Trending Games | Marvel Heroes | Elder Scrolls Online | Star Wars: The Old Republic | ArcheAge

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,921,977 Users Online:0
Games:760  Posts:6,314,853
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System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info?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 » POLL: Faction Lock, or Not...

7 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Search
125 posts found
  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 8:10:35 AM#61
Originally posted by SavageHorizon

No you don't need that course after all. I mean you are wasted sitting on that chair in front of your desktop when you could be getting paid millions to make TESO. You have read about it and watch vids and some how through this you have gained some devine insight on how the game actually plays.

Wow! call ZeniMax and i reckon they will sack Matt and Paul and install Maelwydd the bestest arm chair devs on the nets to really make that block buster MMO.

Can you get me into beta?

Actually the course is very valuable if a little redundent for me as there is not a lot I don't already know (just fact not implying anything other then my results) as most of it is just common sense with the ability to conceptualise, rationalise and document idea's mixed with understanding the buisiness, it's history and what the business is. Anyway... 

As to how the game actually plays....apparently it is just like Skyrim according to Alpha/Beta/press reports. From that point of view it sounds like they have done a good job. Problem is, they could have coppied everything about the feel from Skyrim but if they haven't kept with the founding prociples of a TES game, namely freedom or exploration and choice then the fact it plays well is irrelevent.

To me it is as bad as GTA without great music tracks from the 80's or COD without PvP. Some games are popular because of what their main design concept is, changing that core concept is a bad idea. You don't need to have  3 years of study  to know that...or perhaps you do...

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 8:15:47 AM#62
Originally posted by fs23otm

 

What is shows is the other poll 80/20 was tainted with open world PVP'ers, and that really the only people that truely want an open world are people who want to PVE and people who want to have a open-style pvp (an that means ganking). 

It makes the true percentage that want open world very small, because they want it in a specific way. Would the PVPers be happy if they made it open world PVE? Would the PVE'ers be happy is it was open world PVP?

Zenimax choose the right option... PVE in PVE areas.. and one zone to funnel al the PVP'ers in to promote more PVP.

 

It is your OPINION that the 80/20 poll was 'TAINTED'. Your already crappy logic and self projected interpretation of the results means the rest of your argument is also using crappy logic and an invalid interpretation. Either way, polls can be made to show anything you want to use to back up your argument.

Only people who don't understand how they can be used would put any real faith in the results. The best polls are ones with totally different options with no cross over ir simple either/or options. Do one of those and it might mean something otherwise it is all bollocks.

  Nanfoodle

Elite Member

Joined: 5/23/06
Posts: 3712

2/26/13 9:18:43 AM#63
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by fs23otm

 

What is shows is the other poll 80/20 was tainted with open world PVP'ers, and that really the only people that truely want an open world are people who want to PVE and people who want to have a open-style pvp (an that means ganking). 

It makes the true percentage that want open world very small, because they want it in a specific way. Would the PVPers be happy if they made it open world PVE? Would the PVE'ers be happy is it was open world PVP?

Zenimax choose the right option... PVE in PVE areas.. and one zone to funnel al the PVP'ers in to promote more PVP.

 

It is your OPINION that the 80/20 poll was 'TAINTED'. Your already crappy logic and self projected interpretation of the results means the rest of your argument is also using crappy logic and an invalid interpretation. Either way, polls can be made to show anything you want to use to back up your argument.

Only people who don't understand how they can be used would put any real faith in the results. The best polls are ones with totally different options with no cross over ir simple either/or options. Do one of those and it might mean something otherwise it is all bollocks.

The poll does show one thing clearly. Even the open world PvPers have a different idea of how they want this game made. The posters in this thread seem to think they know ESO better then the devs making it. Yelling fail before we know anything meaty about the game. Yelling fail before we even try it. Here is a fact, make all maps open world PvP and you will get a smaller community, attract less players as pure PvP MMOs do. Sure they wil be more fucused group but that also means less money. <<<shrugs>>> you do the math and guess what side will win this dumb poll.

  Caliburn101

Novice Member

Joined: 3/30/11
Posts: 647

"Imagination is more important than knowledge." Albert Einstein

 
OP  2/26/13 9:27:11 AM#64

Interesting results so far - and I'm not talking about the poll percentages...

The issue continues to polarise people who cannot get it into their heads that three way factional PvP and open world freedom are NOT incompatible.

They were just made so be design in this case.

