Trending Games | ArcheAge | World of Warcraft | Destiny | Guild Wars 2

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,856,678 Users Online:0
Games:740  Posts:6,241,393
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System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info?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 » Lots of Story & Phasing in ESO

3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search
57 posts found
  DavisFlight

Hard Core Member

Joined: 9/25/12
Posts: 2571

7/20/13 3:32:59 PM#41
Originally posted by Rohn
Originally posted by Tierless

At this point a game like Darkfall is more true to TES than TES is...sad really.

 

More accurately, I'd say that Mortal Online is much closer to TES than TESO is.  MO is an actual sandbox.

Having said that, I don't particularly care for phasing in games - it's weird to have multiple different players in different phases of the same place.  I'd prefer that gameworlds would change for everyone based on the actions of players, instead of solo based changes.

That's exactly what MMos should do. They should change and be influenced by the players.

  Rohn

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/02/08
Posts: 3739

7/20/13 3:37:27 PM#42
Originally posted by DavisFlight
Originally posted by Rohn
Originally posted by Tierless

At this point a game like Darkfall is more true to TES than TES is...sad really.

 

More accurately, I'd say that Mortal Online is much closer to TES than TESO is.  MO is an actual sandbox.

Having said that, I don't particularly care for phasing in games - it's weird to have multiple different players in different phases of the same place.  I'd prefer that gameworlds would change for everyone based on the actions of players, instead of solo based changes.

That's exactly what MMos should do. They should change and be influenced by the players.

 

Couldn't agree with you more.  Unfortunately, most games do not allow this.  They are largely static, or use phasing, which makes the gameworld seem far less meaningful.

The one thing that sets MMOs apart is a persistent gameworld populated by massive populations.  MMO creators have done an excellent job of making that one difference completely meaningless in their games.  It's a major reason most of them have been garbage.  TESO is walking the same path.

Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  Xthos

Elite Member

Joined: 4/18/10
Posts: 2648

7/20/13 3:39:07 PM#43
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Actually phasing when done right is the only thing that can truely give players a single player experience and immersion in an MMO world.  Now many people are not looking for such an experience, but many other more casual players are exactly looking for that.

 

Just ask yourself, did you like the story part of TSW, SWTOR and personal story in GW", then you surely are going to love this as it will give you a Skyrim experience inside an MMO.

 

As long as it is immersive, it can be done, as long as it keeps focussing players on the world and not on the actuall game mechanics, as long as it feels natural withouth to many loading screens, then it will work for the majorrity of MMo players, and thats still where the money is.

 

TSW - I liked the quests and their background, more than the story for the mmo, but I really liked TSW, just ran out of content, but it was unique and I was impressed with what seems like a lot of time going into making something different.

 

TOR - Story was ok, the interaction parts were horrible, my wife and I played the same class, but I played dark, and she played light choices, and it was 95%+ the same.  Also I am not a immersion junkie, but it was pretty silly everyone running around with the same companions that were supposed to be unique characters.  Played my free month, got my money worth.

 

GW2 - Couldn't stand to play the game long enough to know how well they did the personal story stuff.

 

 

Phasing may solve some of the problems with personal story and differences for people, but if the game is a ton of instancing, I do not know how well I will like it, no matter how well they do the story.  I am trying to not dig too deep into it, or even criticize anything that people are saying, or like it either.  I am going to wait till we have solid information, then I will decide.  It will also depend on the controls, if it is the same UI setup as NW, then I probably will not enjoy that aspect enough to not give it a go.

 

  gamekid2k

Novice Member

Joined: 6/24/12
Posts: 363

7/21/13 6:39:07 AM#44
Originally posted by Xthos
TSW - I liked the quests and their background, more than the story for the mmo, but I really liked TSW, just ran out of content, but it was unique and I was impressed with what seems like a lot of time going into making something different.

GW2 - Couldn't stand to play the game long enough to know how well they did the personal story stuff.

 

My biggest turn off in GW2 was when I was called a "hero" within the first FEW min of the game.  If I am already a hero why do I want to go through this char progression and long journey.  Shouldn't I be thinking about my 401k and retirement.

