With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available free to you that will do each part better. A MOBA will do PVP better as you'll never have to worry about PVE and can jump right into the action. LOL, MechWarrior, Planet Side, they got the faction warfare covered from the get go. Just PVE loot and level dungeon crawling? Pfft... Diablo has you beat. To compete you need a variety of activities, sometimes very personalized like costume and housing, to go with these features and make you personally value what's on tap that work together to create a greater whole game experience. Without that you have nothing to sell that some one else doesn't already do better individually. That's all MMORPGs have now. A lot of variety under one umbrella to try and compete.
the weapons skills I can concede on a small scale but once theyre filled that will not be a selling point of the game. I doubt very highly it is as in depth as it is being made out to be, and certainly nothing like Skyrim offered. Which was a much better system. So IMO what ESO gives is a hybrid of GW2 and ES. It is a marriage of both.
3 factions realm PvP has been around forever. Just because they want to call it realm versus realm and lock it doesnt change that. Even if they make it impossible for an account to roll toons from multiple realms (which they wont do) it still isnt anything new. Might be a nice step but it still doesnt take away from the glaring problems PvP has. Why do you think that video was so shrt and had so many cut scenes as was spliced together?
Its not semantics at all. Being able to wear any armor you want and wield any weapon you want, is not a small difference from most MMOs. Just the opposite, its a major defining difference. Even Rift, which allows great role flexibility within a given class, still forces that class to use the same weapons and armor as everyone else in that class.
And 3 faction PvP is also a major difference. Most games have two faction pvp. And many pvp games have small pvp arenas, not a huge pvp region.
Just because something is not entirely 'new' doesn't mean its not quite different from most other games out there. And BTW, ESO is more of a hybrid of ES and DAoC than GW2. Although to be fair, most MMOs share major similarities.
Actually it isnt, heavy armor wearer in every MMO can wear any armor they want to, they just chose to wear the highest valued one. In this game while you can wear any armor you want it will also be limited by race traits. Bretons get a light armor buff. So a Breton Cleric might wear light armor to get that buff. But does he have a disadvantage against a cleric played by a race who gets a heavy or medium armor buff? I didnt get deep enough to test that fully in the last beta but I would say they will.
You can try to convince yourself and others all you want I know what I saw.
Its the same game as a half dozen or more others just in a different environment.
Also without collision detection PvP sucks. So if they dont implement that then what good is PvP going to be? Same as every other lame PvP game out there where you do PvE stuff and maybe once in awhile actually kill another player. But mostly by accident.
how does colliision detection mitigate or eliminate doing pve stuff and maybe once in a while actually lilling another player by accident."
Mutually exclusive.
Yes they are mutually exclusive which is why your statement was confusing as you state one thing and then say "same as ,..." indicating that they are related. Thats' why I asked teh quesion.
Why would you destroy keeps and be done with them? You would take them and hold them.
Other than that, I do agree that you need collision detection.
If its perpetual fighting why have pre made keeps at all? If the battles are going to be a 24/7 thing with no resets and no instanced timers then let people build where they want when they want.
I can see why GW2 does it the way they do it with all premade stuff everywhere because it is cyclical. But beyond a 'safe' starter area why have any other structures at all that are pre made? Well that is semi rhetorical, but the dumbed down answer is to give people a place to go to initiate fights. Which again feeds into the mind set of WoW like PvP. If its 'open' world or trying to mimic an open world the more areas you have to entice people to attack the less open it becomes. People will be congregating around the same places waiting.
Open world is just that OPEN, you run around doing your thing. Which if you had to build your own stuff would mean gathering resources. So youre out gathering and wham bam a group of people find you or you run into them. To add to that gathered loot should be lootable. Meaning if youre out gathering sticks and stones to build a keep or a ballisa or whatever and you get killed that loot is lootable for whomever killed you.
That would at least be semi-different or at least get back to some PvP roots.
Having a pre made map and just looking to control it is nothing different than what any arena type PvP does its just on a bigger scale.
Having a pre made map and just looking to control it is nothing different than what any arena type PvP does its just on a bigger scale.
