is, to include PvP you can only do it so many ways, all of which are bad game designs based on past performance so if you're going to include PvP you do the one form that has only been done one other time (DAoC).  You still have more PvE content to explore then any of the single player games which is soemthing you nicely try to avoid altogether.  As I've said in countless other posts.  Taking Eboneart pact as an example (since its easier to show) You get the content of the 3 previous Elder Scrolls titles.  Skyrim, Oblivian and Morrwind.  Huge plus for the PvE crowd.  that in my nutshell is why I do not need ot hapr on creating what you call a "true" elder Scrolsl game.  As theres no need, I get 3 Elder Scrolls Games worth of PvE content!!!!!

I do know what made DAoC successful, and anyone who played DAoC will tell you. Realm Pride.  It isn't jsut a buzz word, especially considering Mark Jacobs has a lengthy blog talking about it on his CU site.  GW2 and TSW failed to capture the spirit of RvR in its entire core concept.  GW2's factions were not factions at all, I could kill a Charr as a Charr or an Asura as an Asura.  I could see the exact same areas and level * pvE in the same exact areas as my enemy's, hell I could even guest with them, run dungeons with them and that did nothing to foster realm pride.  At the end of the day though the biggest mistake GW2's WvW failed to do was give any meaning or structure, basically you RvR'ed for funsies as the buffs were meaningless.  As for TSW, Same deal, I could play with and do dungeons with my enemies....HUGE deal breaker!!!!  Plus the PvP flat out sucked and was remiss with 1 shots and horrible balance.

I just read Mark's article on pride and I rather enjoyed it.  Although I think he has some great points, I believe that word is being tossed around by ESO and it's supporters as a buzz word.

Mark lists lore and background as a major influence on creating pride.  Some of the races paired together in ESO does not make sense to someone who follows the Elder Scrolls franchise and lore.  TES is an established IP, players do not have pride for a faction but for their characters and the choices they make in the game world.

This is the difference between building a game around principles and just making a knock-off.  What I've gathered from his article - it's impossible to make ESO into a proper RvR game because the lore and setting does not support it.

http://citystateentertainment.com/2013/03/foundational-principle-10/

Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

So basically you want them to copy some niche game instead of actually making a real Elder Scrolls game?  It seems to me that you are looking for CU.

So a game which featured 250K subscribers at its peak and had the 2nd highest subscriber base in the west was a niche game?  Not to mention it is by most polls considered to be the best PvP game of all time.

 

Let us not also forget the PvE elements are what make a great game, and is why I will never play CU.  ESO's PvE is exactly like Skyrim but in a bigger area so its the best of both worlds.

4th highest subscriber base. EQ1, Lineage and SWG all had bigger sub bases. DAOC ranked around UO and AC but above AO.

If DAOC was so great, why did it only get 250k subs at peak? Why did it only come in 4th? To call something "the best" Id think it would have to place 1 or 2. Not 4th.

If DAOCs RvR was so great then why hasnt it been copied until now? Why isnt it the "gold standard" for PvP? Why arent other Devs following their "so awesome" style of PvP?

Polls dont mean jack. DAOCs RvR wasnt the best MMO PvP. There isnt one. They have all sucked.

DAOC was a small niche game with a few fanatical fans.

I lol'ed

Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs

Originally posted by azzamasin

Originally posted by sapphen

Originally posted by azzamasin

So in other words you want the same failed concept that has never worked as well as DAoC's closed faction, closed PvE, Realm Pride fostering 3 sided faction warfare.

No thanks, I'll take exactly what the Devs have proposed with the original DAoC style banded RvR PvP and the open world exploration centric PvE realms of the 3 factions that gives each player 4X the PvE world of the single player Elder Scrolls Games.  Get the best of both worlds or get crap PvP ontop of decent PvE.  I'll take the latter every time.

10 years from now if every game released after ESO is a RvR 3 faction MMO then you may have an argument but as of now I'll take something exciting, new and that has known results.

So basically you want them to copy some niche game instead of actually making a real Elder Scrolls game?  It seems to me that you are looking for CU.

So a game which featured 250K subscribers at its peak and had the 2nd highest subscriber base in the west was a niche game?  Not to mention it is by most polls considered to be the best PvP game of all time.

 

Let us not also forget the PvE elements are what make a great game, and is why I will never play CU.  ESO's PvE is exactly like Skyrim but in a bigger area so its the best of both worlds.

4th highest subscriber base. EQ1, Lineage and SWG all had bigger sub bases. DAOC ranked around UO and AC but above AO.

If DAOC was so great, why did it only get 250k subs at peak? Why did it only come in 4th? To call something "the best" Id think it would have to place 1 or 2. Not 4th.

If DAOCs RvR was so great then why hasnt it been copied until now? Why isnt it the "gold standard" for PvP? Why arent other Devs following their "so awesome" style of PvP?

Polls dont mean jack. DAOCs RvR wasnt the best MMO PvP. There isnt one. They have all sucked.

DAOC was a small niche game with a few fanatical fans.

I said in the west so Lineage doesnt count as not many westerners played it.  In its heyday which was before SWG, it had the 2nd largest subscription base.

you do realize 250k subs in 2002 was considered a massive success, I mean huge mega success!  WoW changed all that.

Why hasnt RvR been copied, again another WoW/Blizzard fault here.  Hundreds of MMO's saw wha tWoW did and copied, hence the term WoW clone.  Those companies wanted the chance at recreating Blizzard's success and suffice it to say, it is something we still have to contend with today.

DAoC was a great success and rivaled EQ in terms of Subscription numbers for a long time.  Not till the ToA expansion did it start to go downhill.