Trending Games | Trove | Elder Scrolls Online | Darkest Dungeon | Guild Wars 2

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,769,587 Users Online:0
Games:720  Posts:6,186,966
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System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info?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 » Will the real ESO please stand-up?

13 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search
252 posts found
  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3716

 
OP  3/29/13 2:17:27 PM#1

EDIT: I replaced my original 1 with a less biased version...thanks Sovrath.

ESO forum metagames...what a lovely way to pass the time before the release of the game!

So here's my attempt to summarize the two opposing POVs that turn every thread here into a rehashing of the same arguments.

1. On the one hand you have the people who argue that ESO has to, first and formost, be true to the TES IP. This includes complete freedom to go anywhere and do anything.  The Alliances, the alliance wars and anything related to that are not seen in Elder Scrolls game in a manner that is as restriced as the current system. This is a group of players/fans who would like to facilitate anything that makes this MMO Skyrim Online. They have been fighting an uphill battle since Zmax announced their vision for the game: 3-sided AvA, 3 alliances, 3 separate PvE areas, one massive AvA area, with a notable concession fron Zenimax. They have been using every bit of logic as well as their knowledge of past Elder Scrolls games to rail agains Zmax's core design vision... in this forum, they are legion. They consider themselves TES fans first and MMO fans second.

2. On the other side you have those who have played TES games but prinarily play a lot of MMOs. These guys are MMO fans to whom ESO is just the latest in a long string of MMO projects. They are intersted in this one prinarily for 2 reasons: it's a big-money AAA project and they seem to have a different approach than WOW and all its clones. This is a group that wants to try something truly different and is open to change. The TES IP? A nice bonus but not a big consideration. When Zmax announced the 3-sided AvA as the centerpiece of this MMO they became more, not less, interested because this is clearly not WOW and is reminiscent of a much beloved old game that did it this way, DAoC.

Although I'm definitely in camp #2, I'll admidt that both versions of ESO have merit.

#1 would be very Skyrimish. A world where there are bad guys, beasts and monsters one can fight--some more challenging than others that would require large groups to defeat. They need nothing else to have fun. They are not unlike the majority of WOW players who spend 95% or more of their time in PvE pursuits...it's a popular MMO model. If this is the design model chosen, then factons don't exists and obviously there is no need for faction locks and everyone would be able to talk and group with anyone of any race and go everywhere--nothing else would make any sense.

#2 would be unlike any current game (although GW2 has attempted something similar recently with their 3-sided server wars.) There would be PvE to be sure, but the primary activity is meant to be participation in the Alliance battles in Cyrodiil. This is the model Zmax chose and has been working on for several years. In this world, it would be inconsistent for Aliance enemies to call a time-out and group with each other to kill big bad monsters--that would make no sense. For this to be consistent, the Allaince Wars would need to impact the behavior in the whole world--not just Cyrodiil. Otherwise thhat world would lack integrity and cohesive design.Chatting and grouping with the enemy makes no sense in that design model. Visiting the other sides PvE areas? Sure, that could happen but you'd have to be PvP flagged there for this to be consistent.

Mind you some people could care less. This is the "it's just a game, dude!" crowd. They don't want worlds. They just want to have fun. I think Cindy Lauper is the inspirational leader of this crowd. "What could be simpler," they say, "give group 1 the PVE they want and group 2 the PvP they want...problem solved!" Well...not really. What this would do is take credibility away from both concepts...none of it would make sense. I would be willing to bet that this is the path that the shortsighted moneygrubbing suits would prefer. Shortsighted I say because with this mishmash, serious MMOers would just laugh at the obvious cash grab of trying to be everything to all people. This "compromise solution" would be doomed at birth. It would be yet another 3-months and out release. I guess we could say that this is group #3 but they'd probably hate that since this is a fiercely individualistic forum faction.

What do you think?

 

  elohssa

Novice Member

Joined: 3/29/13
Posts: 41

3/29/13 2:23:03 PM#2

The 1st group have no merit.

I am sort of 2nd group, but I dislike the idea of no real end game progression content. (raids) Quests and shit aren't real end game, so don't even bother with that load of BS.

  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3716

 
OP  3/29/13 2:28:40 PM#3
Originally posted by elohssa

The 1st group have no merit.

