Trending Games | ArcheAge | World of Warcraft | Elder Scrolls Online | Star Wars: The Old Republic

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,923,468 Users Online:0
Games:760  Posts:6,316,519
Zenimax Online Studios | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 04/04/14)  | Pub:Bethesda Softworks
Distribution: | Retail Price:$59.99 | Pay Type:Subscription
System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info? Let us know!

Elder Scrolls Online Forum » General Discussion » I think they went in a good direction with the races...

2 Pages « 1 2 Search
31 posts found
  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 17627

11/27/12 1:03:44 PM#21
Originally posted by Maelwydd

The point you make about the Ebonheart having a weakness of trust and unity is fine except.....how will that affect players? It won't I suspect. Will the distrust mean members of the Ebonheart can attack each other more ofter? How exactly will the weakness actually have any effect on the game?

This weakness is purely story based and will not have any effect in the game that I can tell. All this is, from the current information is an artificial mechanic to emulate the 3 faction fights that were in DAOC that the developer thinks is a sure bet. I think he is making a mistake. I think that the ability to actually think through this design concept has been glossed over simply because "DOAC worked, 3 factions are the way to go".

For DOAC2 it might have fit but I think TESO deserved someone to sit down and deisgn system that works for TESO. A system that is inclusive of exploration, not restrictions based on faction. A system that allows players to choose any race and play any class and work anywhere they are willing to go if they accept the risks, not where the risks are totally removed by invisible walls.

I keep reading about this game and I keep slapping my head in dismay. I am sad with their design idea's.

Are these three factions completely contrived or is there part of the elderscrolls history that lists them?

Because I would normally agree with you that "making something up" just to support three factions isn't the way to go. However, if these were really listed as part of the elder scrolls lore then it is what it is.

It would be like playing a game set in the civil war and bemoaning two factions as being contrived.

 

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

11/27/12 7:39:12 PM#22
Originally posted by Sovrath
Originally posted by Maelwydd

The point you make about the Ebonheart having a weakness of trust and unity is fine except.....how will that affect players? It won't I suspect. Will the distrust mean members of the Ebonheart can attack each other more ofter? How exactly will the weakness actually have any effect on the game?

This weakness is purely story based and will not have any effect in the game that I can tell. All this is, from the current information is an artificial mechanic to emulate the 3 faction fights that were in DAOC that the developer thinks is a sure bet. I think he is making a mistake. I think that the ability to actually think through this design concept has been glossed over simply because "DOAC worked, 3 factions are the way to go".

For DOAC2 it might have fit but I think TESO deserved someone to sit down and deisgn system that works for TESO. A system that is inclusive of exploration, not restrictions based on faction. A system that allows players to choose any race and play any class and work anywhere they are willing to go if they accept the risks, not where the risks are totally removed by invisible walls.

I keep reading about this game and I keep slapping my head in dismay. I am sad with their design idea's.

Are these three factions completely contrived or is there part of the elderscrolls history that lists them?

Because I would normally agree with you that "making something up" just to support three factions isn't the way to go. However, if these were really listed as part of the elder scrolls lore then it is what it is.

It would be like playing a game set in the civil war and bemoaning two factions as being contrived.

 

As it stands, ALL Nord players are in the Ebonheart, Nords will never be able to change that. Same for each race, they are each locked into their faction without ANY choice in the matter. That means you will never be able to change sides, even if you dislike your side. Take Argonians for example. They are apparently allied with the race that enslaves them. Are we ment to assume that absolutely no Argonians would say "screw this, I am not helping my enslavers, I am going to fight against them" because as it stands, no Argonian can make that choice. It sucks, isn't neccessary (except if you are lacking the will to add a bit of complexity to the game design of course which tehy obviously are not) and it removes one of the founding reasons why TES is such a good series of games, the freedom to play your character the way you WANT to play, not be forced into the way someone else dictates it.

Sure there might be lore to support these factions but to ask players to accept that no one fights for the opposition, no one dislikes the pacts made, no one lives in other areas of the world outside their homeland and most importantly no one chooses NOT to fight for any side, well that is just not TESO, at least in my mind. I love the TES games, look forward to a TES MMO...but this arbitary design choice just to give the world a 3 faction rigid, non negotiable design is just aother in a long line of recent design choices that basically take the fundamentals a an IP and screw it over for no real valid reason except making the design simplified when it really doesn't have to be. It is just lazy.