Now Playing: DARKFALL Unholy Wars "Return to Open World, Full Loot PvP, Conquest in a Sandbox MMO with player driven economy! Just like classic MMOs!"

  tazarconan

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/03/07
Posts: 1022

7/21/13 10:21:00 AM#45
Originally posted by BadOrb
Originally posted by tazarconan

All these are insignificant details really. Whether i ll play TES or not depends only an only in just a few things.

1.Combat system how well it will get implemented and if its really working.

2.Character progression system, how deep it is,and with a slow gear improvement so u cant cap everything in just a few months playing.

3. Working and fun pvp

If any of the above aint work THEN id worry about TES .Not though about small details like instancing,phacing etc etc

In reply to no 2 , well if you mean a few months on 1 character then i doubt it will take that long at all , maybe 2-3 weeks if you are lucky. How many classes are there in the game btw ?

It was really interesting to read about LotRo , I never played it but sounds like a total immersion breaker , can't party up to do quests unless you are at that stage. I know in SWTOR that you would have to complete a starter planet if your friend was on a different one , then meet up on the second planet. At least after that you could play the whole rest of the game together. I know if you are the same class then you would have to repeat the class mission for those characters , which is a bit of an immersion breaker. Anyways good to hear some games are less of an MMO than SWTOR , good news indeed. 

Cheers,

BadOrb.

wow wow Badorb,are u certain about this? Are you sure that after playing TESO with your character just a few weeks u ll be top geared? How do you know this???

 

  khameleon

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/07/07
Posts: 372

GAMER 4 LIFE = YOUNG 4 LIFE

7/21/13 10:25:15 AM#46
Originally posted by Tierless

At this point a game like Darkfall is more true to TES than TES is...sad really.

hahahahahahhaaha.

 

So glad I got my invite so I can just laugh at people like this guy that have no idea, but he thinks he does.

GAME TIL YOU DIE!!!!

  BadOrb

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/11/13
Posts: 747

7/21/13 10:36:16 AM#47
Originally posted by tazarconan
Originally posted by BadOrb
Originally posted by tazarconan

All these are insignificant details really. Whether i ll play TES or not depends only an only in just a few things.

1.Combat system how well it will get implemented and if its really working.

2.Character progression system, how deep it is,and with a slow gear improvement so u cant cap everything in just a few months playing.

3. Working and fun pvp

If any of the above aint work THEN id worry about TES .Not though about small details like instancing,phacing etc etc

In reply to no 2 , well if you mean a few months on 1 character then i doubt it will take that long at all , maybe 2-3 weeks if you are lucky. How many classes are there in the game btw ?

It was really interesting to read about LotRo , I never played it but sounds like a total immersion breaker , can't party up to do quests unless you are at that stage. I know in SWTOR that you would have to complete a starter planet if your friend was on a different one , then meet up on the second planet. At least after that you could play the whole rest of the game together. I know if you are the same class then you would have to repeat the class mission for those characters , which is a bit of an immersion breaker. Anyways good to hear some games are less of an MMO than SWTOR , good news indeed. 

Cheers,

BadOrb.

wow wow Badorb,are u certain about this? Are you sure that after playing TESO with your character just a few weeks u ll be top geared? How do you know this???

 

As I said the words "I doubt it will take that long" ( a few months ) , I just feel like the MMO gamer who rushes to end game will have it done in about 2-3 weeks , they rush themeparks ( some people do ) to get to end game then complete everything at end-game very quickly. I miss the MMO's that take a few months ( like you described ) to get everything ( top gear ) in-game. I guess it's a bit of a plague for themeparks , very hard to give enough content to keep a player busy , if they play on one character. I hope I'm wrong though. I don't want another short MMO like SWTOR. Don't get me wrong I like SWTOR but having 16 characters is a bit much I prefer 4-6 tops in an MMO.

Cheers,

BadOrb.

PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing.
"SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

7/21/13 11:05:22 AM#48

To those who don't understand phasing.  It is a way to visually show the player what their choices have altered in the game world.  While the idea sounds great in theory, it usually fails upon execution.  Let's throw out a small example.

