Trending Games | Guild Wars 2 | Firefall | ArcheAge | H1Z1

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,852,002 Users Online:0
Games:733  Posts:6,226,506
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System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info?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 » This would be much better with 2 major factions

4 Pages 1 2 3 4 » Search
75 posts found
  TheScavenger

Elite Member

Joined: 7/05/12
Posts: 686

Those who ask a question, are stupid for 30 seconds. Those who never ask, are stupid for life.

 
OP  4/08/13 5:41:08 PM#1

WoW was the first to do only two major factions, instead of three. This worked out much better, for balance. You didn't have anyone ganging up on the little guy either. It also made the game more interesting. This also proved to be a far more popular design, as seen by how many people got into it.

 

In WoW, you had Alliance vs Horde. If they were to have done capture points in the open world, it would have been far more hectic than if you had a third faction.

 

Just imagine

 

A 100 vs 100 battle (if they had that in WoW)...all even. This is epic. But then if there was a 3rd faction, they'd come along and greatly overbalance one side and the battle becomes no fun anymore. The only people who would have fun are the one that pwn the now greatly outnumbered side.

 

Three factions can never be balanced, as seen in DAOC. One faction is always greatly outnumbered and gets pwned all the time...they can't play the game or capture anything, because the two sides always go after them as they are easy pickings. This will be even more true with the modern MMO crowd, who always choose the 1 (or 2) most popular sides and want the easy pickings of the weak faction.

 

That is never a problem with 2 factions, as WoW proved.

 

(edit: Also look at GW2. It has three servers against each other, but one server is ALWAYS getting pwned so badly. Most badly I've seen thus far is one server had 200k points, another 190k points and the third had a measly 6k points. This again would be vastly different in a server vs setup, and not a three way server battle).

 

So I think they should have the 3rd faction be AI controlled only, so they don't have to redesign or get rid of anything. An AI controlled faction would be rather interesting anyway.

Isabella and Laenaya are on Photobucket!

http://s4.photobucket.com/user/Vendayn/library/Skyrim/Anime%20Skyrim

My (mostly) scenery screenshots of heavily modded Skyrim

http://s4.photobucket.com/user/Vendayn/library/Skyrim/Anime%20Skyrim/Aesthetics

  Caliburn101

Novice Member

Joined: 3/30/11
Posts: 647

"Imagination is more important than knowledge." Albert Einstein

4/09/13 2:59:20 AM#2

I don't think this argument holds water.

Zenimax have already stretched the ES in ESO with 3 fixed factions.

2 would be even less choice and by no means guarantee better mass PvP.

I can't think of a clear example in the MMO world where a 2-way was better than a 3-way.

  azzamasin

Elite Member

Joined: 6/06/12
Posts: 2725

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

4/09/13 3:01:56 AM#3

Spoken like the WoW fanboi you are OP.  I suppose you're one of those who insist WoW was the first MMO too.

 

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

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!

  Livnthedream

Novice Member

Joined: 3/20/13
Posts: 582

I like this planet, YOU get off!

4/09/13 3:21:08 AM#4
Originally posted by azzamasin

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

Except newer games have shown just how false that is. Tsw, Ps2, Gw2. They all show a much more selfish playerbase more willing to get theres before they get got, rather than team up to rule. I have heard this happened in said Daoc also, but I have no personal experience with it to say.

http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/

Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!

  muffins89

Novice Member

Joined: 10/15/12
Posts: 1254

4/09/13 3:23:37 AM#5
Originally posted by azzamasin

Spoken like the WoW fanboi you are OP.  I suppose you're one of those who insist WoW was the first MMO too.

 

 

 it was the first truley Massive on.   ;)

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

  GroovyFlower

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/12/11
Posts: 1252

Skyrim

4/09/13 3:26:05 AM#6
Originally posted by TheScavenger

WoW was the first to do only two major factions, instead of three. This worked out much better, for balance. You didn't have anyone ganging up on the little guy either. It also made the game more interesting. This also proved to be a far more popular design, as seen by how many people got into it.

 

In WoW, you had Alliance vs Horde. If they were to have done capture points in the open world, it would have been far more hectic than if you had a third faction.

 

Just imagine

 

A 100 vs 100 battle (if they had that in WoW)...all even. This is epic. But then if there was a 3rd faction, they'd come along and greatly overbalance one side and the battle becomes no fun anymore. The only people who would have fun are the one that pwn the now greatly outnumbered side.

 

Three factions can never be balanced, as seen in DAOC. One faction is always greatly outnumbered and gets pwned all the time...they can't play the game or capture anything, because the two sides always go after them as they are easy pickings. This will be even more true with the modern MMO crowd, who always choose the 1 (or 2) most popular sides and want the easy pickings of the weak faction.

