Howdy, Stranger!

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

POLL: Faction Lock, or Not...

135

Comments

  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member EpicPosts: 3,466
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

    You dont get the point - point is, the majority are united under "one option". I am amused at the twist you give it but you know... if there's an election and 40% are united under a common cause and the other 60% are divided between 5 or 6 parties or  "pockets of resistance" and don't even agree with each other, you know the party with 40% will win right? Its called relative majority.

    And its not moral high ground... this is just the best for TESO, it was done before and it worked perfectly but... since its before the WoW era, people don't have any idea of how it works so they see change always as a menace. People will always try to clinge to what they know instead of venturing into the unknown, no matter how good is that unkown.

    And btw... since you put things that way, yes I rather have 35% of people that know what they're talking about than 65% that have no clue about the system or its benefits and I'd say that about half of those 65% are just going along with the doom train because of the doom scenarios portrayed here, and half of the other half are thinking about TES single player ... the other half think "faction lock" = SWTOR.

    Thats why there are more people under a single choice there - 35% are the ones who actually know, by experience, the good and bad of faction lock and what it will mean in the game context. To be honest... I'll even go as far as to say that those 35% of those "pro faction lock" actually think "yea it will be nice without it BUT from what I've tried all those years, because of the community it just DOESNT WORK, so its better to have a better experience overall than to let something pointless as faction lock ruin the entire game - so yes, please faction lock - been there and at least that worked".

    What you think DAoC people never thought "man I'd actually like to go over to hibernia and check their stuff"? But ultimately its for a greater good. I also wish that we all had a "common language" but you know... on the other hand I really dont want to hear all the imature people and comments made when things dont go "how they want it". So... block the language also. Please.

    You see how that works right? Its not that people that like faction lock dont like to explore or that they agree in absolute terms with the decision, but they know that the alternative. They've seen the alternative and they've played the alternative and it has far worse consequences when, with faction lock, the integrity of the game is protected and they can just "go around that faction lock and roll an alt to check the other guys stuff".

    I dont know whos the "zealot" here... non-factionlock crowd are the ones, dressed in dark-brown priest-like robes shouting "the end is near" while the "faction-lock" are just trying to make you guys see the light - no the sky is not falling and the radio is not witchcraft.

    Yeah that right, fucking retarded.

     

    What's "fucking retarded" as you put it is you still spounting the nonsence instead of running down to university and booking that course i advised you to take. Instead your here still  going on about it not being tes but you still haven't answered my question on whether you have played the game.

    I assuming that you must have, can you tell us how it plays, feels and compare to the single player tes immersion. Your mystal insight is greatly needed to put these mer mortal devs in their places once and for all.

    Thanks




  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    Originally posted by SavageHorizon

     

    What's "fucking retarded" as you put it is you still spounting the nonsence instead of running down to university and booking that course i advised you to take. Instead your here still  going on about it not being tes but you still haven't answered my question on whether you have played the game.

    I assuming that you must have, can you tell us how it plays, feels and compare to the single player tes immersion. Your mystal insight is greatly needed to put these mer mortal devs in their places once and for all.

    Thanks

    Why would I book a course? I am already in my final year and averaging a pretty good score thanks.

    As for the rest...ever had cancer? Need to get it to realise it probably isn't a good thing to get.

    Unlike you I can read about a game, look at the design concepts and lore provided and ENGAGE BRAIN.

  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member EpicPosts: 3,466
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by SavageHorizon

     

    What's "fucking retarded" as you put it is you still spounting the nonsence instead of running down to university and booking that course i advised you to take. Instead your here still  going on about it not being tes but you still haven't answered my question on whether you have played the game.

    I assuming that you must have, can you tell us how it plays, feels and compare to the single player tes immersion. Your mystal insight is greatly needed to put these mer mortal devs in their places once and for all.

    Thanks

    Why would I book a course? 

    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?




  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,610
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

     

    The game is designed to be played one faction, one map and thats it. My guess is quest and story will repeat in each area to a large degree and would not make sense as each faction is at war and the NPCs and quests in each area will reflect that. My bet is also the dungeons will be mirrored to some level as well. I am sure they would need to do to much work just to let another faction walk on another faction map and thats not worth the devs time. Let them design the game they planed to make and stop asking for things that are larger then you understand. 

    Just to check, it it ment to be played

    'one faction one map'

    or

    '3 games in one'

    or '

    faction locks for faction pride'

    or

    'explore the entire continent of Tamriel'

     

    The game is a confused clusterfuck with their design. They want it be be a TES, they want it to be a RvR game, they want it to be a DAOC game...They don't seem to really be getting any of them.

     

    One DAoC fan here and I know others who plan to play it. DAoC is getting old and very dated and who says it cant be both? Lots of people are asking for ESO to be many different types of PvP games, open world, open world with flagging, open world with co-op play with other factions. So ESO fans seem to want some type of PvP. Taking ESO PvE system and class binded with the best PvP system to date, DAoC. Seems like a winning idea. Most people yelling its dumb have never played, really played, DAoC. This is a good thing and will attract many more players. Gives the best of both worlds. Open worldish PvP with the comfort of letting people who like to PvE in peace also get what they want. The ESO RvR area will have quests and I am sure dungeons if they really are taking one from DAoC. So open world nut bars like me will still have their PvP/PvE mash up as well. Dont kick it to the curb till you have tried it!!!!

  • fs23otmfs23otm Member RarePosts: 506
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by fs23otm

    This is too funny. I saw a poll on here the other day about Faction lock vs Open world, but it wasn't about PVP. Now this poll pops up. The other poll was like 80% for open world. This poll now shows that 34% want to keep PVP in Cyrodiil. 

    That tells me that most of the people complaining are either open world gankers or PVE'ers. 

    I fail to see your logic...

    If most people want an open world and PvP just in Cyrodil...how does that mean people are open world gankers? Isn't that the exact opposite of the results? Or is the 65% the majority now so your argument makes sense?

    And what exactly is the problem if most people are PvE'ers? (Except of course the developers have descided to make it a PvP central game - know your target audiance)

     

     

    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.

     

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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...

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,610
    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.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 Member Posts: 636

    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....

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 Member Posts: 636
    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...

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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...

  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,402
    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.

  • fs23otmfs23otm Member RarePosts: 506
    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.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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.

     

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,610
    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.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,610
    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.

  • BlueTiger33BlueTiger33 Member Posts: 158

    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.

    image

    I will never support freeloaders, no more subsidized gaming.
    My Blog
  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,610
    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.

  • fs23otmfs23otm Member RarePosts: 506

    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.

     

     

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    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)

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 10,610
    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. 

  • MartinJ90MartinJ90 Member Posts: 2

    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

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    Originally posted by fs23otm

    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.

     

     

    I am still highly doubtful I will play.

    My mind is thinking "If they can fuck up the fundamentals required to make a TES game then I don't even want to give them a penny". while another part is thinking "It might work out ok".

    Problem is, from the info supplied, the game isn't what I want and I will happily not buy it or play it...I have TES games that will be far superior.

    Until release though (and anytime I want FFS) I can and will comment on anything related to the game, that is what this site is for.

Sign In or Register to comment.