  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 17627

11/28/12 12:59:01 PM#23
Originally posted by Maelwydd
 

As it stands, ALL Nord players are in the Ebonheart, Nords will never be able to change that. Same for each race, they are each locked into their faction without ANY choice in the matter. That means you will never be able to change sides, even if you dislike your side. Take Argonians for example. They are apparently allied with the race that enslaves them. Are we ment to assume that absolutely no Argonians would say "screw this, I am not helping my enslavers, I am going to fight against them" because as it stands, no Argonian can make that choice. It sucks, isn't neccessary (except if you are lacking the will to add a bit of complexity to the game design of course which tehy obviously are not) and it removes one of the founding reasons why TES is such a good series of games, the freedom to play your character the way you WANT to play, not be forced into the way someone else dictates it.

Sure there might be lore to support these factions but to ask players to accept that no one fights for the opposition, no one dislikes the pacts made, no one lives in other areas of the world outside their homeland and most importantly no one chooses NOT to fight for any side, well that is just not TESO, at least in my mind. I love the TES games, look forward to a TES MMO...but this arbitary design choice just to give the world a 3 faction rigid, non negotiable design is just aother in a long line of recent design choices that basically take the fundamentals a an IP and screw it over for no real valid reason except making the design simplified when it really doesn't have to be. It is just lazy.

But that isn't any different from any faction based game.

What you are saying here is that you just don't like factions. Which is fine. But I'm unclear if there are many faction based games that allowed everyon of any race to pick their faction. Especially when the faction is represented as a unified nation.

The argument you put forth has been put forth in other factoin based games and the answer is that "it's a faction based game" not a sandbox game where people pick and choose and create their own factions.

which brings us back to whether they just wanted 3 sides and wrote the lore to support this or if there really were 3 factions, three fronts, in the history and therefore that time period fit.

however, as I mentioned, you can't play a civil war game without acknowledging that there are two factions. One can make the argument that there were people on both the north and the south who supported the other side but if you allow that in a game it's just goin gto break down.

It's not much of a civil war game if the entirety of the northern "players" are all on the side of the south.

  azzamasin

Hard Core Member

Joined: 6/06/12
Posts: 2840

We live in a fantasy world, a world of illusion. The great task in life is to find reality.

11/28/12 1:08:21 PM#24
Originally posted by UWNVME
Originally posted by Ambros123

They pretty much butchered faction balance when they the top 3 popular races all in the same faction not to mention it doesn't make much sense how the Argonians would from an alliance with a race that enslaves them.  And who says that you need to divide the races evenly into the factions?

Unless they somehow make it where they limit the amount of people into Cyrodiil that are in an overpopulated faction I would say that PvP will be greatly imbalanced.  I'm was on Jade Querry in GW2 and almost eveytime I checked out how the WvWvW is going they would almost always be dominating WvWvW so I don't buy the whole two lesser factions will team up on the larger faction.

To be fair, if you've checked out the lore writing on the official website, it gives a fairly reasonable description of the Ebonheart's races. Basically, the main website seems to hint that the Ebonheart is strong when it comes to raw military power, but centuries of conflict have left plenty of distrust between the three races. So they have a major weakness in that they lack the unity and trust that the races of their rival factions have for each other.

 

And I agree with what you say about two lesser factions double-teaming the bigger one. People love to talk about it, but it never even happened in DAOC.

I dont know what server you played on but on the Guinevere server, we Albions were constantly on the defensive thanks to cross realm teamwork with the Hibs & Mids.  It was even worse once Darkfall was released.  I don't think Darkfall ever flipped one time from Mid to Hib or vice versa.  The only time DF was flipped from those other 2 realms was when we did it.  However every time we had DF, we had it for less time then the other 2 realms combined.  Hib or Mid would get DF and keep it for at least a few hours but every time we Albs got it, we lost it within 30 mins.  True Story!

If your idea of a Sandbox is open FFA Full Loot PvP, full crafted world with minimal support for anything combat then your sandbox ideas are bad! Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

11/28/12 3:06:26 PM#25
Originally posted by Sovrath

 

But that isn't any different from any faction based game.

