Originally posted by Laughing-man

Hey look people are generalizing again!

I heard everyone who made Fallout 3 still works at Zenimax, in fact I've heard that everyone who worked on Fallout 3 is working on this new Project, because they are so similar and clearly the people at this LARGE company all work on one project at a time together, never is their talent divided up, or perhaps assigned to different teams.

People NEVER quit their jobs, or new people are NEVER hired onto new companies.

Right?

 

 /sigh

Depends on how many they are hiring.  Problem is, in a game company, you don't hire without firing unless there is added work.  So people are making assumptions.  We know they are working on a MMO.  They have two IP's.  Logic.  Let people hope.  If they are let down, at least they had fun doing it.

Originally posted by PukeBucket

 

---

Originally posted by DAS1337

---

Originally posted by neorandom
terrible idea, elder scrolls open skill system + mmo = broken and impossible to balance.

---

Why?
 
Esplain yourself.  You can't just make wild claims without actually being able to back up your reasoning.

---

 

Kind of easy to explain, and legit concerns.

I think Bethesda's aware of these problems tho'.

1. They make buggy games. All of them have had their issues. Fallout 3 wasn't too bad for me personally, New Vegas I saw knees attacking me in mid air.. Daggerfall there were a number of quests without ends (tho' quests functioned differently / better back then), Morrowind similar bugs here and there, Skyrim my girlfriend's character constantly froze at one scene. Figured it'd do it to me and I'd cry, but no. I got pass it just fine in the main story. SOOOOOOO their track record on stability, shaken at best.

All I can say here is that due to being a MMO, there will be constant patching in the case of bugs and glitches.  MMO's are harder to make as there are many outside factors that can't be duplicated in-house.  These get fixed in time, in most cases.

Now how do ES games generally progress? Well you eventually become the baddest MOFO in town. It used to be a very solitary ordeal and if you pure built warrior or rogue you needed a million health potions to get anything done. So magetanks were plenty abound.

What about all of the other adventurers in the ES world?  Were they all badass MOFO's as well?  I'd gather to venture that they would be more like the players that we are controlling in a ES MMO.  We don't have to play the hero.

Then you have TES games increasingly shrinking in a way. The spells used to be quite open ended, you could float and hover, carry polearms, craft your own this and that item of bad assery. Really it didn't matter if it balanced out in the end. The end bosses were generally either too easy or too hard unless you out level them crazily.

So they don't have any sense of balance, and MMOers crave it. If someone, so help them god, is even 1 dps point higher than them; the forums explode with a crazy amount of whinery type input.

It's going to be a shaky situation.

Luckily tho', I have at least some hope that these are quite familiar issues to ZeniMax.

The problem is, in addressing these issues, will there be any soul left in the series?

Again, if you take the games as single player RPG's and attempt to turn them into MMO's with all of the same game mechanics, you're going to get a terrible mess.  They would obviously attempt to create systems within the game to promote balance.  They may have to skirt the edge of what makes ES, ES.  But, if you want an ES MMO, you're going to be forced to sacrifice something.  There's reaslly no way around it.  I guess it just depends on what you think is too much sacrifice.

Originally posted by Unreal024

Originally posted by DAS1337

Name a sandbox MMO where you can do all those things that you mentioned.  How can 'your' definition of sandbox include those when it doesn't exist?  You can't make a definition based on something that doesn't exist.  Don't give me some off the wall multiplayer game that barely anyone plays.  Also, don't even mention minecraft.  It's not even in the same catagory.  You are arguing just to argue. 

 

ES is a sandbox.  All sandbox MMO's are made by developers.  All sandbox content on those games are made by developers or are made to be affected by players by developers.  Without a developer, there is no mountain.  I have no clue where you are going there.  No MMO survives without developer support.

Whoa, I'm not trying to argue here, I thought we were having a discussion. If you want to bring this down to a simple pissing contenst then I'll just step out of the conversation. If you don't want Minecraft mentioned, that's fair I guess. I'll just say that there are plenty of games more sandboxy than TES that do allow you to do those things I mentioned, and more.

