Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

[POLL] If TES:O Did Not Have AvAvA, Would You Play it?

AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member

Simply stated, if the PvE was the same as far as we know about it, if the PvP was something else besides AvAvA, would you still be interested?

I know none of this will affect the game. I am just curious.

[EDIT]Oops... Wrong Area... My bad. Meant it for the TES:O board.

[EDIT 2]
Thanks Mods :)

- 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

«134

Comments

  • meddyckmeddyck Athens, GAPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon
    Without AvA, this would for me be a generic fantasy MMO based on an IP from other games I didn't play using mechanics I dislike (limited hotbar skills, no targeted healing). So no I wouldn't be thinking twice about it if it didn't have AvA.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon

    I could be sucked in by open world PVP with conquerable stuff and consequences.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    I selected 'Other' because I'm not sure if I'm interested in the game with or without AvAvA. I haven't been all that interested in playing the single player games. Yes, I know they are awesome, and I would probably enjoy them since I enjoyed Fallout so much, but I'm just not that interested in playing the game(s).

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • ghorgosghorgos NirgendwoPosts: 190Member Uncommon

    Still undecided if i'm going to play TESO but my issues with the game are not with the AvAvA in general. Romoving this feature wouldn't change anything for me.

     

    My issues are about the way the faction lock is done(tthings like eq2 betrayal quests would be good, much more races per faction), the partial locked world, combat seems to be way to action based and simple instead of some real tactical components, lack of some better pve-sandbox mechanisms....

  • LeiloniLeiloni None of your beeswax, ALPosts: 432Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Without AvA, this would for me be a generic fantasy MMO based on an IP from other games I didn't play using mechanics I dislike (limited hotbar skills, no targeted healing). So no I wouldn't be thinking twice about it if it didn't have AvA.

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    I have been wanting to play a TES MMO since Oblivion, unfortunately AvAvA almost discourages me from playing it.
  • ghorgosghorgos NirgendwoPosts: 190Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Leiloni

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

    You have played the wrong tab-targetting games or played them at the wrong time. Tab-targetting can be much more than "whack a mole" and offer a depth of strategy and planning that action based playstyle will never achieve. 

  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko RotterdamPosts: 3,845Member Uncommon

    I'd be interested in playing a TES MMO, but I'm not at all sure if I'll be playing this one.

     

    In any MMO with a strong PVP focus, the PVE is inevitably affected by the requirements of PVP balancing, which usually results in limits being imposed on the things you can do in PVE (such as stuns and knockbacks). Few dev teams want to develop two seperate rule sets in the same game, and for good reason.

  • LeiloniLeiloni None of your beeswax, ALPosts: 432Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ghorgos
    Originally posted by Leiloni

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

    You have played the wrong tab-targetting games or played them at the wrong time. Tab-targetting can be much more than "whack a mole" and offer a depth of strategy and planning that action based playstyle will never achieve. 

    I'm not saying it doesn't. I've played a lot of tab target games but staring at the UI all day is not my idea of fun.

    Trust me, tab target healing seems really cool until you try action combat healing and then you wonder what the hell you were thinking all those years.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,616Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    I'd be interested in playing a TES MMO, but I'm not at all sure if I'll be playing this one.

     

    In any MMO with a strong PVP focus, the PVE is inevitably affected by the requirements of PVP balancing, which usually results in limits being imposed on the things you can do in PVE (such as stuns and knockbacks). Few dev teams want to develop two seperate rule sets in the same game, and for good reason.

    This may interest you:

    "There are seven confirmed varieties of skill trees within the game: Class, Weapon, Armor, Racial, World, Guild, and AvA. These categories are (in some cases) further broken down. Each class has three sub-trees, and AvA also features three skill trees. Unique quest based skill trees like those for Lycanthropy or Vampiriism are also present."

    Seems to me like a path for PvP balancing without interfering too much with PvE is already part of the design. I don't know what that means exactly. But it reminds me a bit of the Rift PvP soul system.

  • meddyckmeddyck Athens, GAPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Leiloni
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Without AvA, this would for me be a generic fantasy MMO based on an IP from other games I didn't play using mechanics I dislike (limited hotbar skills, no targeted healing). So no I wouldn't be thinking twice about it if it didn't have AvA.