It doesn't matter to TES fans who want freedom to explore that the faction lock will mean a repeat of a previously succesful PvP-centric game - DAoC.

It doesn't matter to the DAoC fans that TES fans are getting a central and much loved major aspect of their IP taken away.

The two sides need to get their heads out of their proverbials and realise the game didn't have to be that way.

How about;

"I love DAoC and three faction PvP, but man, this has the TES IP and gameworld - why did you make is so restrictive? It's really not in the spirit of the IP, which by the way has been very successful for a very long time."

and;

"I am a TES adict, and am not bothered too much about PvP. But hey, I hear DAoC was a great game for it back in the day - couldn't you have put all that good in the game without ripping out the freedom to explore?"

No sign of any such posts though, the thoughtless crossfire just gets more intense - the numbers just underline where some of the fault lines are....

  Caliburn101

Novice Member

Joined: 3/30/11
Posts: 647

"Imagination is more important than knowledge." Albert Einstein

 
OP  2/26/13 9:33:56 AM#65
Originally posted by DMKano

Its faction locked, this is part of the base game design, it won't change no matter how many polls we have.

Let have a poll which way the earth should turn...

Actually, putting in caravaneer NPCs here and there for travel to otherwise blocked areas, some vendor available disguise kits which take a back slot, and changing guards to neutral towards members of enemy factions would be all it takes to open up the world to everyone.

You would just have to be careful in enemy territory - but you could quest and do dungeons.

Moreover, it would open up the possibility for sabotage and spying quests to be put in post-launch.

Minimal effort really, and a lot of people far happier because they can EXPLORE.

It's a historical fact that doing nothing means nothing changes.

So you are partly right; but I prefer to try - that way, there is a some kind of chance, rather than none...

... and don't quote me the likely probabilities - I already know, and that's not my point...

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 9:37:47 AM#66
Originally posted by Caliburn101

Interesting results so far - and I'm not talking about the poll percentages...

The issue continues to polarise people who cannot get it into their heads that three way factional PvP and open world freedom are NOT incompatible.

They were just made so be design in this case.

It doesn't matter to TES fans who want freedom to explore that the faction lock will mean a repeat of a previously succesful PvP-centric game - DAoC.

It doesn't matter to the DAoC fans that TES fans are getting a central and much loved major aspect of their IP taken away.

The two sides need to get their heads out of their proverbials and realise the game didn't have to be that way.

How about;

"I love DAoC and three faction PvP, but man, this has the TES IP and gameworld - why did you make is so restrictive - it's really not in the spirit of the IP, which by the way has been very successful for a very long time."

and;

"I am a TES adict, and am not bothered too much about PvP. But hey, I hear DAoC was a great game for it back in the day - couldn't you have out all that good in the game without ripping out the freedom?"

No sign of any such posts though, the thoughtless crossfire just gets more intense, and the numbers show the split.

I am pretty vocal in my thoughts of the design aspects of the game. Appologies, thought my viewpoint wsa more then apparent. Check my previous posts, I totally agree. There is NO reason to think the game chouldn't have a totally explorable world AND a central PvP area.

In fact, I have given several detailed suggestions on the matter. Essentially...

Factions replaced with 3 geat houses.

Great houses headed by same leaders as in current design.

Great houses are politically motivated and not tied to racial restrictions.

PvP still remains in Cyrodil as a 3 side conflict.

PvP outside Cyrodil could be added (optional via different servers or if it worked by using hteir mega server technology).

This has no effect on Cyrodil but now provides the open world for the explorers with the option of alternate rulesets (again, the mega server could thoretically be providing this anyway if it works as they say).

But the old 'DAOC is great what is your problem with TESO using it' posts are gonna keep blindly posting it isn't posssible and thowing around 'armchair dev' posts...

  azarhal

Hard Core Member

Joined: 7/06/09
Posts: 589

2/26/13 9:39:04 AM#67
Originally posted by Nanfoodle

The poll does show one thing clearly. Even the open world PvPers have a different idea of how they want this game made. The posters in this thread seem to think they know ESO better then the devs making it. Yelling fail before we know anything meaty about the game. Yelling fail before we even try it. Here is a fact, make all maps open world PvP and you will get a smaller community, attract less players as pure PvP MMOs do. Sure they wil be more fucused group but that also means less money. <<>> you do the math and guess what side will win this dumb poll.

Money!