 

As for MMOs, Wurm, Xsyon, Haven & Hearth, Salem, etc. Maybe you havn't heard of them, and maybe they don't have hundreds of thousands of players, but they do exist.

Those games have developers.  So, you argued against yourself.  By your definition, they aren't sandboxes.  You used the word 'allow'.  Who allows?  Ah, developers.  What are we discussing here?  Oh yes, that ES is a sandbox RPG.  Case closed.  Your definition, in my opinion, isn't reasonable.  As sandboxes do not exist by your definition.  This is not a conversation that can continue, because I now know that sandboxes are simply a figment of my imagination.. It's something that I thought up in my spare time.  Apparently, a lot of other people have spare time too..

Anyways.  ES can be done while still retaining what makes it so popular.  It won't, nay, can't be exactly the same as Skyrim.  It can be close though.  I, for one, am going to watch this with much interest. 

Originally posted by neorandom

terrible idea, elder scrolls open skill system + mmo = broken and impossible to balance.

Why?

Esplain yourself.  You can't just make wild claims without actually being able to back up your reasoning.

Originally posted by mmoguy43

I REALLY hope not. It better not be anything more than a rumor.

Seriously, all Bethesda needs to do is have coop multiplayer add on to ES6. A feature that could be scaled up to hold more players later and if it is possible. But jumping right into an Elder Scrolls online is going to be fatal.

There are already mods in the works for Skyrim Online. 

If a MMO adopted the same systems as they are in Skyrim, it would be a largely broken multiplayer game.

Originally posted by Unreal024

Originally posted by DAS1337

I think if you take the entire game as a whole and ask someone whether it's a sandbox or themepark oriented game, the answer is obvious.  So yes, indications would be that a MMO with the ES IP would gravitate closer to sandbox than themepark.  The opposite is nearly impossible to argue.

 

It may end up being closer to WoW.  I personally don't have that opinion, but it's possible.  Though, again, you are confusing me with the FPV bit.  The first four games had FPV.  The last, Skyrim, had a very functional TPV.  So, by their design, ES isn't ES because of FPV.  And again, it can have some themepark features, but still be a sandbox.  You did it again.

 

Neither one of us know how they are designing it.  In fact, neither one of us knows whether or not this article is even true.  We can wait and see.  I'm not about to attach 'fail' to it yet though.

I think that's where we differ, if someone were to ask me, I wouldn't call it a complete sandbox. It has some sandboxy things, gives you more freedom than some games, but it's not a full on sandbox. Everything you do in the game is developer created, you can roam the world created by the devs, do the quests and see they're outcomes and effects on the world, which are all created by the devs, or explore dungeons created by the devs. You don't do much that the devs didn't intend.

 

If you want to nock down a mountain, you can't, if you want to create new dungeons and cave systems, you can't. You can't destroy towns or cities, you can't build new ones. Outside of mass genocide you can't really do anything to the world that the devs didn't intend.

 

So, is it a sandbox? Yeah, somewhat, I think I would call it an open world, but everyone has different definitions for everything.

 

But, back to my original point, I just think people should take the wait and see approach before they start jumping for joy over the new FFA full loot, territory control sandbox elder scrolls MMO comming out. It may very well not be anything like that, in which case they're just setting themselves up for disappointment.

Name a sandbox MMO where you can do all those things that you mentioned.  How can 'your' definition of sandbox include those when it doesn't exist?  You can't make a definition based on something that doesn't exist.  Don't give me some off the wall multiplayer game that barely anyone plays.  Also, don't even mention minecraft.  It's not even in the same catagory.  You are arguing just to argue. 

ES is a sandbox.  All sandbox MMO's are made by developers.  All sandbox content on those games are made by developers or are made to be affected by players by developers.  Without a developer, there is no mountain.  I have no clue where you are going there.  No MMO survives without developer support.  In fact, no MMO exists without developer support.  If players develop it, then those players are the developers. 

Originally posted by Sovrath

Originally posted by DAS1337

Originally posted by Nobadeeftw

Originally posted by Mephster

Please let it be a sandbox mmo. Tired of all the theme parks!

 

Sandbox MMOs don't sell well in the US; so, it would more than likely be a cheezy themepark ride.