 

That is never a problem with 2 factions, as WoW proved.

 

(edit: Also look at GW2. It has three servers against each other, but one server is ALWAYS getting pwned so badly. Most badly I've seen thus far is one server had 200k points, another 190k points and the third had a measly 6k points. This again would be vastly different in a server vs setup, and not a three way server battle).

 

So I think they should have the 3rd faction be AI controlled only, so they don't have to redesign or get rid of anything. An AI controlled faction would be rather interesting anyway.

At launch you had world pvp no BG or other instance pvp huge wars at tarrenmil  but poeple whined so much that eventually world pvp died and BG/arena  was main pvp.

So yeh that worked out fine 2 factions lol

  muffins89

Novice Member

Joined: 10/15/12
Posts: 1254

4/09/13 3:32:41 AM#7
Originally posted by GroovyFlower
Originally posted by TheScavenger

WoW was the first to do only two major factions, instead of three. This worked out much better, for balance. You didn't have anyone ganging up on the little guy either. It also made the game more interesting. This also proved to be a far more popular design, as seen by how many people got into it.

 

In WoW, you had Alliance vs Horde. If they were to have done capture points in the open world, it would have been far more hectic than if you had a third faction.

 

Just imagine

 

A 100 vs 100 battle (if they had that in WoW)...all even. This is epic. But then if there was a 3rd faction, they'd come along and greatly overbalance one side and the battle becomes no fun anymore. The only people who would have fun are the one that pwn the now greatly outnumbered side.

 

Three factions can never be balanced, as seen in DAOC. One faction is always greatly outnumbered and gets pwned all the time...they can't play the game or capture anything, because the two sides always go after them as they are easy pickings. This will be even more true with the modern MMO crowd, who always choose the 1 (or 2) most popular sides and want the easy pickings of the weak faction.

 

That is never a problem with 2 factions, as WoW proved.

 

(edit: Also look at GW2. It has three servers against each other, but one server is ALWAYS getting pwned so badly. Most badly I've seen thus far is one server had 200k points, another 190k points and the third had a measly 6k points. This again would be vastly different in a server vs setup, and not a three way server battle).

 

So I think they should have the 3rd faction be AI controlled only, so they don't have to redesign or get rid of anything. An AI controlled faction would be rather interesting anyway.

At launch you had world pvp no BG or other instance pvp huge wars at tarrenmil  but poeple whined so much that eventually world pvp died and BG/arena  was main pvp.

So yeh that worked out fine 2 factions lol

how would the amount of factions affect wether or not people like world pvp or bg/arena pvp more?  

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

  azzamasin

Elite Member

Joined: 6/06/12
Posts: 2725

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

4/09/13 12:52:08 PM#8
Originally posted by Livnthedream
Originally posted by azzamasin

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

Except newer games have shown just how false that is. Tsw, Ps2, Gw2. They all show a much more selfish playerbase more willing to get theres before they get got, rather than team up to rule. I have heard this happened in said Daoc also, but I have no personal experience with it to say.

TSW is crap, PS2 is a Shooter, GW2's WvW is crap.  2 of these I played offerd no real group or faction specific incentives it was all personal.

 

TSW and GW2 do something that DAoC never did.  No racial enmity, enemies can group in PvE and there is no  cause for killing other then to gain artificial points.  Plus the PvP (RvR) areas they do battle in is about the size of a peanut compared to the large area of DAoC's frontier (and ESO's Cryodill).

 

PS2 is just a shooter and does not appeal to the same type of gamer so that is a non issue in my book.

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!

  Squeak69

Novice Member

Joined: 1/21/13
Posts: 960

cheese cheese wheres da bloody cheese

4/09/13 12:56:55 PM#9
Originally posted by azzamasin
Originally posted by Livnthedream
Originally posted by azzamasin

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

Except newer games have shown just how false that is. Tsw, Ps2, Gw2. They all show a much more selfish playerbase more willing to get theres before they get got, rather than team up to rule. I have heard this happened in said Daoc also, but I have no personal experience with it to say.

TSW is crap, PS2 is a Shooter, GW2's WvW is crap.  2 of these I played offerd no real group or faction specific incentives it was all personal.

 

TSW and GW2 do something that DAoC never did.  No racial enmity, enemies can group in PvE and there is no  cause for killing other then to gain artificial points.  Plus the PvP (RvR) areas they do battle in is about the size of a peanut compared to the large area of DAoC's frontier (and ESO's Cryodill).