Well, it depends, is it "perpetual fighting?"
Because, if it's like warhammer then that's kind of horrible. In Warhammer you would just keep flipping keeps.
I do know they said there would be some "pride in ownership" so maybe that can be a good thing in that sides/factions would want to keep their "keeps".
I personally prefer the lineage 2 way where every two weeks there would be a siege and contenders would fight for the keep.
They then had fortresses that one would make a play for but there were specific times that one could do this. It's my thought that ESO will have that system. maybe even a bit like Aion.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
the weapons skills I can concede on a small scale but once theyre filled that will not be a selling point of the game. I doubt very highly it is as in depth as it is being made out to be, and certainly nothing like Skyrim offered. Which was a much better system. So IMO what ESO gives is a hybrid of GW2 and ES. It is a marriage of both.
3 factions realm PvP has been around forever. Just because they want to call it realm versus realm and lock it doesnt change that. Even if they make it impossible for an account to roll toons from multiple realms (which they wont do) it still isnt anything new. Might be a nice step but it still doesnt take away from the glaring problems PvP has. Why do you think that video was so shrt and had so many cut scenes as was spliced together?
Its not semantics at all. Being able to wear any armor you want and wield any weapon you want, is not a small difference from most MMOs. Just the opposite, its a major defining difference. Even Rift, which allows great role flexibility within a given class, still forces that class to use the same weapons and armor as everyone else in that class.
And 3 faction PvP is also a major difference. Most games have two faction pvp. And many pvp games have small pvp arenas, not a huge pvp region.
Just because something is not entirely 'new' doesn't mean its not quite different from most other games out there. And BTW, ESO is more of a hybrid of ES and DAoC than GW2. Although to be fair, most MMOs share major similarities.
the weapons skills I can concede on a small scale but once theyre filled that will not be a selling point of the game. I doubt very highly it is as in depth as it is being made out to be, and certainly nothing like Skyrim offered. Which was a much better system. So IMO what ESO gives is a hybrid of GW2 and ES. It is a marriage of both.
3 factions realm PvP has been around forever. Just because they want to call it realm versus realm and lock it doesnt change that. Even if they make it impossible for an account to roll toons from multiple realms (which they wont do) it still isnt anything new. Might be a nice step but it still doesnt take away from the glaring problems PvP has. Why do you think that video was so shrt and had so many cut scenes as was spliced together?
Its not semantics at all. Being able to wear any armor you want and wield any weapon you want, is not a small difference from most MMOs. Just the opposite, its a major defining difference. Even Rift, which allows great role flexibility within a given class, still forces that class to use the same weapons and armor as everyone else in that class.
And 3 faction PvP is also a major difference. Most games have two faction pvp. And many pvp games have small pvp arenas, not a huge pvp region.
Just because something is not entirely 'new' doesn't mean its not quite different from most other games out there. And BTW, ESO is more of a hybrid of ES and DAoC than GW2. Although to be fair, most MMOs share major similarities.
Actually it isnt, heavy armor wearer in every MMO can wear any armor they want to, they just chose to wear the highest valued one. In this game while you can wear any armor you want it will also be limited by race traits. Bretons get a light armor buff. So a Breton Cleric might wear light armor to get that buff. But does he have a disadvantage against a cleric played by a race who gets a heavy or medium armor buff? I didnt get deep enough to test that fully in the last beta but I would say they will.
You can try to convince yourself and others all you want I know what I saw.
Its the same game as a half dozen or more others just in a different environment.
You're the only one trying to do any convincing here with your dismissive attitude. I see most other people trying to be objective with their likes and dislikes.
The "heavy armor wearers can wear any armor" bit is just a pathetic attempt to grasp at straws to make your point that it's just the same old stuff.
if you'd just stuck to your collision detection argument, you might have gotten some traction: it's not a biggie for me but it can be argued logically that collision detection has more realism than not having it.
The problem is that when you start knocking everything about a game, including the parts that most people see as innovative and different in a good way, all you're doing is undermining your own credibility about whatever valid points you might otherwise have.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
the weapons skills I can concede on a small scale but once theyre filled that will not be a selling point of the game. I doubt very highly it is as in depth as it is being made out to be, and certainly nothing like Skyrim offered. Which was a much better system. So IMO what ESO gives is a hybrid of GW2 and ES. It is a marriage of both.