EVE?

UO?

SWG?

 

Other than EVE, there hasn't been a single sandbox MMO that was made well since UO and SWG.  This is a great opportunity to finally show all you sandbox haters that sandboxes are not as niche as you think.  Perhaps we will finally see the first AAA sandbox MMO.

whoa. UO and SWG were made and sold at a different time in the "era" of mmo's. They were early games and were adopted by geeks who just loved the idea of playing online games. The landscape has changed now. Does that mean a sandbox game would do poorly? Well, when I read in lotro chat that a player found the game too unfocused and needed more guidance to find the quest hubs it makes me wonder.

If you are going to make an assessment about whether or not sandbox games would do well you might want to consider what the current audience is about.

EVE is it's own bird, is successful for many reasons but I doubt that it being a sandbox game is the only reason. Also, it was made at an earlier time, garnered a loyal following and built from there.

 

I do, the same audience that purchased millions of copies of Skyrim, which by the way is a sandbox game.  Yes, single player, but still everything most sandboxes have minus the FFA PvP and full loot because it's, well, single player.

Take a look at these forums.  Take a look at any forum.  There are more than enough FFA PVP and full loot supporters out there to make this game successful.  That's if they even go that route.  Which they should if they want to stay true to what ES is about.

UO and SWG are considered the best of the sandbox games to this day.  I wasn't one of those geeks.  I wasn't a D&D guy.  All I did was play counterstrike all day.  To this day, UO is still my favorite MMO because of the core concepts in it.  There are millions of people who would play a AAA sandbox game.  Would they stay?  Maybe not all of them.  But if EVE can hold around 300k subscribers in a mining sandbox.  I see no reason why a good fantasy sandbox MMO couldn't have more than that.  It's only logic.

You act like the old gamers are dead.  Dude, it's been ten years.  I'm still alive.  I'm still in my 20's.  We are all still here, we have just been waiting.  Millions played UO.  Millions wait.

Originally posted by Unreal024

Originally posted by DAS1337

How about a Sandbox with theme-park elements?  Why does it have to be your way?  Why can themeparks have sandbox elements, but sandboxes can't have themepark elements?

 

Full PvP, Full Loot, Skill based, not class based, un-instanced open world, meaningful control of territory, meaningful player crafting, lack of epic loot, and so on.  Just because it may have quests, arena combat, and dungeons wouldn't mean it's no longer a sandbox.

 

FPV and twitch combat works in single player games, but it doesn't in MMO's.  It wouldn't be a bad sacrifice to have TPV(which skyrim has) and tab-targetting combat with some freeform melee with non-targetted skills and abilities.  I personally can't stomach Oblivion because of the FPV.  I'm certainly not the only one that would be fine with that change.  MMO's and tab-targetting (Wow-style) combat simply work best.  You can keep everything else the same.  You'll have to rework the spells and skills in the MMO, but it's not like they didn't do that for Skyrim. 

 

I don't see much of an issue here.

It doesn't have to be my way, and in all likelyhood it won't be exactly as I described it, I don't posess any knowledge that others don't. But, there is no indication that it will be a sandbox/themepark full of meaningful crafting, territory control, FFA PvP with full loot or any features that have become synonymous with sandbox. People just want those features to be in it, they hope that it might feature them because the singleplayer games have an open world and open character creation/progression.

 

I'm just going off what exists in the singleplayer games and the current most popular MMO model, as that is most likely what they're going to be modeling the game after. I just have a feeling that it's going to be closer to WoW than UO. Assuming they don't gut the IP and take out everything that makes ES (FPV, classless, open world, etc.) then it will have some sandbox features, but it will still be a themepark.

I think if you take the entire game as a whole and ask someone whether it's a sandbox or themepark oriented game, the answer is obvious.  So yes, indications would be that a MMO with the ES IP would gravitate closer to sandbox than themepark.  The opposite is nearly impossible to argue.

It may end up being closer to WoW.  I personally don't have that opinion, but it's possible.  Though, again, you are confusing me with the FPV bit.  The first four games had FPV.  The last, Skyrim, had a very functional TPV.  So, by their design, ES isn't ES because of FPV.  And again, it can have some themepark features, but still be a sandbox.  You did it again.

