Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

open-world and supports up to 2000 players

12357

Comments

  • KyelthisKyelthis Member UncommonPosts: 287
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    War was alright during 1.2 and 1.3, but it didn't do it as good as daoc or planetside.
    At launch it had cc and engine problems, then the bright wizard love in, bit it became a decent enough game. Bioware ruined it with 1.4 though with its stupid wow style wtfpwn gear, rez in keeps and dress as a rat.

    Yeah, I actually quit WAR right before the whole Skaven thing, but aside from the terrible PvE they had in the game, the RvR (non-zerg) was the saving grace for me and is what kept me in the game so long. Solo roaming with my Witch Hunter and my White Lion reminded me so much of my Infiltrator in DAoC. I just hope that TESO can fufill my PvP itch when it's released. 

  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904


    Originally posted by deakon
    Originally posted by Caliburn101 Originally posted by ShakyMo Caliburn Why would it crash? Planetside 2 has simmilar player numbers per continent and doesn't crash. Daoc & planetside 1 managed perfectly well too.  
    Let me be as clear as possible then; 2000 people in a zone max. 200 people on your screen max. When the 2000 people come together for the 'final push' in defence or attack to take the throne - FAR MORE than 200 will be crowding your screen... ... crash... ... or do you think 1800 of them will voluntarily leave the last phases of the battle to a select 200?... ... or that the zone will be split into 10 different areas which have objectives which all have to be taken simultaneously to win?... ... no?... ... me neither.
    Your assuming there is just one big objective in the middle rather than lots spread out around the map

     

    Its already been said you need to capture and hold multiple keeps etc in order to "win" so there wont be a centralised "push" as it were because if you have your whole team on one keep one of the factions will just break off and capture those you have left alone


    Your joking right? Time and time again games have shown human nature in the majority is to ZERG

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • deakondeakon Member Posts: 583
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by deakon

    Originally posted by Caliburn101

    Originally posted by ShakyMo Caliburn Why would it crash? Planetside 2 has simmilar player numbers per continent and doesn't crash. Daoc & planetside 1 managed perfectly well too.  
    Let me be as clear as possible then; 2000 people in a zone max. 200 people on your screen max. When the 2000 people come together for the 'final push' in defence or attack to take the throne - FAR MORE than 200 will be crowding your screen... ... crash... ... or do you think 1800 of them will voluntarily leave the last phases of the battle to a select 200?... ... or that the zone will be split into 10 different areas which have objectives which all have to be taken simultaneously to win?... ... no?... ... me neither.
    Your assuming there is just one big objective in the middle rather than lots spread out around the map

     

     

    Its already been said you need to capture and hold multiple keeps etc in order to "win" so there wont be a centralised "push" as it were because if you have your whole team on one keep one of the factions will just break off and capture those you have left alone


     

    Your joking right? Time and time again games have shown human nature in the majority is to ZERG

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207
    Gotta love all these people that never played daoc assuming it played like gw2 (or even worse swtor / tsw)
  • Rthuth434Rthuth434 Member Posts: 346
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Gotta love all these people that never played daoc assuming it played like gw2 (or even worse swtor / tsw)

    gotta love the ones who think TESO will be exactly like dAOC even more.

     

    rofl, 4 ex daoc devs in gw2(2 heavily involved in the RVR) while matt frior alone who really was responsible for the gear grind that turned everyone off to the game and delivered them straight to blizzard is on TESO.

     

    DAoC will not return this day. probably never sadly.

     

    EDIT: all i'm saying is it's not going back to the way it was...no matter what names these studios want to drop these days.

  • jtcgsjtcgs Member Posts: 1,777
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • FearumFearum Member UncommonPosts: 1,175
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

     Your large guild would lose everything else in Cyrodiil if you all go to one spot, so that tactic is not really viable. So your not ruining anyones game playing like that, your actually helping the enemy by playing bad.

  • Rthuth434Rthuth434 Member Posts: 346
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    exactly. the setup is identical to the first guild wars with the difference being that seemingly you'll be seemlessly put in the same DISTRICT(that's what anet called it in 2005) as your guild friends. no need to switch manually.

  • deakondeakon Member Posts: 583
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    I'm not saying the system is perfect, I was pointing out that having 2000 players all in the same place at the same time is unlikely

     

    What would you suggest they do, limit cyrodil to 200 people? Because the map would be pretty darn empty if they did that

     

    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

  • BetaguyBetaguy Member UncommonPosts: 2,627
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

     Please, lol. Anymous is dead bub, join a real group.

    "The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"

  • jtcgsjtcgs Member Posts: 1,777
    Originally posted by Fearum

     Your large guild would lose everything else in Cyrodiil if you all go to one spot, so that tactic is not really viable. So your not ruining anyones game playing like that, your actually helping the enemy by playing bad.