Actually, the ZOS designers already said that they went with faction lock because the majority of PvE players don't like none-consentual PvP. And unlike SWTOR designers, the one for TESO actually want to the game to feel like there is a war going between the factions  and funel PvP players into the same area to keep the concentration high as opposed to sprinkle into many zones.

  fs23otm

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/11/07
Posts: 271

2/26/13 9:41:22 AM#68
Originally posted by Caliburn101

Interesting results so far - and I'm not talking about the poll percentages...

The issue continues to polarise people who cannot get it into their heads that three way factional PvP and open world freedom are NOT incompatible.

They were just made so be design in this case.

It doesn't matter to TES fans who want freedom to explore that the faction lock will mean a repeat of a previously succesful PvP-centric game - DAoC.

It doesn't matter to the DAoC fans that TES fans are getting a central and much loved major aspect of their IP taken away.

The two sides need to get their heads out of their proverbials and realise the game didn't have to be that way.

How about;

"I love DAoC and three faction PvP, but man, this has the TES IP and gameworld - why did you make is so restrictive? It's really not in the spirit of the IP, which by the way has been very successful for a very long time."

and;

"I am a TES adict, and am not bothered too much about PvP. But hey, I hear DAoC was a great game for it back in the day - couldn't you have put all that good in the game without ripping out the freedom to explore?"

No sign of any such posts though, the thoughtless crossfire just gets more intense - the numbers just underline where some of the fault lines are....

Is it a possibility that they could have chosen a different path: Instead of racial divides, use say Guild divides ( Mages, Warriors, Rogues guilds) ? Sure, but think of the feasability... All mages would be Mage guild, Warriors in warriors guild, and rogues in rogue guild. You could never balance that....

I think racial divide was the easiest and most sound. It has a historic note, and works well.

Now could they have opened the whole world up for "territorial battle"? Yes, but lets take a look at that... WAR had the entire leveling world open for battle.... and what you got was empty battle areas in the middle tiers. The low levels were popular and the high levels had all the high levels.

In ESO, EVERYONE is pushed into Cyrodiiil for PVP. That means more PVP will have the chance to happen.... no one can deny if you 1 area has pvp vs 100 areas... that pvp will occur more often in the 1 area.

Combine those two ideas and that is why Faction-lock PVP works... and  that is why DAoC worked for PVP, and t hat is why ESO will work.

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 9:43:01 AM#69
Originally posted by Nanfoodle

The poll does show one thing clearly. Even the open world PvPers have a different idea of how they want this game made. The posters in this thread seem to think they know ESO better then the devs making it. Yelling fail before we know anything meaty about the game. Yelling fail before we even try it. Here is a fact, make all maps open world PvP and you will get a smaller community, attract less players as pure PvP MMOs do. Sure they wil be more fucused group but that also means less money. <<>> you do the math and guess what side will win this dumb poll.

Lets just assume that the polls do show what you think they show...

Exactly why should that be a problem with their megaserver technology?

Imagine, if they had designed the game as an open world first, then added the restrictions as alternate playing options...

My choice would be to have PvP in Cyrodil unchanged, allow full exploration of the world, allow people to flag for PvP outside Cyrodil if they want....

What would your choice have been...oh that is right, no choice available because while they thought up the great idea of megaserver to let you play how you want with who you want they fucked up the rest of the design so that you don't have choices.

 

  Nanfoodle

Elite Member

Joined: 5/23/06
Posts: 3712

2/26/13 9:44:05 AM#70
Originally posted by Caliburn101

Interesting results so far - and I'm not talking about the poll percentages...

The issue continues to polarise people who cannot get it into their heads that three way factional PvP and open world freedom are NOT incompatible.

They were just made so be design in this case.

It doesn't matter to TES fans who want freedom to explore that the faction lock will mean a repeat of a previously succesful PvP-centric game - DAoC.

It doesn't matter to the DAoC fans that TES fans are getting a central and much loved major aspect of their IP taken away.

The two sides need to get their heads out of their proverbials and realise the game didn't have to be that way.

How about;

"I love DAoC and three faction PvP, but man, this has the TES IP and gameworld - why did you make is so restrictive? It's really not in the spirit of the IP, which by the way has been very successful for a very long time."

and;

"I am a TES adict, and am not bothered too much about PvP. But hey, I hear DAoC was a great game for it back in the day - couldn't you have put all that good in the game without ripping out the freedom to explore?"

No sign of any such posts though, the thoughtless crossfire just gets more intense - the numbers just underline where some of the fault lines are....