I am sort of 2nd group, but I dislike the idea of no real end game progression content. (raids) Quests and shit aren't real end game, so don't even bother with that load of BS.

Raids and high-level PvE content could fit in any model...so long as it fits clearly within the overall design. I'm not a raider but I'm not against raids

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 2914

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

3/29/13 2:31:02 PM#4

Could you slant this topic any more?

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 16989

3/29/13 2:31:46 PM#5
Originally posted by Iselin

What do you think?

 

Well, I think your post would have been infinitely more impressive had you not been so disparging in your bias.

However, you did put "Although I'm definitely in camp #2, I'll admidt that both versions of ESO have merit." So that was a nod in the right direction.

I could rewrite what you said with the bias going the other way but that wouldn't really be adding anything constructive to the conversation.

I'll edit this part to make it on par with the second part:

1. On the one hand you have the people who argue that ESO has to, first and formost, be true to the TES IP. This includes complete freedom to go anywhere and do anything.  The Alliances, the alliance wars and anything related to that are not seen in Elder Scrolls game in a manner that is as restriced as the current system. This is a group of players/fans who would like to facilitate anything that makes this MMO Skyrim Online. They have been fighting an uphill battle since Zmax announced their vision for the game: 3-sided AvA, 3 alliances, 3 separate PvE areas, one massive AvA area, with a notable concession fron Zenimax. They have been using every bit of logic as well as their knowledge of past Elder Scrolls games to rail agains Zmax's core design vision... in this forum, they are legion. They consider themselves TES fans first and MMO fans second.

 

I think that's a good start.

  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 16989

3/29/13 2:33:03 PM#6
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

Could you slant this topic any more?

  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3716

 
OP  3/29/13 2:33:47 PM#7
Originally posted by Sovrath
Originally posted by Iselin

What do you think?

 

Well, I think your post would have been infinitely more impressive had you not been so disparging in your bias.

However, you did put "Although I'm definitely in camp #2, I'll admidt that both versions of ESO have merit." So that was a nod in the right direction.

I could rewrite what you said with the bias going the other way but that wouldn't really be adding anything constructive to the conversation.

I'll edit this part to make it on par with the second part:

1. On the one hand you have the people who argue that ESO has to, first and formost, be true to the TES IP. This includes complete freedom to go anywhere and do anything.  The Alliances, the alliance wars and anything related to that are not seen in Elder Scrolls game in a manner that is as restriced as the current system. This is a group of players/fans who would like to facilitate anything that makes this MMO Skyrim Online. They have been fighting an uphill battle since Zmax announced their vision for the game: 3-sided AvA, 3 alliances, 3 separate PvE areas, one massive AvA area, with a notable concession fron Zenimax. They have been using every bit of logic as well as their knowledge of past Elder Scrolls games to rail agains Zmax's core design vision... in this forum, they are legion. They consider themselves TES fans first and MMO fans second.

 

I think that's a good start.

 Fair enough... I am biased. I freely admit it. Let's go with your version of #1 instead of mine.

  Maelwydd

Elite Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1094

3/29/13 2:34:18 PM#8

Aliances, 3 way faction conflict, seperate PvE and PvP area's...all fine and do not need to deviate from the TES games much to be achievable.

The problem is, to provide the aliances, 3 way faction conflict and seperate PvE and PvP area's they chose a way that forces players into a different type of gameplay then what is possible.

That is a very important thing to remember. to achieve all the things mentioned yuo do not need to remove all the freedoms the designers have chosen to remove.

The tried and tested argument of "but this is an MMO, you can't do it" is simply a cop out people use because to the unimaginative or uncreative it seems that way. Unfortunately it has been shown elsewhere that it is possible and HAS been done.

As for #2 being unlike any other game out there....ask the DAOC guys if that is the case, perhaps read a few of the duscussions back before the designers revealed that at 50+ you can PvE explore the otehr 2 factions territories. I can assure you, people on BOTH sides of the arguments knew EXACTLY what the game was and it wasn't unlike any other game out there, it was exactly like a game released over 10 years ago.

  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3716

 
OP  3/29/13 2:34:24 PM#9
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

Could you slant this topic any more?

