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!

What about TESO?

LonzoLonzo GoettingenPosts: 235Member Uncommon
So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

image
«134

Comments

  • superconductingsuperconducting Rochester, NYPosts: 843Member Uncommon

    It is looking better I think. They seem to now be doing all the right things and have addressed many of the criticisms. And things will only get better as they polish until release.

    image
  • GuyClinchGuyClinch Sunnyvale, CAPosts: 485Member
    I have to say honestly I saw some developer run preview stuff and it seemed fairly impressive. Its not going to the MMO Holy Grail but it will peel some players away from the current big mmos and lure some console guys too.
  • zevni78zevni78 grimsbyPosts: 1,133Member Uncommon

    I think the delay till next year put everyone, dev and fan in a sleep mode for a few months as we are now too far from launch for the hype build up.

    Personally Zenimax do indeed seem to realize what mistakes they made and are trying to made TESO a real elder scrolls game, but it should have been obvious to them, as it was to everyone else that a DoaC meets SWTOR clone was not what either mmo players or TES fans wanted, or at least expect from the IP. So now they are scrambling to get the console versions ready, and 1st person finished, good, I just hope there is a lot more they are working on to make it more Elder Scrolls such as housing and physics. More seamless open world would be nice too.

    I suspect they are really focusing on more content to justify the box price and sub, content for the locusts, lvling and endgame, and preparing enough assets for the post launch updates. It will take a heck of a lot to convince all those that are waiting for the inevitable switch to f2p.

  • Blazer6992Blazer6992 Las Vegas, NVPosts: 606Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

       They were always planning on the pay to play model anyways.

     

  • PWN_FACEPWN_FACE SeoulPosts: 670Member

    This is the game I'm most looking forward to. Everything I've seen about it looks good.* And I will be approaching this game as an Elder Scrolls player first, rather than as an MMORPG player. I love anything Elder Scrolls, so I hope it will be good on that account. If it turns out to be a good MMORPG, then so much the better.

     

    *I'm not going to quibble about instancing and factions because the ability to play in all of Tamriel is a pretty awesome prospect for me.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    They've been in full panic mode from the start. Nobody was even remotely enthusiastic about the initial reveal. Did you notice how almost every press release and article has been defensive, trying to make a case for the game?

    And no, the features have been creeping more and more to a heavily instanced Skyrim but worse style game.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

  • superconductingsuperconducting Rochester, NYPosts: 843Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by zevni78

    Personally Zenimax do indeed seem to realize what mistakes they made and are trying to made TESO a real elder scrolls game, but it should have been obvious to them, as it was to everyone else that a DoaC meets SWTOR clone was not what either mmo players or TES fans wanted, or at least expect from the IP.

    This.

    MMO or not, you can't make any TES game and expect it to do well without remaining true to the series. Thank goodness they eventually realized this. I watched some beta gameplay recently and let me just say it is looking really darn good. I think they took the hint.

    image
  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,553Member Uncommon

    I am curious to see how Zenimax does here - the rumors are they are struggling to get it finished.

    So much is riding on their shoulders - huge undertaking for Zenimax.

    We'll see if they can pull it off.

     

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

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

  • Geist333Geist333 Chandler, AZPosts: 7Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

     

    I too am curious which RVR features you're speaking of as being removed; I tried looking for this information and did not come up with anything. Please provide some more info/sources if you would. Thanks!

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Geist333
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

     

    I too am curious which RVR features you're speaking of as being removed; I tried looking for this information and did not come up with anything. Please provide some more info/sources if you would. Thanks!

    The two biggest being, the whole game is on one server, meaning RvR is going to be a series of layered instances on top of one another, with shifting teams, no stable realms to fight against. They also allow you to go to the enemy realms, which entirely undermines the entire feeling of being at war with the enemy.

  • RophezRophez Tucson, AZPosts: 46Member
    Someone failed his reading comprehension test :(
  • keithiankeithian Los Angeles, CAPosts: 3,042Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    They've been in full panic mode from the start. Nobody was even remotely enthusiastic about the initial reveal. Did you notice how almost every press release and article has been defensive, trying to make a case for the game?