You cant make everyone happy, thats the way life works. Open world PvPers that want to explore every area on the same char are asking to play the game in a way it was not designed for and in the end I am sure would make them unhappy if they got what they wanted. They are better off rerolling on the other faction and seeing the area the way it was designed. As I am sure the maps are designed with the war in mind, questing to kill the other factions NPCs, quests and story in each map all directed at the war and designed for the faction that plays on it. They would be shorting themselves if they did not explore it with the right char. I dont think people get what they are asking for, or they are asking the devs to spend another year or two to change how the game is played. This is not a simple thing people are asking for here. Its not lets flip a switch and now everyone can go everywhere.

  Nanfoodle

Elite Member

Joined: 5/23/06
Posts: 3712

2/26/13 9:45:07 AM#71
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by Nanfoodle

The poll does show one thing clearly. Even the open world PvPers have a different idea of how they want this game made. The posters in this thread seem to think they know ESO better then the devs making it. Yelling fail before we know anything meaty about the game. Yelling fail before we even try it. Here is a fact, make all maps open world PvP and you will get a smaller community, attract less players as pure PvP MMOs do. Sure they wil be more fucused group but that also means less money. <<>> you do the math and guess what side will win this dumb poll.

Lets just assume that the polls do show what you think they show...

Exactly why should that be a problem with their megaserver technology?

Imagine, if they had designed the game as an open world first, then added the restrictions as alternate playing options...

My choice would be to have PvP in Cyrodil unchanged, allow full exploration of the world, allow people to flag for PvP outside Cyrodil if they want....

What would your choice have been...oh that is right, no choice available because while they thought up the great idea of megaserver to let you play how you want with who you want they fucked up the rest of the design so that you don't have choices.

 

Read my reply above this one. Thats why.

  BlueTiger33

Novice Member

Joined: 2/25/13
Posts: 169

2/26/13 9:47:21 AM#72

I vote for option 1. No need for special snowflakes in a PVP game...and trying to mix special snowflakes with a possible F2P game? Hell no.

 

I'm here (in gaming) to melt your face and make you surrender dishonorably, that's all.


I will never support freeloaders, no more subsidized gaming.
My Blog

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 9:49:15 AM#73
Originally posted by fs23otm

Is it a possibility that they could have chosen a different path: Instead of racial divides, use say Guild divides ( Mages, Warriors, Rogues guilds) ? Sure, but think of the feasability... All mages would be Mage guild, Warriors in warriors guild, and rogues in rogue guild. You could never balance that....

I think racial divide was the easiest and most sound. It has a historic note, and works well.

I disagree. It isn't the easiest and actually has such a huge impact in the rest of the game.

The easiest would have been to have the 3 leaders or their respective factions with a 'base' located someplace in each of their current home territories. That way you don't have to block borders, you don't ahve to block race selection, you don't have to block exploration.

Now could they have opened the whole world up for "territorial battle"? Yes, but lets take a look at that... WAR had the entire leveling world open for battle.... and what you got was empty battle areas in the middle tiers. The low levels were popular and the high levels had all the high levels.

In ESO, EVERYONE is pushed into Cyrodiiil for PVP. That means more PVP will have the chance to happen.... no one can deny if you 1 area has pvp vs 100 areas... that pvp will occur more often in the 1 area.

As has been mentioned elsewhere, to have this as a option would be great, to design the entire game on it not so great.

And their megaserver is meant to provide options for things like this. Why not have had an open world and have 3 options on the mega server for (faction locked territories, flagged PvP and faction based FFA PvP)?

Combine those two ideas and that is why Faction-lock PVP works... and  that is why DAoC worked for PVP, and t hat is why ESO will work.

This works for PvP...great, it doesn't work for the PvE or for the TES feel of the game though.

  DMKano

Elite Member

Joined: 6/17/11
Posts: 6437

2/26/13 9:49:20 AM#74

Ugh to posters saying they messed up the design by faction locking.

They did not mess up, faction locking was intended, planned and designed from the early inception, it's a core design decision.

Just because some disagree with it does not mean they messed up.

There is a huge difference there, messing up would mean if they intended have no factions and somehow goofed up and made them, this did not happen.

 

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 9:57:20 AM#75
Originally posted by DMKano

Ugh to posters saying they messed up the design by faction locking.

They did not mess up, faction locking was intended, planned and designed from the early inception, it's a core design decision.

Just because some disagree with it does not mean they messed up.