What you are saying here is that you just don't like factions. Which is fine. But I'm unclear if there are many faction based games that allowed everyon of any race to pick their faction. Especially when the faction is represented as a unified nation.

The argument you put forth has been put forth in other factoin based games and the answer is that "it's a faction based game" not a sandbox game where people pick and choose and create their own factions.

which brings us back to whether they just wanted 3 sides and wrote the lore to support this or if there really were 3 factions, three fronts, in the history and therefore that time period fit.

however, as I mentioned, you can't play a civil war game without acknowledging that there are two factions. One can make the argument that there were people on both the north and the south who supported the other side but if you allow that in a game it's just goin gto break down.

It's not much of a civil war game if the entirety of the northern "players" are all on the side of the south.

I don't mind factions. I don't mind the factions as they are currently in the game. What I dislike is the fact that I cannot choose my race, class and faction independently. I also dislike the fact that I MUST choose a faction. I would likw the same freedom to never choose a faction if I want in the same way I could choose to never engage in melee combat in any of the TES games if I wanted and just use magic.

If TESO is designed with the 3 faction PvP as the point of the game then I will probably have to give it a miss. To me a TES game is about the freedom to play how you want to play, get involved in the war or not, do the main questline or not, use magic or not, craft or not.

And all of the reasons I dislike how the game has been designed so far don't even touch on the limitations put into the game by these factions to world exploration. The argument that each faction is bigger then the explorable parts of previous games is moot, TESO has all these regions and the game is artificially impossing an impassible barrier to my ability to travel where I want. I couldn't explore outside Skyrim because the game didn't have anywhere outside Skyrim to go. Yes an invisible barrer, but one I can understand from a design point. The barriers that are imposed here are just a system mechanic. If the fact was I could travel into another factions lands but there was a geat risk of dying then that is a choice to make. But I cannot make that choice. It is the removal of freedom to choose that really stops this game being a true TES MMO in my mind. And so I have to agree with others that I think the game is DAOC 2 with a TESO skin. And imo TESO is the game they should be true to, not DOAC.

  UWNVME

Novice Member

Joined: 4/16/06
Posts: 175

11/29/12 3:56:05 AM#26
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by UWNVME

To be fair, if you've checked out the lore writing on the official website, it gives a fairly reasonable description of the Ebonheart's races. Basically, the main website seems to hint that the Ebonheart is strong when it comes to raw military power, but centuries of conflict have left plenty of distrust between the three races. So they have a major weakness in that they lack the unity and trust that the races of their rival factions have for each other.

 

And I agree with what you say about two lesser factions double-teaming the bigger one. People love to talk about it, but it never even happened in DAOC.

The point you make about the Ebonheart having a weakness of trust and unity is fine except.....how will that affect players? It won't I suspect. Will the distrust mean members of the Ebonheart can attack each other more ofter? How exactly will the weakness actually have any effect on the game?

This weakness is purely story based and will not have any effect in the game that I can tell...

It's not intended to have any effect on gameplay and is purely for storyline. Which is where the complaints came from in the first place, that the Ebonheart faction is inconsistent with TES lore.

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

11/29/12 5:30:28 AM#27
Originally posted by UWNVME
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by UWNVME

To be fair, if you've checked out the lore writing on the official website, it gives a fairly reasonable description of the Ebonheart's races. Basically, the main website seems to hint that the Ebonheart is strong when it comes to raw military power, but centuries of conflict have left plenty of distrust between the three races. So they have a major weakness in that they lack the unity and trust that the races of their rival factions have for each other.

 

And I agree with what you say about two lesser factions double-teaming the bigger one. People love to talk about it, but it never even happened in DAOC.

The point you make about the Ebonheart having a weakness of trust and unity is fine except.....how will that affect players? It won't I suspect. Will the distrust mean members of the Ebonheart can attack each other more ofter? How exactly will the weakness actually have any effect on the game?

This weakness is purely story based and will not have any effect in the game that I can tell...

It's not intended to have any effect on gameplay and is purely for storyline. Which is where the complaints came from in the first place, that the Ebonheart faction is inconsistent with TES lore.

Well I totally agree with you there then. It certainly does sound like they thought "3 factions, pick the 3 locations next to each otehr and make them a faction...ignore any hostility these locations have to other faction members....I mean 3 faction PvP is cool right? It worked in DAOC so it must work here...right? RIGHT?".