     No you dont get it, this is a DUMB IDEA THAT CAN BE CHANGED NOW and by blindly defending it you are ASKING for bad things to happen, and they WILL HAPPEN. Also, what you are refusing to understand is that if they limited what can be on screen to 200, when there are 300, you WONT SEE 100 OF THEM.

    We wont be helping the enemy, we will be exploiting a limit that YOU ARE DEFENDING. the 100 extra people WILL BE THERE and people will be dieing to those they cannot see, it will cause massive lag for everyone, and odds are, judging by early DaoC that also had a stupid limit like this there will be SERVER CRASHES. So, how about just waking up, getting the Devs to see this future issue NOW and getting it changed BEFORE release...it took 6 damn months for them to fix the server crash issue in DaoC, an issue that was pointed out to them during BETA 1, but sadly, while trying to point it out to them, crazy blind *#$@#! shut it down with blind defense.

    So, here you are, defending this crazy stupid idea, just because its in a game you are lookin forward to basically going to make everyone have to deal with PISS POOR PvP, massive exploiting and server issues that will drive players away after release.

    What the hell ever happened to the idea of wanting something you like to be even better by pointing out the damn flaws so its removed?!? dealing in black and white doesnt make sense...There is no, either like all of the game or hate all of the game, open your mouth, point out the flaws, get them fixed BEFORE release.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • jtcgsjtcgs Member Posts: 1,777
    Originally posted by deakon

    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

     Is there more than one copy of a zone? its an instance. You can even switch from one to the other. amount of people or persistant has nothing to do with the defenition of the word.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • deakondeakon Member Posts: 583
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

     Is there more than one copy of a zone? its an instance. You can even switch from one to the other. amount of people or persistant has nothing to do with the defenition of the word.

    How is it any different from having different servers tho, both have multiple copies of the same content and there is a cost attached to switching

  • The Megaserver concept essentially makes every zone "instanced" because there's going to be tonnes of copies of each zone, which players can flip flop inbetween. This mechanic is in place instead of dividing all "copies" of zones into a server of their own.

    Cyrodil is also copied many times so all players of the game don't come into the same version of Cyrodil. It's going to have a more persistent feel due to the campaign system. You'll essentially be fighting in the same "version" of Cyrodil much like you're fighting in the same version of Wintergrasp in WoW. The difference being that after the campaign has ended with some result and possibly some reasonable looting period of "peace" is ended a new copy of the instance will spawn with new rivals meeting each other.

    Bottom line, it's instanced but it'll have a sense of persistence through each campaign.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    Originally posted by deakon
    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

    A campaign in not a replacement for a server. It is an instance located on a server but does n't replace the entire server, just the cetral Cyrodil province. It is also not open world.

    Imagine 2 friends meet up and just happen to both have joined campaigns, although different ones. They both walk to the edge of Cryodil and as they cross over they disappear from each other. The first guy goes to his campaign (Instance) and the 2nd guy goes to his campaign (instance). The world outside doesn't change but the campaign area of Cryodil does.

    That is 100% instancing and 100% not open world. The minute 2 people standing side by side are seperated they are instanced and non open world. There really isn't any argument about that (well you can argue it but you just don't understand the technology or are just ignorant).

  • GhostshadowsGhostshadows Member UncommonPosts: 70
    Mega Server tech is like STO type servers guys....oh geeze and imagine Ilum

    People take the internet too serious...go out get some sun and cool off

  • PyrateLVPyrateLV Member CommonPosts: 1,096

    Zoning, Instancing, Phasing, Mirroring...

    How is any of this "Open World"??????

    Most of the ESO Fanbots are so obtuse its frightening

    Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
    Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
    Playing: Skyrim
    Following: The Repopulation
    I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
    ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)

  • deakondeakon Member Posts: 583
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by deakon
    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

    A campaign in not a replacement for a server. It is an instance located on a server but does n't replace the entire server, just the cetral Cyrodil province. It is also not open world.

    Imagine 2 friends meet up and just happen to both have joined campaigns, although different ones. They both walk to the edge of Cryodil and as they cross over they disappear from each other. The first guy goes to his campaign (Instance) and the 2nd guy goes to his campaign (instance). The world outside doesn't change but the campaign area of Cryodil does.

    That is 100% instancing and 100% not open world. The minute 2 people standing side by side are seperated they are instanced and non open world. There really isn't any argument about that (well you can argue it but you just don't understand the technology or are just ignorant).

    Your missing my point entirly, your campaign (instance) is designed to be your "home", not just an instance that can be swapped at a whim like the rest of the pve world, so yes campaigns are server replacements

    Instancing in cyrodil is there to replace servers because there are no servers to limit the player count in that zone, the reason why its a server replacement on cyrodil but not the rest of the world (which is also instanced) is due to the fact that its persistant and you get locked to that instance (campaign), so theres a permanence to them which isnt there in the rest of the world.