There is a huge difference there, messing up would mean if they intended have no factions and somehow goofed up and made them, this did not happen.

 

Would saying their design choice is wrong because it goes against the verry essence of a TES game by removing freedom of choice and freedom of exploration be better?

You can be the greatest artist in the world but if you are drawing a pile of crap it is just gonna be a good looking pile of crap. The point peopel make about the design being 'messed up' is that it is the wrong choice as it restricts options not opens them up.

  Nanfoodle

Elite Member

Joined: 5/23/06
Posts: 3712

2/26/13 10:02:14 AM#76
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by DMKano

Ugh to posters saying they messed up the design by faction locking.

They did not mess up, faction locking was intended, planned and designed from the early inception, it's a core design decision.

Just because some disagree with it does not mean they messed up.

There is a huge difference there, messing up would mean if they intended have no factions and somehow goofed up and made them, this did not happen.

 

Would saying their design choice is wrong because it goes against the verry essence of a TES game by removing freedom of choice and freedom of exploration be better?

You can be the greatest artist in the world but if you are drawing a pile of crap it is just gonna be a good looking pile of crap. The point peopel make about the design being 'messed up' is that it is the wrong choice as it restricts options not opens them up.

TES was not a MMO, they had to pick some mold to fit it in. Its not wrong. When anything changes mediums, it can never stay 100% pure. Look at any book made into a movie. Movie made into a game. Next you going to demand everyone play 1st person view. I think the picked the best mold for a MMO they could have. Its like the best of TSE, SWToR and DAoC had a good looking baby. You want the pure form of TES, I say go turn on your xbox.

  fs23otm

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/11/07
Posts: 271

2/26/13 10:05:23 AM#77

Wrong choice in your opinion....

Why can't people understand that the Devs are the Devs for a reason.... if you don't agree with the way they want to make the game.. then don't play. 

I agree with the Devs choice... and I will enjoy the game. Sorry that you don't, but maybe the next single player TES game will suite you more.

 

 

  Maelwydd

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1169

2/26/13 10:13:16 AM#78
Originally posted by Nanfoodle

TES was not a MMO, they had to pick some mold to fit it in. Its not wrong. When anything changes mediums, it can never stay 100% pure. Look at any book made into a movie. Movie made into a game. Next you going to demand everyone play 1st person view. I think the picked the best mold for a MMO they could have. Its like the best of TSE, SWToR and DAoC had a good looking baby. You want the pure form of TES, I say go turn on your xbox.

What part of converting TES into an MMO is impossible?

Why did they have to pick a mold then coming up with their own design?

WTF does the comment about 1st person view come from?

 

The problem here is that they did picka mold and didn't design it themselves.Instead of sitting down and saying

TES...Online....ok where do we start?

They said

TES---Online...DAOC was a good game with 3 faction PvP lets coppy it and not worry about what we could or could not have done to make a TES game.

lol had to throw in a console reference, got a problem with people who own consoles or is it just a throwaway insult (PS I don't own any consoles)

  Nanfoodle

Elite Member

Joined: 5/23/06
Posts: 3712

2/26/13 10:16:33 AM#79
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by Nanfoodle

TES was not a MMO, they had to pick some mold to fit it in. Its not wrong. When anything changes mediums, it can never stay 100% pure. Look at any book made into a movie. Movie made into a game. Next you going to demand everyone play 1st person view. I think the picked the best mold for a MMO they could have. Its like the best of TSE, SWToR and DAoC had a good looking baby. You want the pure form of TES, I say go turn on your xbox.

What part of converting TES into an MMO is impossible?

Why did they have to pick a mold then coming up with their own design?

WTF does the comment about 1st person view come from?

 

The problem here is that they did picka mold and didn't design it themselves.Instead of sitting down and saying

TES...Online....ok where do we start?

They said

TES---Online...DAOC was a good game with 3 faction PvP lets coppy it and not worry about what we could or could not have done to make a TES game.

lol had to throw in a console reference, got a problem with people who own consoles or is it just a throwaway insult (PS I don't own any consoles)

I dont even know where you are coming from any more or how to respond to you. A MMOer, TES fan, or someone thats even played the game. 

  MartinJ90

Novice Member

Joined: 3/31/12
Posts: 2

2/26/13 10:16:36 AM#80

I think you should be able to explore every area, and if you enter an enemy zone, you'll get flagged.

You'll not be able to attack, but if you get attacked, you can attack back.

A thousand years of pain

7 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Search