 

Player A and player B have just completed a phasing quest.  This quest dramatically changes the appearance of a city, for example.  We'll say player A has saved the city.  As player A enters, he/she is greeted by townsfolk praising them, cheering, etc etc.  Now, let's say player B helps the city to it's demise.  So, player B sees a city in ruin, and it is overrun by a NPC enemy faction. 

 

Cool right?  Both players get to see the world differently based on their actions.  Except...

 

Player A wants to group with player B.  Player A needs to go into town to drop some things off, gather supplies, what have you.  Player B has to leave the group locally and travel to another city, because in player B's world, the city is destroyed and there are no supplies to be had.  This would create frustration for both players, because they have to take extra time to meet back up.

 

Alright, no big deal right?  Let's move on...

 

Not only are players forced to go elsewhere in this example, if they are actually in the same phased area, they will likely become invisible to each other, since the game has moved each player to their own phase.  Now, some games will drop your group entirely, which forces you to re-create your group upon leaving the phased area.  This is incredibly frustrating.  Though, some games will keep your group active, but grey out the player that is no longer sharing the same game world.  This sort of thing can create a ton of issues.  What if you are in a high level area and you are relying on your mate for backup?  Only to turn around and see that they aren't in the same phase and you are getting your behind handed to you?

 

Alright..  so I hear the argument that it's a great mechanic because it allows people to still feel like they have some control over the world.  Wrong.  You have control over a phase of the world and you can only share it with certain people who chose as you did.  It's basically like their campaign system, except on a much smaller scale.  There can be 100 campaigns going on, and all will end differently.  There is nothing that you are doing that is actually affecting the game world.  The developers are just giving you the illusion that you are actually able to change things.  When you win in campaign 34 and lose in campaign 26, what have you actually gained?  Nothing.  The game world is unchanged in exception for a few phasing changes, which in reality, is just a temporary thing that you can't even really control.

 

These are the type of immersion breakers that I hate in MMO's.  They, in themselves, are anti-community building tools.  They push the ideology of MMO's in the other direction.  Things like quest finder, dungeon finder, auction houses, instant travel, instant-rez, instanced housing and other mechanics that over-simplify your gaming experience.  Megaservers are the devil in my opinion.  All of those are good in limited form, but if used exclusively and found common, are often reason why I do not play a game.  I, personally, am not looking for a realistic virtual world.  But, I am looking for something that has some soul.  I enjoy game mechanics that promote hard work and in the end, potential consequences for failure.  I enjoy the RP aspect for RPG's.  I'm not really talking about a group of people all talking to each other as their characters world, I'm talking about mechanics that promote community, face to face interactions. 

 

If you like phasing, so be it.  It honestly doesn't make any sense to me from a player standpoint.  To me, it's just a tool that developers use in order to be lazy. 

  page975

Apprentice Member

Joined: 6/02/13
Posts: 317

7/21/13 2:09:15 PM#49
Originally posted by DAS1337

To those who don't understand phasing.  It is a way to visually show the player what their choices have altered in the game world.  While the idea sounds great in theory, it usually fails upon execution.  Let's throw out a small example.

 

Player A and player B have just completed a phasing quest.  This quest dramatically changes the appearance of a city, for example.  We'll say player A has saved the city.  As player A enters, he/she is greeted by townsfolk praising them, cheering, etc etc.  Now, let's say player B helps the city to it's demise.  So, player B sees a city in ruin, and it is overrun by a NPC enemy faction. 

 

Cool right?  Both players get to see the world differently based on their actions.  Except...

 

Player A wants to group with player B.  Player A needs to go into town to drop some things off, gather supplies, what have you.  Player B has to leave the group locally and travel to another city, because in player B's world, the city is destroyed and there are no supplies to be had.  This would create frustration for both players, because they have to take extra time to meet back up.

 

Alright, no big deal right?  Let's move on...

 

Not only are players forced to go elsewhere in this example, if they are actually in the same phased area, they will likely become invisible to each other, since the game has moved each player to their own phase.  Now, some games will drop your group entirely, which forces you to re-create your group upon leaving the phased area.  This is incredibly frustrating.  Though, some games will keep your group active, but grey out the player that is no longer sharing the same game world.  This sort of thing can create a ton of issues.  What if you are in a high level area and you are relying on your mate for backup?  Only to turn around and see that they aren't in the same phase and you are getting your behind handed to you?