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

    I haven't played TERA or RaiderZ. I asked about PvP in TERA on a different forum recently and was told there was none until level cap. I can see how reticle-based healing could work in a PvE context. In fast paced PvP, you don't have time to locate a member of your group getting focus-fired and move your reticle onto them. You need to be able to immediately target that group member and heal him directly. The only way reticle-based targeting can work in that kind of RvR MMO is if TTK is extremely high so there is no urgency to target your group member and get him healed. But that's not something I like either. I may still try to deal with it in AvA in TESO particularly since I'm not planning on playing a healer there. But it's not my preferred mechanic.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,616Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Originally posted by Leiloni
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Without AvA, this would for me be a generic fantasy MMO based on an IP from other games I didn't play using mechanics I dislike (limited hotbar skills, no targeted healing). So no I wouldn't be thinking twice about it if it didn't have AvA.

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

    I haven't played TERA or RaiderZ. I asked about PvP in TERA on a different forum recently and was told there was none until level cap. I can see how reticle-based healing could work in a PvE context. In fast paced PvP, you don't have time to locate a member of your group getting focus-fired and move your reticle onto them. You need to be able to immediately target that group member and heal him directly. The only way reticle-based targeting can work in that kind of RvR MMO is if TTK is extremely high so there is no urgency to target your group member and get him healed. But that's not something I like either. I may still try to deal with it in AvA in TESO particularly since I'm not planning on playing a healer there. But it's not my preferred mechanic.

    ESO healing is not reticle based either. It is AOE healing exclusively although some of the AoE is cone shaped and some may be ground-targetted. I also don't think it is either "group exclusive" nor player-limit capped.

    To give tanks some extra healing, one of the properties inherent in heavy armor is +% to healing received.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Without the realm combat, I would probably play it for a month or two and then get bored, much like SWTOR. I need good PvP to keep me interested in a game long term.
  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEPosts: 2,838Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by sapphen
    I have been wanting to play a TES MMO since Oblivion, unfortunately AvAvA almost discourages me from playing it.

    i don't see why, the pvp is totally optional and segregated from the rest of the game.

    me personally, i would still try this game if it still had the option to pvp other than just battleground style pvp.

    i mean, sure i could still play it without any pvp or endgame for a while but it wouldn't last long, that is for sure.

    still probably wont last very long for me as far as mmo's go, but we will see.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    I'd rather have Raids and other forms of small-medium group content as highly polished and engaging as in WoW.

    But I know that is not a popular opinion.

    More interesting to me long term than taking and retaking and retaking and retaking the same hill over and over and over again.

    War without end is not a good design decision IMO - as without an end there is no long term objective.

    You've got to have winners and losers.

    Open world territorial control warfare without borders defining the conflict is the only way to do PvP in a MMO properly, however it doesn't really fit into the "Elder Scrolls except also an MMO" box well.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,460Member Uncommon

    I put yes but it's a qualified "yes".

    though I love pvp I don't care about rvr so that's not a selling point. What is a selling point is how close they can make me feel like I'm playing in the Elder Scrolls Universe.

    so far I'm on the fence.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,460Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by meddyck
     

    I haven't played TERA or RaiderZ. I asked about PvP in TERA on a different forum recently and was told there was none until level cap.

    That's not true.

    go to a pvp server. Might not be completely fair but it's there.

    Sorry for the off topic.

    On topic, the combat mechanics feel closer to a mixture of tera and guild wars.

    So considering that I prefer this type of combat, ESO might be a great experience in regards to pvp.

    But the RVR is of no consequence to me.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 20,008Member Uncommon
    Even with AVA not really sure it's my style of MMO actually, I prefer titles centered around more long term territory control.

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid hell, NJPosts: 6,778Member Uncommon
    YES. If i play TESO it will be only for PvE (the online experience of an Elder Scroll world). But if the PvE is not as good as Skyrim then i expect TESO to be B2P only. I wouldnt pay a sub for it if Skyrim entertains me more and for longer time.

    image
  • LeiloniLeiloni None of your beeswax, ALPosts: 432Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Originally posted by Leiloni
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Without AvA, this would for me be a generic fantasy MMO based on an IP from other games I didn't play using mechanics I dislike (limited hotbar skills, no targeted healing). So no I wouldn't be thinking twice about it if it didn't have AvA.