Neither one of us know how they are designing it.  In fact, neither one of us knows whether or not this article is even true.  We can wait and see.  I'm not about to attach 'fail' to it yet though.

Originally posted by jinxxed0

Why would anyone think this is a good idea. The games are mediocre storywise and only shine because of the "do anything you want" gameplay (and mods if you're smart enough to play it on PC). If you have a bunch of people walking around doing whatever they want, that'd be a shitty and crowded game. I'm sure that wont be cause so then it'll be completely different from what makes TES great. It'll either be an obvious cash cow to idiots/super fans like SWTOR or it'll be a gankfest like DF or MO with every dork running around in heavy armor casting fire on everyone and killing all the NPCs. I'm sure it'll be the first one.

 

If it's something different it's still not TES. May as well make an Arkham City MMO where everyones batman. Or how about a pac man MMO.

Or...

They could actually try and balance skills and spells to support a multiplayer environment.  Which is something they would obviously try to do.  If people are going to look at this as Skyrim Online, where all features are exactly the same.  Then of course there are going to be game breaking issues.  Can we assume for a moment that they will actually attempt to be intelligent about how they will design the systems within a new TES MMO?

Sheesh.  It can still be TES without the exact same systems. 

Originally posted by Unreal024

To those who are talking about it being anything close to a 'sandbox', whatever that means for you, your setting yourselves up for disappointment. Assuming this rumor is even true, I don't see why it would be a sandbox.

 

Your not going to be changing the landscape in any way, I doubt you'll be able to build houses or guild keeps. If it's a full open world game they may allow the three factions to fight over and capture the towns, but that's probably as close to a sandbox as your going to get.

 

If it's anything like the singleplayer games, which it should be if it's going to call itself Elder Scrolls, then your going to spend your time doing quests and running dungeons. Pretty much exactly what you do in any themepark. The quests might be different, the dungeons shorter/longer, but it's still going to be a themepark. Don't expect much more than that, an open-ended themepark with a free-form skill system, twitch combat and a first person view.

How about a Sandbox with theme-park elements?  Why does it have to be your way?  Why can themeparks have sandbox elements, but sandboxes can't have themepark elements?

Full PvP, Full Loot, Skill based, not class based, un-instanced open world, meaningful control of territory, meaningful player crafting, lack of epic loot, and so on.  Just because it may have quests, arena combat, and dungeons wouldn't mean it's no longer a sandbox.

FPV and twitch combat works in single player games, but it doesn't in MMO's.  It wouldn't be a bad sacrifice to have TPV(which skyrim has) and tab-targetting combat with some freeform melee with non-targetted skills and abilities.  I personally can't stomach Oblivion because of the FPV.  I'm certainly not the only one that would be fine with that change.  MMO's and tab-targetting (Wow-style) combat simply work best.  You can keep everything else the same.  You'll have to rework the spells and skills in the MMO, but it's not like they didn't do that for Skyrim. 

I don't see much of an issue here.

Originally posted by PancakeEffct

Better be in FPV otherwise I don't give a shit. 

Unfortunately FPV MMO's aren't good.  By good, I mean successful. 

Originally posted by Nobadeeftw

Originally posted by Mephster

Please let it be a sandbox mmo. Tired of all the theme parks!

 

Sandbox MMOs don't sell well in the US; so, it would more than likely be a cheezy themepark ride.

EVE?

UO?

SWG?

Other than EVE, there hasn't been a single sandbox MMO that was made well since UO and SWG.  This is a great opportunity to finally show all you sandbox haters that sandboxes are not as niche as you think.  Perhaps we will finally see the first AAA sandbox MMO.

Originally posted by MMOGamer71

Originally posted by spaceport
As long as it's not made by Bioware... im in.

I'd have to look for the boxes but I think Black isle Studio(?) developed it and Bioware published it.

It was Black Isle.  Their studios were closed shortly after.

Oh it's Atari?  Great.. I'd rather them /RickRoll me..