 Yes, I could have.

  pokrak

Novice Member

Joined: 8/20/11
Posts: 86

there is always another battle to win

3/29/13 2:37:20 PM#10

Count me into group nr 2. Im expecting from ESO good pvp and most of all combat system must be fun(looks like it is). Then when I want to rest from slaying elfs and other s***s will look for fun in pve and I don't really care if its TES IP or any thing else...

I will play it for pvp as many others and if they break it at some point they will loose half of their population...

  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 16989

3/29/13 2:42:31 PM#11
Originally posted by Iselin
 

 Fair enough... I am biased. I freely admit it. Let's go with your version of #1 instead of mine.

Thank you. I always considered you a reasonable person and your taste in the Game of Thrones can't be questioned.

  Maelwydd

Elite Member

Joined: 2/26/09
Posts: 1094

3/29/13 2:45:55 PM#12
Originally posted by pokrak

I will play it for pvp as many others and if they break it at some point they will loose half of their population...

Lets play the numbers game (unable to verify sales of TES games, just numbers found from a few sources, might be wrong but you get the point)...

DAOC subscribers/players roughly 250,000.

TES subscribers/players over 7 million (Oblivion 3mil and Skyrim 4mil).

If you were making a game to make a profit who would you want to piss off less?

  tokini

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/03/07
Posts: 344

3/29/13 2:47:54 PM#13

#2 should just read "people that want DAoC 2"

 

they certainly dont seem  'want something different and open to change', as you imply. all of their suggestions revolve around making it as close to DAoC as possible.

 

 

  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3716

 
OP  3/29/13 2:52:03 PM#14
Originally posted by tokini

#2 should just read "people that want DAoC 2"

 

they certainly dont seem  'want something different and open to change', as you imply. all of their suggestions revolve around making it as close to DAoC as possible.

 

 

I beg to differ. Most of us got bored with DAoC and left. We want something better: better combat, better crafting, better terain with natural chokepoints, better end-game progression... I could go on.

  Miblet

Apprentice Member

Joined: 8/19/10
Posts: 327

3/29/13 2:56:45 PM#15

I want to see what TESO is like.

I can see a lot of upset people when more information gets revealed.  It's certainly following the usual MMO trend of people arguing over how the game should be developed to attract the most people whilst ignoring how it is being developed.

  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3716

 
OP  3/29/13 2:59:19 PM#16
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by pokrak

I will play it for pvp as many others and if they break it at some point they will loose half of their population...

Lets play the numbers game (unable to verify sales of TES games, just numbers found from a few sources, might be wrong but you get the point)...

DAOC subscribers/players roughly 250,000.

TES subscribers/players over 7 million (Oblivion 3mil and Skyrim 4mil).

If you were making a game to make a profit who would you want to piss off less?

Maybe Zmax knew the numbers--the real ones, not the ones you're pulling out of...somehere--and decided to go with their original plan anyway? Just a guess...

  tokini

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/03/07
Posts: 344

3/29/13 3:03:14 PM#17
Originally posted by Miblet

I want to see what TESO is like.

I can see a lot of upset people when more information gets revealed.  It's certainly following the usual MMO trend of people arguing over how the game should be developed to attract the most people whilst ignoring how it is being developed.

this is true. reminds me of how a decent number of people kept hoping SWTOR was going to have some SWG elements and 'sandbox' features, etc., no matter how many times they were told the only thing the games shared was the IP.

 

 

  Phry

Elite Member

Joined: 7/01/04
Posts: 5069

3/29/13 3:15:50 PM#18
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by pokrak

I will play it for pvp as many others and if they break it at some point they will loose half of their population...

Lets play the numbers game (unable to verify sales of TES games, just numbers found from a few sources, might be wrong but you get the point)...

DAOC subscribers/players roughly 250,000.

TES subscribers/players over 7 million (Oblivion 3mil and Skyrim 4mil).

If you were making a game to make a profit who would you want to piss off less?