3 factions realm PvP has been around forever. Just because they want to call it realm versus realm and lock it doesnt change that. Even if they make it impossible for an account to roll toons from multiple realms (which they wont do) it still isnt anything new. Might be a nice step but it still doesnt take away from the glaring problems PvP has. Why do you think that video was so shrt and had so many cut scenes as was spliced together?
Its not semantics at all. Being able to wear any armor you want and wield any weapon you want, is not a small difference from most MMOs. Just the opposite, its a major defining difference. Even Rift, which allows great role flexibility within a given class, still forces that class to use the same weapons and armor as everyone else in that class.
And 3 faction PvP is also a major difference. Most games have two faction pvp. And many pvp games have small pvp arenas, not a huge pvp region.
Just because something is not entirely 'new' doesn't mean its not quite different from most other games out there. And BTW, ESO is more of a hybrid of ES and DAoC than GW2. Although to be fair, most MMOs share major similarities.
Actually it isnt, heavy armor wearer in every MMO can wear any armor they want to, they just chose to wear the highest valued one. In this game while you can wear any armor you want it will also be limited by race traits. Bretons get a light armor buff. So a Breton Cleric might wear light armor to get that buff. But does he have a disadvantage against a cleric played by a race who gets a heavy or medium armor buff? I didnt get deep enough to test that fully in the last beta but I would say they will.
You can try to convince yourself and others all you want I know what I saw.
Its the same game as a half dozen or more others just in a different environment.
You're the only one trying to do any convincing here with your dismissive attitude. I see most other people trying to be objective with their likes and dislikes.
The "heavy armor wearers can wear any armor" bit is just a pathetic attempt to grasp at straws to make your point that it's just the same old stuff.
if you'd just stuck to your collision detection argument, you might have gotten some traction: it's not a biggie for me but it can be argued logically that collision detection has more realism than not having it.
The problem is that when you start knocking everything about a game, including the parts that most people see as innovative and different in a good way, all you're doing is undermining your own credibility about whatever valid points you might otherwise have.
I am not knocking everything. I pointed out a couple obvious things. YOU or whoever brought up the armor issue as something 'new'. I just stated it wasnt and it isnt. Nor is it something that can be taken 'advantage' of off the cuff. I just pointed out the issues with it, as far as the NDA and what has been revealed allows anyway. There are other issues...
From what I saw and have seen of PvP it is a glorified arena where you chase each other around a map and capture shit and then play the turtle game. we all know how well that goes. Even three realms isnt enough, because inevitably one side sucks and quits or joins the other lesser team in some mishandled 'alliance' and they both get owned. Then that 'kills' PvP because people will just re-roll because it is a pretty clear fact that people only PvP when they win. The few that like a challenge are simply over run eventually and generally their times runs out and/or they get irritated and leave.
Some of that is speculation on my part but an educated speculation based on several factors. Hopefully the next beta goes alot better and lets more people into PvP so it can actually be tested with some numbers. As far as I can tell it hasnt been so far, and a two minute video spliced together isnt going to impress me.
the weapons skills I can concede on a small scale but once theyre filled that will not be a selling point of the game. I doubt very highly it is as in depth as it is being made out to be, and certainly nothing like Skyrim offered. Which was a much better system. So IMO what ESO gives is a hybrid of GW2 and ES. It is a marriage of both.
3 factions realm PvP has been around forever. Just because they want to call it realm versus realm and lock it doesnt change that. Even if they make it impossible for an account to roll toons from multiple realms (which they wont do) it still isnt anything new. Might be a nice step but it still doesnt take away from the glaring problems PvP has. Why do you think that video was so shrt and had so many cut scenes as was spliced together?
Its not semantics at all. Being able to wear any armor you want and wield any weapon you want, is not a small difference from most MMOs. Just the opposite, its a major defining difference. Even Rift, which allows great role flexibility within a given class, still forces that class to use the same weapons and armor as everyone else in that class.