 

Alright..  so I hear the argument that it's a great mechanic because it allows people to still feel like they have some control over the world.  Wrong.  You have control over a phase of the world and you can only share it with certain people who chose as you did.  It's basically like their campaign system, except on a much smaller scale.  There can be 100 campaigns going on, and all will end differently.  There is nothing that you are doing that is actually affecting the game world.  The developers are just giving you the illusion that you are actually able to change things.  When you win in campaign 34 and lose in campaign 26, what have you actually gained?  Nothing.  The game world is unchanged in exception for a few phasing changes, which in reality, is just a temporary thing that you can't even really control.

 

These are the type of immersion breakers that I hate in MMO's.  They, in themselves, are anti-community building tools.  They push the ideology of MMO's in the other direction.  Things like quest finder, dungeon finder, auction houses, instant travel, instant-rez, instanced housing and other mechanics that over-simplify your gaming experience.  Megaservers are the devil in my opinion.  All of those are good in limited form, but if used exclusively and found common, are often reason why I do not play a game.  I, personally, am not looking for a realistic virtual world.  But, I am looking for something that has some soul.  I enjoy game mechanics that promote hard work and in the end, potential consequences for failure.  I enjoy the RP aspect for RPG's.  I'm not really talking about a group of people all talking to each other as their characters world, I'm talking about mechanics that promote community, face to face interactions. 

 

If you like phasing, so be it.  It honestly doesn't make any sense to me from a player standpoint.  To me, it's just a tool that developers use in order to be lazy. 

You know what DAS....Your right, I agree 100%, 

But what you don't know is that most of the people are not really mmo players and they don't care about mmos, they are looking for FREE 2 PLAY !

They would like a fun fun game to play for a few weeks until they have to pay something and on to the next. They don't care about friends, grouping  or community.  They dont care about two months down the road or care about others, they may join a guild to do a little chatting as long as its just nonsence.

They are looking for a free game to play.

  Eir_S

Apprentice Member

Joined: 8/07/11
Posts: 4701

GW2 socialist.

7/21/13 2:15:18 PM#50
Phasing is the reason ESO dropped off my personal hype meter like a meteor.
  Brabbit1987

Elite Member

Joined: 10/02/11
Posts: 676

7/21/13 9:04:08 PM#51

Never seen anything wrong with phasing as long as it is done correct. Since the game is yet to be out, again I will not judge it just yet because I do not judge things based on nothing or other games that have nothing to do with it.

Also, even if they do happen to get it wrong, it maybe forgivable depending on the rest of the game.

Only time will tell really.

  KhinRunite

Novice Member

Joined: 11/05/10
Posts: 897

7/21/13 9:08:56 PM#52

Ugh @ phasing...I prefer dynamic worlds shared by everyone. 

I'm not taking a pass though. I'd still check it out.

  User Deleted
7/23/13 4:08:23 PM#53
Originally posted by KhinRunite

Ugh @ phasing...I prefer dynamic worlds shared by everyone. 

I'm not taking a pass though. I'd still check it out.

 

Dynamic worlds?  You mean like if I decide to let a city burn and get their first the city should be burnt down and then you have to go the path I chose?  Or if I decide to let that city burn that in 15min it will be rebuilt with the same choices posed to you...aka pointless choices?

 

Look I get the buzzwordyness of wanting everything open world...its trendy for sure...but there are certainly cases where instancing and phasing would work best. ES gameplay is a good example of that.

I don't think anyone wants lame and pointless dynamic events where nothing matters and everything is zerged down only to reappear later once the event is tripped again by the next lot.  That isn't ES. 

 

I feel ESO gets a pass on abiding by the typical buzzword requests from gamers...ES did things the old school way.  Long, complex, difficult, choices that matter...Removing this removes what made the ES games great.  I hope they don't slap a standard mmorpg on top of their IP...it would suck.

The more ES like ESO is the better of a game it will be.  The more they deviate from what makes people like the IP, to appeal to larger crowd ect...the worse the game will be.