 

PS2 is just a shooter and does not appeal to the same type of gamer so that is a non issue in my book.

in TSW and GW2 while not exactly friendly they where not in open war with each other. also in GW2 you where not fighting people from the same server but a diffrent server. and in TSW PvP????? really cause aside from arenas there was no real PvP in that game.

useing examples that have major diffrence form the subject you are useing them as examples aginst dose ot work.

F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.

  Alders

Elite Member

Joined: 1/28/10
Posts: 1690

I cannot fiddle but I can make a great state of a small city.

4/09/13 12:57:50 PM#10
Originally posted by azzamasin
Originally posted by Livnthedream
Originally posted by azzamasin

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

Except newer games have shown just how false that is. Tsw, Ps2, Gw2. They all show a much more selfish playerbase more willing to get theres before they get got, rather than team up to rule. I have heard this happened in said Daoc also, but I have no personal experience with it to say.

TSW is crap, PS2 is a Shooter, GW2's WvW is crap.  2 of these I played offerd no real group or faction specific incentives it was all personal.

 

TSW and GW2 do something that DAoC never did.  No racial enmity, enemies can group in PvE and there is no  cause for killing other then to gain artificial points.  Plus the PvP (RvR) areas they do battle in is about the size of a peanut compared to the large area of DAoC's frontier (and ESO's Cryodill).

 

PS2 is just a shooter and does not appeal to the same type of gamer so that is a non issue in my book.

 

Doesn't change the fact that he's right.  Times and players have changed.  No one gives a shit about server/faction pride anymore and will flock to the side where the most "known" large PVP guilds decide to go.  2 weaker factions ganging up on the larger one will last a week at most until players reroll for easy wins.

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

4/09/13 12:58:33 PM#11

You've clearly never played a three faction game.  

 

The third faction balances the unbalance of two factions.  Since one is always more popular than the other.  If one faction is strong, the two weaker factions balance it out.  Midgard was usually the least populated due to ugly races, however, I never had a problem taking keeps or finding a good fight.  I'm seen first hand, two factions temporarily forming an alliance to knock the stronger faction down a peg or two.

 

Just because WoW did it, doesn't mean that it's the best.  

  JimmyYO

Apprentice Member

Joined: 9/13/11
Posts: 541

4/09/13 1:00:13 PM#12

Wow's success had nothing to do with having 2 factions over three and everything to do with how smooth the gameplay was compared to all else out there. A fact which holds true to this day.

The sad part is GW2 is still the games only competition but luckily for blizzard, arenanet chose to give few to no incentives for doing anything and no competitive raid kills or pvp ladders. Otherwise they would have actually killed WoW and that's coming from someone that HATED GW2.

  Alders

Elite Member

Joined: 1/28/10
Posts: 1690

I cannot fiddle but I can make a great state of a small city.

4/09/13 1:01:25 PM#13
Originally posted by DAS1337

You've clearly never played a three faction game.  

 

The third faction balances the unbalance of two factions.  

 

Again, this isn't the case anymore.  It is still better than 2 though.

  DAS1337

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/28/07
Posts: 2379

4/09/13 1:01:48 PM#14
Originally posted by Alders
Originally posted by azzamasin
Originally posted by Livnthedream
Originally posted by azzamasin

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

Except newer games have shown just how false that is. Tsw, Ps2, Gw2. They all show a much more selfish playerbase more willing to get theres before they get got, rather than team up to rule. I have heard this happened in said Daoc also, but I have no personal experience with it to say.

TSW is crap, PS2 is a Shooter, GW2's WvW is crap.  2 of these I played offerd no real group or faction specific incentives it was all personal.

 

TSW and GW2 do something that DAoC never did.  No racial enmity, enemies can group in PvE and there is no  cause for killing other then to gain artificial points.  Plus the PvP (RvR) areas they do battle in is about the size of a peanut compared to the large area of DAoC's frontier (and ESO's Cryodill).

 

PS2 is just a shooter and does not appeal to the same type of gamer so that is a non issue in my book.

 

Doesn't change the fact that he's right.  Times and players have changed.  No one gives a shit about server/faction pride anymore and will flock to the side where the most "known" large PVP guilds decide to go.  2 weaker factions ganging up on the larger one will last a week at most until players reroll for easy wins.

It doesn't become a fact just because you will it to.  The weaker insecure players will go to the strong side, while the stronger PvP'ers will join the weak side.  This is how it's always worked, and it still works today.

  Arun

Novice Member

Joined: 9/18/04
Posts: 53

4/09/13 1:05:04 PM#15
3 is just more interesting than 2.