Maybe Zmax knew the numbers--the real ones, not the ones you're pulling out of...somehere--and decided to go with their original plan anyway? Just a guess...

the DAoC figure is the peak subscriber numbers, what the overall number of accounts was over the lifetime of the game, i wouldnt like to estimate, but its obviously a much lower figure than that of the TES games, though i wouldnt go so far as to say 7 million as people who bought Skyrim most likely bought Oblivion and probably Morrowind too, but i do think its fair to say that TES fans do number in the millions rather than just a couple of hundred thousand. In the end, Zenimax will have to choose which demographic they want to appeal to, although catering to the DAoC crowd and the TES crowd shouldnt be mutually exclusive, there is no real reason why a racial faction lock should be in place, it doesnt fit in with the TES lore, except with some exceptionally obscure shoehorning that isnt really in keeping with TES anyway, thats not to say that a game can't be made in the TES vein with 3 factions, just that basing it on racial lock-ins was a bit of a weird move, basing the 3 factions on idealogical motives would have been far better, and more in keeping with TES, and moreover would have given players the option of choosing, which is also in keeping with the spirit of TES.

  aesperus

Elite Member

Joined: 1/04/05
Posts: 4601

3/29/13 3:17:11 PM#19
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by elohssa

The 1st group have no merit.

I am sort of 2nd group, but I dislike the idea of no real end game progression content. (raids) Quests and shit aren't real end game, so don't even bother with that load of BS.

Raids and high-level PvE content could fit in any model...so long as it fits clearly within the overall design. I'm not a raider but I'm not against raids

I think the problem w/ this particular portion of group #1, is that they're argument doesn't hold up here. They're marching under the banner of 'TESO should be true to Elder Scrolls games!', and at the same time using that logic to criticisize the game for not having raiding.

Raiding is primarily a product of games like EQ / WoW. It literally has nothing to do with any of the elder scrolls games. Could it fit into the MMO version? Of course it could, but that wouldn't make it more of an elder scrolls game. It would just be a feature that a lot of people want, and are demanding.

Imho PvP makes a lot more sense in an elder scrolls game. Conflict is a huge part of the elder scrolls universe, and every game usually has at least 2 sides battling it out. They all have dungeon crawling, but that's mostly side-quest territory, and is still evident in the MMO.

- Really the only argument I've seen from group #1 that makes sense, is their push for a more open world. Last I heard, Zmax was giving a little ground in that area, but I haven't really been following it close enough to know specifics.

  Sovrath

Elite Member

Joined: 1/06/05
Posts: 16989

3/29/13 3:29:54 PM#20
Originally posted by Phry
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by Maelwydd
Originally posted by pokrak

I will play it for pvp as many others and if they break it at some point they will loose half of their population...

Lets play the numbers game (unable to verify sales of TES games, just numbers found from a few sources, might be wrong but you get the point)...

DAOC subscribers/players roughly 250,000.

TES subscribers/players over 7 million (Oblivion 3mil and Skyrim 4mil).

If you were making a game to make a profit who would you want to piss off less?

Maybe Zmax knew the numbers--the real ones, not the ones you're pulling out of...somehere--and decided to go with their original plan anyway? Just a guess...

the DAoC figure is the peak subscriber numbers, what the overall number of accounts was over the lifetime of the game, i wouldnt like to estimate, but its obviously a much lower figure than that of the TES games, though i wouldnt go so far as to say 7 million as people who bought Skyrim most likely bought Oblivion and probably Morrowind too, but i do think its fair to say that TES fans do number in the millions rather than just a couple of hundred thousand. In the end, Zenimax will have to choose which demographic they want to appeal to, although catering to the DAoC crowd and the TES crowd shouldnt be mutually exclusive, there is no real reason why a racial faction lock should be in place, it doesnt fit in with the TES lore, except with some exceptionally obscure shoehorning that isnt really in keeping with TES anyway, thats not to say that a game can't be made in the TES vein with 3 factions, just that basing it on racial lock-ins was a bit of a weird move, basing the 3 factions on idealogical motives would have been far better, and more in keeping with TES, and moreover would have given players the option of choosing, which is also in keeping with the spirit of TES.

Well, didn't mark jacobs say that DAoC was about 250k (on this site no less)  and we can see from here that at least Skyrim was in the millions...

Skyrim Sales Statistics Data
Skyrim units sold in the first 48 hours 3.5 million
Skyrim units sold in the first week release 7 million
Skyrim sales in the first week of release $450 million
Total Skyrim units sold 10 million
Total Skyrim sales $620 million
Average user review rating 92 / 100
Highest number of concurrent players on Steam 280,000

http://www.statisticbrain.com/skyrim-the-elder-scrolls-v-statistics/

 
Having said that, I don't believe Zenimax went into this endeavor without knowing this info therefore they probably based some of their decision on other factors.
13 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search