And 3 faction PvP is also a major difference. Most games have two faction pvp. And many pvp games have small pvp arenas, not a huge pvp region.
Just because something is not entirely 'new' doesn't mean its not quite different from most other games out there. And BTW, ESO is more of a hybrid of ES and DAoC than GW2. Although to be fair, most MMOs share major similarities.
Actually it isnt, heavy armor wearer in every MMO can wear any armor they want to, they just chose to wear the highest valued one. In this game while you can wear any armor you want it will also be limited by race traits. Bretons get a light armor buff. So a Breton Cleric might wear light armor to get that buff. But does he have a disadvantage against a cleric played by a race who gets a heavy or medium armor buff? I didnt get deep enough to test that fully in the last beta but I would say they will.
You can try to convince yourself and others all you want I know what I saw.
Its the same game as a half dozen or more others just in a different environment.
You're the only one trying to do any convincing here with your dismissive attitude. I see most other people trying to be objective with their likes and dislikes.
The "heavy armor wearers can wear any armor" bit is just a pathetic attempt to grasp at straws to make your point that it's just the same old stuff.
if you'd just stuck to your collision detection argument, you might have gotten some traction: it's not a biggie for me but it can be argued logically that collision detection has more realism than not having it.
The problem is that when you start knocking everything about a game, including the parts that most people see as innovative and different in a good way, all you're doing is undermining your own credibility about whatever valid points you might otherwise have.
I am not knocking everything. I pointed out a couple obvious things. YOU or whoever brought up the armor issue as something 'new'. I just stated it wasnt and it isnt. Nor is it something that can be taken 'advantage' of off the cuff. I just pointed out the issues with it, as far as the NDA and what has been revealed allows anyway. There are other issues...
From what I saw and have seen of PvP it is a glorified arena where you chase each other around a map and capture shit and then play the turtle game. we all know how well that goes. Even three realms isnt enough, because inevitably one side sucks and quits or joins the other lesser team in some mishandled 'alliance' and they both get owned. Then that 'kills' PvP because people will just re-roll because it is a pretty clear fact that people only PvP when they win. The few that like a challenge are simply over run eventually and generally their times runs out and/or they get irritated and leave.
Some of that is speculation on my part but an educated speculation based on several factors. Hopefully the next beta goes alot better and lets more people into PvP so it can actually be tested with some numbers. As far as I can tell it hasnt been so far, and a two minute video spliced together isnt going to impress me.
I didn't bring up the armor. I said "The skill development system is different from other MMOs" (post #47)
You then tried to minimize that by saying "semantics" and focusing on just the weapon skills (post #50)
The skill development system is a hell of a lot more than just weapon or armor skills. It includes acquiring global skills from guilds (companions and Mages at launch, thief and Assasin later,) werewolf and Vampire skills, Cyrodill skills as well as armor and weapon skills for all types. Then you add the class-specific skills and you get a hybrid skill development system that is pretty damn unique.
To that you can add dual system of skill line advancement by using them to unlock actives and passives into which you can add the points you get from leveling and exploring (Skyhards.) Add skill morphing to that and you've got a skill system that is just a tiny semantics difference from everything else that's out there?
Yeah right... You're just sinking deeper and deeper if you keep saying that this skill development system is nothing new or just a tiny thing.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
At the moment the only endgame they have talked about is there version of GW2 wvwvw (Its based on DAOC)in the form of cyrodil as one big 3 faction pvp zone.
PvE they have said once you finished your factions story you can simply switch and play through a different factions story. And besides the story there is harder modes of dungeons.
That's about all they have really talked about although they have said they are not planning any raid pve content at the moment and none is development they have mentioned this a few times. I get the feeling like GW2 they are hoping to make there 3 faction pvp a major focus of the endgame. Plus all the best gear in game is crafted so I imagine there will be a heavy foucs on professions too.
I would hope that they will provide details early in the New Year. Not much point in the run up to Christmas as things will get lost in the noise but once the Christmas sales have passed they need to start providing details.