 

Having an Elder Scrolls game with an online world and some pvp would be fantastic, but it has to actually be an Elder Scrolls game in every way...it cant just be the story and setting with standard mmorpg combat, quests, dynamic events (yes even a badass dragon attacking as a dynamic event is pointless if theres no reason to it).  It the game takes this route its just going to be another big budget IP wasted.

 

I really hope Bethesda has some senses behind how the game will be played, and I hope they realize why people play ES and why people will hate a large deviation of this to mmorpg-ify it.

  SavageHorizon

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/14/13
Posts: 1565

7/23/13 4:15:52 PM#54
Originally posted by khameleon
Originally posted by Tierless

At this point a game like Darkfall is more true to TES than TES is...sad really.

hahahahahahhaaha.

 

So glad I got my invite so I can just laugh at people like this guy that have no idea, but he thinks he does.

Invite or no invite, DarkFall combat is very similar to Oblivion and Morrowind than TESO is.

As for TESO, the world is built on instancing and phasing, this is a fact that even the die hard fan can't counter.

Coolermaster Cosmos II Case
Corsair AX1200W Modular PSU
Intel Core i7 3970X OC 4.50GHz
Asus P9X79 PRO Intel X7
16GB (4x4GB) DDR3 PC3-1866MHz
840 Series 250GB SSDs
Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDDs
EVGA SuperClocked GTX TITAN 6GB GDDR5 SLi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0i88t0Kacs

  User Deleted
7/23/13 4:20:47 PM#55
Originally posted by SavageHorizon
Originally posted by khameleon
Originally posted by Tierless

At this point a game like Darkfall is more true to TES than TES is...sad really.

hahahahahahhaaha.

 

So glad I got my invite so I can just laugh at people like this guy that have no idea, but he thinks he does.

Invite or no invite, DarkFall combat is very similar to Oblivion and Morrowind than TESO is.

Ill be honest, I picked up skyrim on the steam sale and have been playing it religiously.  I actually thought "man this game would be awesome if it had Darkfall style weapon and skill switching mid combat"  Its close, but there is no way to go from melee to magic to archery without pausing the game and manually switching it...which breaks the action.

And yes DF combat and ES combat is VERY similar, though DF is a bit more fast paced.

  KhinRunite

Novice Member

Joined: 11/05/10
Posts: 897

7/25/13 5:08:49 AM#56
Originally posted by Strangerous
Originally posted by KhinRunite

Ugh @ phasing...I prefer dynamic worlds shared by everyone. 

I'm not taking a pass though. I'd still check it out.

 

Dynamic worlds?  You mean like if I decide to let a city burn and get their first the city should be burnt down and then you have to go the path I chose?  Or if I decide to let that city burn that in 15min it will be rebuilt with the same choices posed to you...aka pointless choices?

 

I wasn't directly comparing ESO with GW2. My point is I prefer the dynamic world route against the phasing route. GW2's implementation of dynamism is a step forward, but it's not the pinnacle of the model. I have no problem overcoming the obstacle that you, as another player, has set. As long as the system provides a way for me to undo you it wouldn't be a problem for me. To make things meaningful the turn around of events just has to be on a more realistic scale, and must affect the population. It should also not be so easy for one such as you to burn down the village. Plus this model supports the feature I want most from multiplayer games: share the experience with my comrades.

With phasing, the game offers a one way tiering for me. If they make it in such a way that I can go back any phase I want (i.e. in order to help a friend, etc) that would make it more bearable. A lot more trivial/artificial, yes, but bearable.

  Eir_S

Apprentice Member

Joined: 8/07/11
Posts: 4701

GW2 socialist.

7/25/13 8:26:27 AM#57
^ You forgot that if you're not on the same phase, even if you can "go back", you can't go forward, meaning anyone not caught up with you in the story can't join you.  If they changed that, my apologies, but man, that is the definition of limitation when it comes to player interaction: either keep up or get out.  But hey, some people seem to think that's the best way to do things.  ESO could turn out to be the worst possible type of world for players like myself: a vast single server where there are invisible people everywhere trying to do things together at the same time through artificial means.
3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search