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

    I haven't played TERA or RaiderZ. I asked about PvP in TERA on a different forum recently and was told there was none until level cap. I can see how reticle-based healing could work in a PvE context. In fast paced PvP, you don't have time to locate a member of your group getting focus-fired and move your reticle onto them. You need to be able to immediately target that group member and heal him directly. The only way reticle-based targeting can work in that kind of RvR MMO is if TTK is extremely high so there is no urgency to target your group member and get him healed. But that's not something I like either. I may still try to deal with it in AvA in TESO particularly since I'm not planning on playing a healer there. But it's not my preferred mechanic.

    Targeting your friendlies to heal them on the fly is actually not hard to tell you the truth. If you play a Priest you have one multi target lock on heal and an AoE lock on heal (so once you hover over your target it alows you to lock on to them so you don't miss); as well as several ground circle AoE heals with fixed locations, meaning you place your character close enough to the people you want to heal and everyone within the circle's radius gets healed. 

    PvP healing is probably one of the most fun things about TERA's combat. But it's a different kind of gameplay altogether that's for sure.

    Both TERA and RaiderZ are free and you don't even have to get all that far to get a feeling for how healing works in those games. TERA I'd play to 26 to get a feeling of some of them but you can even just create a level 1 toon and go through the tutorial, which puts you at level 20. So you can sit in the tutorial zone and play around with the skills for as long as you like. RaiderZ I'd play to maybe level 17 or so to get a feeling for how it works there as well. And hey, since ESO isn't out yet you have time to kill! ;)

     

     

  • LeiloniLeiloni None of your beeswax, ALPosts: 432Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Originally posted by Leiloni
    Originally posted by meddyck
    Without AvA, this would for me be a generic fantasy MMO based on an IP from other games I didn't play using mechanics I dislike (limited hotbar skills, no targeted healing). So no I wouldn't be thinking twice about it if it didn't have AvA.

    You really prefer tab target healing? Staring at a UI playing whack a mole all day? In non targeting games, the healing allows you to not only see the fight, but actually be a part of it. It's much more fun and interactive. You should try a game like TERA (really the best at it) or even RaiderZ to see what non targeting healing is like. It's far far better. I will never ever go back to tab target.

    I haven't played TERA or RaiderZ. I asked about PvP in TERA on a different forum recently and was told there was none until level cap. I can see how reticle-based healing could work in a PvE context. In fast paced PvP, you don't have time to locate a member of your group getting focus-fired and move your reticle onto them. You need to be able to immediately target that group member and heal him directly. The only way reticle-based targeting can work in that kind of RvR MMO is if TTK is extremely high so there is no urgency to target your group member and get him healed. But that's not something I like either. I may still try to deal with it in AvA in TESO particularly since I'm not planning on playing a healer there. But it's not my preferred mechanic.

    ESO healing is not reticle based either. It is AOE healing exclusively although some of the AoE is cone shaped and some may be ground-targetted. I also don't think it is either "group exclusive" nor player-limit capped.

    To give tanks some extra healing, one of the properties inherent in heavy armor is +% to healing received.

    Yea that's why I suggested also trying out RaiderZ because their Cleric's use mostly AoE and ground targeted heals. So between the two games you get a feeling for both types of non targeting healing methods.

  • Po_ggPo_gg Twigwarren, WestfarthingPosts: 2,719Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    I'd be interested in playing a TES MMO, but I'm not at all sure if I'll be playing this one.

    In any MMO with a strong PVP focus, the PVE is inevitably affected by the requirements of PVP balancing, which usually results in limits being imposed on the things you can do in PVE (such as stuns and knockbacks).

    +1.

    I didn't mind pvp in my games up until in AoC they f**ked up pve classes because of the pvp whiners... since then I prefer my games with the least pvp possible for the sake of unaffected pve. So I'd poll to Other or No, since removing AvAvA wouldn't make TESO any better.