Originally posted by shukes33
Grind is not one of the downfalls of DF it is just a feature.

  Drakynn

Novice Member

Joined: 3/02/08
Posts: 2051

4/09/13 1:13:11 PM#16
Originally posted by DAS1337
Originally posted by Alders
Originally posted by azzamasin
Originally posted by Livnthedream
Originally posted by azzamasin

I suggest you look up this little game that was titled DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot) to get a sense for what a 3rd faction does to combat the overpopulated and winning faction.

Except newer games have shown just how false that is. Tsw, Ps2, Gw2. They all show a much more selfish playerbase more willing to get theres before they get got, rather than team up to rule. I have heard this happened in said Daoc also, but I have no personal experience with it to say.

TSW is crap, PS2 is a Shooter, GW2's WvW is crap.  2 of these I played offerd no real group or faction specific incentives it was all personal.

 

TSW and GW2 do something that DAoC never did.  No racial enmity, enemies can group in PvE and there is no  cause for killing other then to gain artificial points.  Plus the PvP (RvR) areas they do battle in is about the size of a peanut compared to the large area of DAoC's frontier (and ESO's Cryodill).

 

PS2 is just a shooter and does not appeal to the same type of gamer so that is a non issue in my book.

 

Doesn't change the fact that he's right.  Times and players have changed.  No one gives a shit about server/faction pride anymore and will flock to the side where the most "known" large PVP guilds decide to go.  2 weaker factions ganging up on the larger one will last a week at most until players reroll for easy wins.

It doesn't become a fact just because you will it to.  The weaker insecure players will go to the strong side, while the stronger PvP'ers will join the weak side.  This is how it's always worked, and it still works today.

I also have to disagree.The reason why recent games have failed to engender faction pride IMO is because the factiosn are all generic and exactly the same.In games like DAoC and War each faction had it's own unique lore,races and classes with unique clothing and animations.

The games mentioned here the factions are interchangeable with the same classes with the same animations and the same races.TSW has a little variation in the clothing and lore but that is it.

Of course now that someone is trying to engender said pride again by making unique factions we see people crying liek babies about not being able to have all the races,classes and content available from day one.Seems today's gamer wants sameness and bland content.

  rojoArcueid

Elite Member

Joined: 8/13/09
Posts: 5450

"It is double pleasure to deceive the deceiver". - Niccolo Machiavelli

4/09/13 1:24:41 PM#17

i think the game would do better without the 3 player factions (or even 2 like OP says).

 

Let everyone hang out together in game. All PvE. You would have the freedom to choose to join a real Elder Scroll faction in game (dark brotherhood, thieves, mages, etc) and through them you can do all different types and modes of PvP that would benefit your faction as a hole. Everyone will be neutral out in the world. You can only be flagged for pvp to other faction if you choose to go against them for the overall benefit of your own faction. Once you start looking for trouble you will stay enemy of the members of that faction you offended in some way (giving you the option to redeem yourself and be forgiven by betraying your faction and joiniing them, otherwise you stay enemy to them)

 

My endgame begins with character creation and ends with a new mmorpg

  Sideras

Novice Member

Joined: 2/13/04
Posts: 236

4/09/13 1:38:30 PM#18

Did you really play DAoC? The little guy usually waited for the right moment while the middle faction was thinning out the Zerg and then the underdogs came in for the clean up. That happend alot.

There is a very big problems in MMO's today and that's the whole balance whine, MMO's shouldn't be over-balanced, WoW was to the point where it bored me to tears.

And 2 factions has even less chance of being balanced considering population.

  Slapshot1188

Elite Member

Joined: 5/06/07
Posts: 4115

4/09/13 1:40:15 PM#19
Originally posted by Alders

   No one gives a shit about server/faction pride anymore

Umm... I do...

 

"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  Sideras

Novice Member

Joined: 2/13/04
Posts: 236

4/09/13 1:41:32 PM#20
Originally posted by DAS1337

You've clearly never played a three faction game.  

 

The third faction balances the unbalance of two factions.  Since one is always more popular than the other.  If one faction is strong, the two weaker factions balance it out.  Midgard was usually the least populated due to ugly races, however, I never had a problem taking keeps or finding a good fight.  I'm seen first hand, two factions temporarily forming an alliance to knock the stronger faction down a peg or two.

 

Just because WoW did it, doesn't mean that it's the best.  

Really? :) Midgard was always the middle pop faction in on the EU servers, but I suppose that's thanks to the Scandinavians I guess.

But yeah underdogs balance it out, that's the idea anyways but you can always fuck it up like in GW2.

4 Pages 1 2 3 4 » Search