    And no, the features have been creeping more and more to a heavily instanced Skyrim but worse style game.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Another great thread to discuss nothing.

    Full Panic Model...what a joke LOL. Where do you guys pull this crap from. They seem to be doing just fine which is consistent with the feedback from people who have actually RECENTLY played the game, not just publishers, but everyday people from the last couple of events....but you must be missing all of those threads where proof of that is posted..though we can't post RECENT leaked beta comments due to the NDA.

    Now I'll agree with one thing, that I don't like the way they are trickling info out which in my mind is similar to the TOR marketing folks, but that doesn't mean in any shape or form that this game will follow in the same footsteps as TOR and from everything I've seen they are not.

    There Is Always Hope!

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,616Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Geist333
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

     

    I too am curious which RVR features you're speaking of as being removed; I tried looking for this information and did not come up with anything. Please provide some more info/sources if you would. Thanks!

    The two biggest being, the whole game is on one server, meaning RvR is going to be a series of layered instances on top of one another, with shifting teams, no stable realms to fight against. They also allow you to go to the enemy realms, which entirely undermines the entire feeling of being at war with the enemy.

    There's nothing new in the "one server" tech. That has been the way the game was structured from day one. And you don't seem to understand that each Cyrodiil campaign works exactly like a server works in other MMOs: you're always in the same campaign with static teams and stable realms. They even have unique names just like servers. The megaserver phasing is a PVE-only thing, RVR is segregated into persistent server-like campaigns. Switching to another campaign is a choice you can make that is as big of a deal in ESO as changing servers is in other MMOs.

    As to the "allow you to go to enemy lands" thing, you don't seem to understand that either. It's an end-game PVE thing where you get to explore and quest in a version of those territories with just other PVErs from your own alliance - you never get to play with the members of the other 2 alliances as a group mate in any PVE anywhere. The alliance segregation is intact.

    So... you're just making up shit. There have been zero "essential RVR features" removed. 

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Geist333
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

     

    I too am curious which RVR features you're speaking of as being removed; I tried looking for this information and did not come up with anything. Please provide some more info/sources if you would. Thanks!

    The two biggest being, the whole game is on one server, meaning RvR is going to be a series of layered instances on top of one another, with shifting teams, no stable realms to fight against. They also allow you to go to the enemy realms, which entirely undermines the entire feeling of being at war with the enemy.

    There's nothing new in the "one server" tech. That has been the way the game was structured from day one.

    Actually, they didn't announce that as the server structure initially. That is something that came about long after the game got announced. And if you don't see how having multiple servers and seperation from enemy lands, you're lost.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,461Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which necessary RvR features did they remove?

    And as of this article there are public dungeons:

    https://www.tentonhammer.com/elder-scrolls-online/previews/return-of-public-dungeons

     

    Can you point to a more recent article saying they are removing them? That above article is only a few months old.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,616Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Geist333
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

     

    I too am curious which RVR features you're speaking of as being removed; I tried looking for this information and did not come up with anything. Please provide some more info/sources if you would. Thanks!

    The two biggest being, the whole game is on one server, meaning RvR is going to be a series of layered instances on top of one another, with shifting teams, no stable realms to fight against. They also allow you to go to the enemy realms, which entirely undermines the entire feeling of being at war with the enemy.

    There's nothing new in the "one server" tech. That has been the way the game was structured from day one.

    Actually, they didn't announce that as the server structure initially. That is something that came about long after the game got announced. And if you don't see how having multiple servers and seperation from enemy lands, you're lost.

    Show me anything they ever said about having traditional servers instead of one megaserver. That was not a change except maybe in your mind.

    You're having a hard time understanding the megaserver/campaign concept so I'll break it down for you.