    I mean even after the 'horrible' changes when the whole daoc-lover crowd went berserk, for me it was much more relevant what Maria said in her video with Garrett. It was about creature combat (and pve), and her first line was "since our game is so pvp-centered" ? c'mon, what the... thanks, but no thanks :)

     

    My perfect TESO would be a LotRO-ish setting, with every TES game combined, nice storyline arch plus a helluva lot of exploration and crafting and character developement, and somewhere tucked away a separate area for pvp'ers to gank each other 24/7 without any influence to the outside and the rest of the game :) (if only the devs insisted to insert pvp at all) Sweet dreams from the time when the first news arrived that there will be a TES online...

  • Po_ggPo_gg Twigwarren, WestfarthingPosts: 2,719Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Leiloni

    Yea that's why I suggested also trying out RaiderZ because their Cleric's use mostly AoE and ground targeted heals. So between the two games you get a feeling for both types of non targeting healing methods.

    I liked both my cleric and my cleric/def in RaiderZ... fun little game, only too grindy and as an rpg game it's... lol.

  • DAS1337DAS1337 Parma, OHPosts: 2,404Member

    I believe people would be a lot happier without AvAvA, they just don't know it.  Most people don't know what they like, so it's hard to be surprised.

     

    I feel that AvAvA could have been kept, without locking faction zones and making almost all of the people happier.

     

    It starts with disbanding the megaserver idea.  This brings RP servers, PvP servers, PvE servers and hardcore servers back into the mix, which make a huge amount of people interested.  It brings server communities back as well, so you know who you are playing with.  It gets rid of annoying phases and instances and 'layers', which break up your groups and make the world feel less immersive.  I feel that Megaserver is just a tool for the developers.  It's likely far easier to manage and costs less money in the end to support the megaserver.  It's only a coincedence that is keeps the game world more active, even in the middle of the night.

     

    The lore could have been changed from alliance wars to guild wars.  Offering deep story into the Mages Guild, Fighters Guild and Theives guild.  Based on your archtype chosen at character creation (Because I don't believe that needs changed), you may opt into a PvP war with the guilds if you join one.  This uses existing factions within the world that we all know and if people do not want to PvP, they do not have to join a guild.  People who do not choose to opt in will be normal PvE enabled players, who can go about their business in relative safety.  Those players can engage in PvP matchmaking, but not open world PvP.  The players who do opt in, will be forced to engage in open world PvP.  They will be permenantly flagged.  This makes the PvE'ers and PvP'ers happy, as well as the people who like a little in the form of matches.  

     

    All areas should be open to all players.  You should be able to visit any area within the game, bottom line.  The world should have been designed with the idea of housing.  There's a very easy solution.  Not all will like it, but it's a compromise that I believe would be acceptable.  If the world were designed to have neighborhoods dotted around the landscape, you can have open world housing.  Those areas would lack NPC enemies and they would be plots of land that were first come, first serve.  While, being realistic, you could only house perhaps 20% - 30% or so of the server playerbase, it's still a start until new areas open up or later in the games lifespan, low level areas get inscreased housing.  You can circumvent that flaw by adding instanced housing to two other areas of the game off the top of my head.  Those areas are keeps and fortresses that you clan holds.  These will have a limited number available and they wll be temporary, but can be used.  The other areas is cities.  Every city can have an Inn.  Those inns will provide the majority of player housing.  They will be instanced, and there will be different 'housing tiers' available depending on how much rent you are willing to pay.  You can decorate these any way you like.  So now everyone can have a place to live in what should have been built as a virtual world and not a gear grinding treadmill.

     

    I won't get into some of the smaller stuff.  Those are the three biggest issues that I see on these boards and in general.  I believe they would have made this game far better.  There is almost no downside to these suggestions.  Oh well, I guess I'll have to wait for some ill-funded indie company to make a good game.  Because I'm damn sure that I won't get it from companies like this who sell out for the all mighty dollar.

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,058Member Uncommon

    No because the game would be to one-dimensional.

     

    I'd still play it but I would get burnt out of doing the same stuff and would likely find myself quitting after the first month or 2.  There jsut wont be enough content to satiate the average gamer.  Hence the reason why I continue to support the AvA style conflict ontop of an amazing Elder Scrolls Experience.

     

    Additing something ontop of something does not take away from it, it enchances it and makes it better but you'll have a bunch of whiney "realists" saying it isnt a TES game when something is added onto the game but they are clearly wrong.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

«134
Sign In or Register to comment.