Originally posted by Buttermilch

Originally posted by FrostWyrm

Gay people play MMOs too. Sexuality aside, people have all sorts of fashion tastes. Don't underestimate the preferences of your player base.

That's right. But since our game world is sort of postapocalyptic we cannot make everyone happy. The style still needs to perfectly fit into the game's atmosphere. ;)

Well, what would be the best way for a female to get ahead in a physically demanding world in a post apocalyptic setting?  Sex.  Most females would use what they have to buy protection, to get the good jobs away from danger, to attract the powerful men..etc.  Slightly revealing clothing wouldn't be out of the ordinary I wouldn't imagine.  Who really knows what it would be like?

Always hilarious how people have such an issue with the admiration of the female figure.  No matter what your gender and sexual preference, I believe we can mostly agree that the female body is more attractive than the male body.  Designing clothes that show off a little skin is not sexist.  Running a female character out in a bra and panties, while the male character is fully clothed at all times is sexist.  Making all female characters boobs and butts oversized, while all male parts are all normally sized is sexist.  Allowing some skin on the arms, chest, and legs to show is not sexist.  It's what our culture accepts in every day life.

Above all, your co-workers need to understand that sex sells.  If you're a business aimed at anyone other than children, sexual undertones will only help your cause.  If they really want to be realistic, they should be designing army clothes for females in real life instead of creating a video game.

Originally posted by thefinn

Originally posted by DAS1337

The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.

 

Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles.  This is why the vast majority of them fail.  They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest.  The game devolves into a PvP arena.  The wolves conquer the few sheep around.  The wolves turn on the wolves.  Everyone leaves.  The servers shut down.

^^^

This. Has happened at least 3-4 times to me over the years. However, I've also seen the opposite happen. UO for instance.

The developers get a bunch of those "wow like nerf mails" which involve a lot of tears and cries of "bullies got me" and then they nerf the crap out of the PVP side of the game, everyone eventually gets bored and leaves as above.

 

UO actually got a lot more popular after the introduction of Trammel.  Not that I liked it, but it did.  It's one of the few sandboxes to try and make compromises to further the genre.  Their idea was right, but the execution could have been better.

In UO, you could PvP though if you wanted to.  You could also avoid it.  There was something for everyone.  That's what sandboxes need to get back to.

The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.

Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles.  This is why the vast majority of them fail.  They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest.  The game devolves into a PvP arena.  The wolves conquer the few sheep around.  The wolves turn on the wolves.  Everyone leaves.  The servers shut down.

I agree that you shouldn't be forced to look on the internet to figure out how to play a game.  I wish sandbox games could evolve past this problem.  Come now sandbox developers.  Let's all say it together.

East To Learn...

Hard To Master...

Glad you found something you like though.  It's also a shame that sandbox communities ruin their own game so much.  Finding the right people is sometimes really hard to do.

Originally posted by Squal'Zell

Originally posted by Phelcher
Oh I get it....

The OP doesn't understand the difference between an FPS game and a game with PvP. He doesn't understand one game is persistant & the other has maps 64 players. i think you are the one that didn't understand the OP, while comparing the same aspect of both games, he finds that the player versus player modes, where 64player maps largely surpass this 8v8arena battles in these so called MMORPG, are far better in FPS games than in MMORPG PvP games.

Basically the OP's argument is moot, because he is unable to decern history, progeny, nor genra... he is also unable to decern game mechanics and scope of gameplay. So sad really, that we have to sit threw this while he learns his mistakes.

I wonder if the OP played Planetside 5 years ago... or BF2142 5 years ago and can understand the difference.

i don't really care about the difference of an MMORPG and an FPS. i want my PvP to be the best possible weather i play x or y game. i don't give a rat's ass about history progeny or genra (as you put it) i just want which ever game i chose to buy to have top notch gameplay. and not some half arsed semi finished turd on a plate wether FPS or MMORPG. there is no reason why an MMOFPS can't have MW3 mechanics.

and im sure that has nothing to do with history/progeny or genra. 

 

You would be wrong.

There is a reason.  It's called latency.  We do not have the technology available to the public to have true FPS combat in our MMO's in a large scale.  If we could, then we would have it.