Sloppy.

  muffins89

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/15/12
Posts: 1255

11/29/12 5:36:49 AM#28
Originally posted by UWNVME
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by UWNVME

To be fair, if you've checked out the lore writing on the official website, it gives a fairly reasonable description of the Ebonheart's races. Basically, the main website seems to hint that the Ebonheart is strong when it comes to raw military power, but centuries of conflict have left plenty of distrust between the three races. So they have a major weakness in that they lack the unity and trust that the races of their rival factions have for each other.

 

And I agree with what you say about two lesser factions double-teaming the bigger one. People love to talk about it, but it never even happened in DAOC.

The point you make about the Ebonheart having a weakness of trust and unity is fine except.....how will that affect players? It won't I suspect. Will the distrust mean members of the Ebonheart can attack each other more ofter? How exactly will the weakness actually have any effect on the game?

This weakness is purely story based and will not have any effect in the game that I can tell...

It's not intended to have any effect on gameplay and is purely for storyline. Which is where the complaints came from in the first place, that the Ebonheart faction is inconsistent with TES lore.

forgive my ignorance as i don't follow lore.  but,  didn't they pick the 2E becuase there was no set in stone lore?  since the announcment i have been paying closer attention to books i read in Oblivian and Skyrim and not a lot is said about the time that TESO will/does take place.  so,  how can they break lore that has never been set in stone?  and is only mildly,  if ever referenced in an ES game.

I think the prostitute mod corrupted your game files man. -elhefen

  UWNVME

Novice Member

Joined: 4/16/06
Posts: 175

11/29/12 4:49:08 PM#29
Originally posted by muffins89
Originally posted by UWNVME
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by UWNVME

To be fair, if you've checked out the lore writing on the official website, it gives a fairly reasonable description of the Ebonheart's races. Basically, the main website seems to hint that the Ebonheart is strong when it comes to raw military power, but centuries of conflict have left plenty of distrust between the three races. So they have a major weakness in that they lack the unity and trust that the races of their rival factions have for each other.

 

And I agree with what you say about two lesser factions double-teaming the bigger one. People love to talk about it, but it never even happened in DAOC.

The point you make about the Ebonheart having a weakness of trust and unity is fine except.....how will that affect players? It won't I suspect. Will the distrust mean members of the Ebonheart can attack each other more ofter? How exactly will the weakness actually have any effect on the game?

This weakness is purely story based and will not have any effect in the game that I can tell...

It's not intended to have any effect on gameplay and is purely for storyline. Which is where the complaints came from in the first place, that the Ebonheart faction is inconsistent with TES lore.

forgive my ignorance as i don't follow lore.  but,  didn't they pick the 2E becuase there was no set in stone lore?  since the announcment i have been paying closer attention to books i read in Oblivian and Skyrim and not a lot is said about the time that TESO will/does take place.  so,  how can they break lore that has never been set in stone?  and is only mildly,  if ever referenced in an ES game.

I should probably put my words into better context. I'm not saying I share the opinion that Ebonheart is inconsistent with established. I was just saying that it's a complaint other people have. But yes, you're right, the lore for TESO is all newly established. A lot of people just aren't convinced the Ebonheart faction is sensical because of the historical disdain that the three races have for one another. But like I said, this is acknowledged in the game's lore. Ebonheart plays the role of the "ragtag" faction you could say, they're reluctant allies. Compare that to the Aldmeri, where the two elf races have a history of good relations and the Queen has been friendly to the Khajiit.

  DeniZg

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/29/12
Posts: 586

11/29/12 5:17:56 PM#30

I agree with OP. They seem to went in good direction and hopefully we will have balanced factions when it goes live.

About complaints on not being able to chose race and faction and lore inconsistencies. I like your RP enthusiasm, but you guys do realize if that's the main issue the game will have, then we can safely say that TESO will be the new MMO king.

  GreenishBlue

Novice Member

Joined: 5/27/12
Posts: 266

11/29/12 5:41:39 PM#31
only thing that will make this game playable after the first 30 days is if Cyrodiil is a persistent warzone; no throne or towers/camp resets; the PvE and solo experience is the same boring gear shit grinding; the races/faction lock is nonsense; at least, the devs could have let us create an imperial character that could join any of the 3 factions

2 Pages « 1 2 Search