    So to break it down it will be persistant have up to 2k players and your locked to it. That is pretty much the exact same restrictions as it would be if it was seperated by server instad of an instance, so i really dont see how one is open world and the other not if they both have the exact same restrictions/benafits

     

  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904


    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely
     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.


    <3 Thankyou

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207
    It's the mega server that's the stupid idea. Not having cyrodil as a rvr area.
  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen Member UncommonPosts: 2,483
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    It's the mega server that's the stupid idea. Not having cyrodil as a rvr area.

    ^^This^^

    I wish they'd just go with servers.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • aslan132aslan132 Member UncommonPosts: 619

    Clearly some of you dont understand what open world is. Open world is not the opposite of instanced. Open world is the opposite of linear. 

     

    Open world does not mean that there are no zones, or instances, or load screens. It means that there are no artificial barriers or invisible walls WITHIN those zones, or instances. It means you are free to roam across the entire instance, jumping, climbing or running around without encountering obstacles. 

     

    This can easily be an open world PvP. And yes, Gw2 is open world, both the PvE and the WvW. Sorry your definition doesnt fit in with the rest of everyone elses, but its much easier for you to accept the game industries standard than to try to redifine everyone elses into your personal idea.

  • AerowynAerowyn Member Posts: 7,928
    Originally posted by aslan132

    Clearly some of you dont understand what open world is. Open world is not the opposite of instanced. Open world is the opposite of linear. 

     

    Open world does not mean that there are no zones, or instances, or load screens. It means that there are no artificial barriers or invisible walls WITHIN those zones, or instances. It means you are free to roam across the entire instance, jumping, climbing or running around without encountering obstacles. 

     

    This can easily be an open world PvP. And yes, Gw2 is open world, both the PvE and the WvW. Sorry your definition doesnt fit in with the rest of everyone elses, but its much easier for you to accept the game industries standard than to try to redifine everyone elses into your personal idea.

    GW2 WvW is a persistant open world just not tied to the questing world per say so basically it's own little world.. but instancing how i always read the definition is when the zone, dungeon, map, whatever creates a copy of itself to accomodate more people or groups of people.. for me then it can lose it's feel of a persistant map since you log in one day and could be in another instance of the zone.. in WvW that wouldn't happen. But honestly ill have to wait and try it to really make any sort of solid judgement.. if done well it still could be a lot of fun.

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  • KarteliKarteli Member CommonPosts: 2,646
    Originally posted by aslan132

    Clearly some of you dont understand what open world is. Open world is not the opposite of instanced. Open world is the opposite of linear. 

     

    Open world does not mean that there are no zones, or instances, or load screens. It means that there are no artificial barriers or invisible walls WITHIN those zones, or instances. It means you are free to roam across the entire instance, jumping, climbing or running around without encountering obstacles. 

     

    This can easily be an open world PvP. And yes, Gw2 is open world, both the PvE and the WvW. Sorry your definition doesnt fit in with the rest of everyone elses, but its much easier for you to accept the game industries standard than to try to redifine everyone elses into your personal idea.

    Open World PVP, in one bordered zone. Just like GW2 is open world PVP, because you can fight "openly" in a separate war instance.  Lol?

     

    In that context, you are correct.  As a standalone "Open World PVP" - no.  Segregations make the world so restrictive as to where a particular character can travel that it is not open world, even for PVE.  And without faction crossover zones other than the final PVP map, there is no "Open World PVP".  Just Open World PVP, in one bordered zone, which is a perversion of the meaning of open world.

     

    You may as well admit that there is nothing open world about TESO.  Or keep trying to convince yourself that the lacking qualities of TESO are what is making TESO equal to or better than the competition.  Makes just about as much sense.

     

    Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
    Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.

  • ThandrasThandras Member Posts: 41
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    jtcgs,

    Why all the hate? I mean, personally, I look at new games coming out and if I don't like what they have to offer, I simply don't buy/play them. It's a pretty simple philosophy. Just trying to get my head around why you and others are attacking the game.

    Is it that you are a huge fan of TES series and want to see the game be successful? Or is it that the game doesn't fit what YOUR vision of what a game should be?

    I can understand if you honestly want to try to help improve the game while it's still in beta but don't you think your purpose would be better served on the game's own website?

    In my opinion, (I know opinions are like assholes, we all have one and they all stink) if you're trying to help the game improve, you are going about it the wrong way. Seriously, threatening to get your guild to ruin others game experience? That just makes you seem like the little kid on the playground that has the only ball screaming at everyone else "If we don't play it my way, I'm going to take my ball and go home"!

    I don't have a personal stake in this game really. I like TES but not a huge fan, Skyrim was fun. I friggen loved DAOC pre-TOA and was dissapointed by GW2's attempt to recapture RvR. (that might be something that never happens. Nostalgia is a hard thing to duplicate) So, I will resume my sitting in the cheap seats and watching the text battle on the forums. I was just interested in yours and other attackers  motivation.

Sign In or Register to comment.