    Traditional server based MMO brand X:

    • World PVE = just the people on your server
    • World PVP = just the people on your server
    • Instanced dungeons = everyone
    • Scenario PVP =  everyone

    ESO:

    • World PVE = everyone
    • World PVP = just the people from your Campaign (i,e, server)
    • Instanced dungeons = everyone
    • Scenario PVP = does not exist in ESO

     

    The only 2 differences are that ESO doesn't have scenario PVP  (which in case you haven't figured it out, is all about promoting the PVP that does exist, RVR) and open world PVE is one big megaserver.

     

    So how exactly did the "publishers" get them to remove "necessary RvR features"? And since this is all happening in-house, just who are these nefarious publishers?

     

    And no, I'm not lost at all. Just immune to your bafflegab. You just decided to rant and pulled stuff out... somewhere, to try to make it fit your rant. So why don't you quit while you're not as far behind as you will be if you keep trying to defend a lie?

     

    I won't even bother with your other open dungeon lie since someone else already called you on it (Hint: open dungeons are still very much in and are not going.)

  • superconductingsuperconducting Rochester, NYPosts: 843Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Geist333
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

     

    I too am curious which RVR features you're speaking of as being removed; I tried looking for this information and did not come up with anything. Please provide some more info/sources if you would. Thanks!

    The two biggest being, the whole game is on one server, meaning RvR is going to be a series of layered instances on top of one another, with shifting teams, no stable realms to fight against. They also allow you to go to the enemy realms, which entirely undermines the entire feeling of being at war with the enemy.

    There's nothing new in the "one server" tech. That has been the way the game was structured from day one.

    Actually, they didn't announce that as the server structure initially. That is something that came about long after the game got announced. And if you don't see how having multiple servers and seperation from enemy lands, you're lost.

    Can't help but notice you're digging yourself into a smaller and smaller hole. Better to admit being incorrect than to defend those inaccuracies pointed out by others.

    image
  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which necessary RvR features did they remove?

    And as of this article there are public dungeons:

    https://www.tentonhammer.com/elder-scrolls-online/previews/return-of-public-dungeons

     

    Can you point to a more recent article saying they are removing them? That above article is only a few months old.

    They've gutted them. The pressence of public dungeons means nothing if the game is phased and instanced, which it is.

    The focus has been shifted towards quests and instances and scenarios, as seen by how little anyone mentions public dungeons since the initial release.

    Not only that, but public dungeons only really work when they're the only dungeons. This stinks of adding in instances to please some Zenimax CEO.

  • flizzerflizzer Manchester, NHPosts: 1,550Member Uncommon

    I'm  not sure what to make of Elder Scrolls Online. I'm currently playing Skyrim and loving it and keep saying to myself "what if this type of game was an MMO?"   I still prefer MMOs and love Elder Scrolls because these games approach MMO size, but I don't know if they can successfully graft the single player Skyrim experience in to an MMO.  

     

    Didn't Bioware try that with SWTOR and that didnt exactly work out well.  I'll remain cautiously optimistic I suppose.

     

  • SiugSiug TallinnPosts: 1,236Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which necessary RvR features did they remove?

    And as of this article there are public dungeons:

    https://www.tentonhammer.com/elder-scrolls-online/previews/return-of-public-dungeons

     

    Can you point to a more recent article saying they are removing them? That above article is only a few months old.

    They've gutted them. The pressence of public dungeons means nothing if the game is phased and instanced, which it is.

    The focus has been shifted towards quests and instances and scenarios, as seen by how little anyone mentions public dungeons since the initial release.

    Not only that, but public dungeons only really work when they're the only dungeons. This stinks of adding in instances to please some Zenimax CEO.

    In most of your posts you blame mystic CEOs for all the problems. Maybe you should just admit that you are getting nowhere instead of posting the same complaint (yet to be defined as it's very vague) over and over again.

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

    I'm  not sure what to make of Elder Scrolls Online. I'm currently playing Skyrim and loving it and keep saying to myself "what if this type of game was an MMO?"   I still prefer MMOs and love Elder Scrolls because these games approach MMO size, but I don't know if they can successfully graft the single player Skyrim experience in to an MMO.  

     

    Didn't Bioware try that with SWTOR and that didnt exactly work out well.  I'll remain cautiously optimistic I suppose.

     

    They're totally different things. Skyrim works very well as a single player game - there is no one else to cater to so it's all about you. The world auto-levels around you to keep your fights interesting and to allow you to explore without needing to worry about zone-appropriate content.

    Just how the heck would you duplicate that experience when there are hundreds or thousands of players of different levels? When you have PvP? When you have no mercenaries or followers?

    ESO is not Skyrim online and it could never be. It has similarities to Skyrim where those things are possible in an MMO and it's different when it needs to be. The similarities to Skyrim are the lore, the world, the graphics, the menus... aside from that, it's an MMO with MMO stuff: trading, grouping, RvR.

    And you can say SWTOR all you want but Skyrim was not a cut-scene crazed RPG/adventure hybrid like KOTOR was. SWTOR was just KOTOR + WOW. ESO has nothing WOWish about it and it's a real RPG MMO.

    I also still play Skyrim... just finished the Dawnguard quest line with my sneaky archer tonight as a matter of fact.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Wiha
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which necessary RvR features did they remove?

    And as of this article there are public dungeons:

    https://www.tentonhammer.com/elder-scrolls-online/previews/return-of-public-dungeons

     

    Can you point to a more recent article saying they are removing them? That above article is only a few months old.

    They've gutted them. The pressence of public dungeons means nothing if the game is phased and instanced, which it is.

    The focus has been shifted towards quests and instances and scenarios, as seen by how little anyone mentions public dungeons since the initial release.

    Not only that, but public dungeons only really work when they're the only dungeons. This stinks of adding in instances to please some Zenimax CEO.

    In most of your posts you blame mystic CEOs for all the problems. Maybe you should just admit that you are getting nowhere instead of posting the same complaint (yet to be defined as it's very vague) over and over again.

    Your post makes little to no sense.

     

    And yes, publishers are the common denominator, what else would make a seasoned veteran MMO designer make awful decisions?

  • BMBenderBMBender Nowhere, NCPosts: 568Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
     

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which RVR features were removed?

    none that I know about they are merely staying quiet about them in the hopes that the heavy ES push will mask it for the ES crowd. they are still pursuing both markets as far as I can see.

     

    EDIT weather that's a good idea or not I remain unconvinced, Mythic and it's former personnel do have a track record in  both 3rd party IP's and mixed demographic play styles after all.

    image
  • SiugSiug TallinnPosts: 1,236Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Wiha
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Lonzo
    So quiet.... I think this is a bad sign. I bet my .... that they bet on the wrong horse and are now in panic and try to fix the game and push it more to the more oldschool direction. Now that every company can see that F2P and casual gaming is not the key to success.

    If they had kept it oldschool, DAoC style, which was the original vision before publishers shat all over it and got them to remove necessary RvR features and remove public dungeons and add instancing and phasing.... it might actually be worth playing.

    Which necessary RvR features did they remove?

    And as of this article there are public dungeons:

    https://www.tentonhammer.com/elder-scrolls-online/previews/return-of-public-dungeons

     

    Can you point to a more recent article saying they are removing them? That above article is only a few months old.

    They've gutted them. The pressence of public dungeons means nothing if the game is phased and instanced, which it is.

    The focus has been shifted towards quests and instances and scenarios, as seen by how little anyone mentions public dungeons since the initial release.

    Not only that, but public dungeons only really work when they're the only dungeons. This stinks of adding in instances to please some Zenimax CEO.

    In most of your posts you blame mystic CEOs for all the problems. Maybe you should just admit that you are getting nowhere instead of posting the same complaint (yet to be defined as it's very vague) over and over again.

    Your post makes little to no sense.

     

    And yes, publishers are the common denominator, what else would make a seasoned veteran MMO designer make awful decisions?

    Their first awful decision was to make Daoc clone in TES skin which caused an outrage in TES community. I've said it before and truly think that most problems ESO has are because of it's Daoc devs. Daoc may have some following but TES fanbase is hundreds of times bigger.

«134
Sign In or Register to comment.