The NDA ... well just over 3 months to publication. Sure they can tweak stuff and have a pre-launch patch but:
- discs need to be cut so they can be boxed and sent to distributors and then to shops
- if they want reviews in actual magazines then publishers want their copy usually 2 months in advance, so reviewers have to have their write-ups done before that ...
- and there has to be time for fixing bugs that any open test finds ...
So the game is not even out yet...yet you all are sittin here deciding how you are gonna zip threw the content to get to endgame. Then cry about the game having nothing to do in a month. If a MMO is done right...there should be no endgame. Kinda sad when ppl worry so much about endgame. Endgame means just that...end of the game. You've gone threw everything and there is nothing left to do...so then it's time to move on.
I played UO for five years after I maxed out all skills on all my characters. I never did find the endgame.
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition in the free to play market for an MMORPG to compete with by being good at only one thing. If people want to go PVP without all the BS entailed in a game with leveling PVE go play a MOBA like LOL or large scale like Planet Side with its corporate factions. Need I mention Call of Duty. You want loot and level dungeoning fine go hit up Diablo 3 and get right to business without worrying over all the other PVP BS you don't care about. The thing is that these specialty games have become so good at what they do that the classic MMORPG can only compete with them by offering a breadth of experience under one umbrella that adds up to a greater whole than the sum of its parts by linking everything together because if they focus on and offer just that one thing as a selling point then they were better off making a specialty game anyway. That's all an MMORPG has to offer in the face of existing competition in today's times, breadth of play experience that adds up to something greater with all the parts taken together. A virtual world...
As things stand they should have just focused on making a large scale fantasy MOBA to compete with Planet Side (Big Market potential here) out of this idea and then adding optional co-op to the next elder scrolls PVE RPG. They offer nothing to really to satisfy or hook anyone when compared to other available options that cost nothing to get started with. Its the same old crap they think MMORPG players must have.
Just look at the numbers specialty games are pulling in now a days compared to your typical MMORPG. They can't begin to compete in dollars raked in or playerbase retained and end up tanking shortly after release, after all the hopes and hype. We see the fall out right here in the forums every time and it's not because players are negative and hate-filled it's because they are making formulaic old games from old ideas that ultimately suck in the here and now.
Some body needs to understand this and break the mold or MMORPGS are going to go the way of the dinosaurs or simply be relegated to browsers. Heck, check the new game release list here on site and compare it to years past. There is some hope but nothing like earlier years with AAA titles lined up and so many big names right now like Star Citizen and Elite are kick starters.
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition in the free to play market for an MMORPG to compete with by being good at only one thing.
You lost all credibility on the second line of this post which is where I stopped reading. What F2P competition, exactly? Neverwinter? Are you kidding me? The only other thing I can think you mean is one of the aging games that have been converted to some F2P bastardization like LOTRO or maybe SWTOR (which isn't really even F2P) but those are hardly competition for anything.
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition
There are no current MMos that do good RvR.
And thank at least one gaming god (MJ) for Camelot Unchained. 2015 seems so far away though.
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition
There are no current MMos that do good RvR.
And thank at least one gaming god (MJ) for Camelot Unchained. 2015 seems so far away though.
Sounds like a cult when you put it that way. ESO is led by another co-founder of Mythic, Matt Firor. So who can say, I hope they'll both be good.
I too was trying to understand how much pve the game will have at max level. By reading this thread one is led to believe the game is mostly about pvp later on, if that is the case then I am not sure it is worth a sub for me. I would only play in cyrodiil from time to time, pvp fix comes mostly from fps shooters^^. If they intend to have a strong pve component at max level as well then they need to promote it and show it more.
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition
There are no current MMos that do good RvR.
And thank at least one gaming god (MJ) for Camelot Unchained. 2015 seems so far away though.
Sounds like a cult when you put it that way. ESO is led by another co-founder of Mythic, Matt Firor. So who can say, I hope they'll both be good.
Well the main difference is MJ isn't limited by publishers.
It's very clear to anything who has followed TESO that the initial DAoC style design kept getting pushed back in favor of WoWification and making it more like a singleplayer game.
Originally posted by superpata I too was trying to understand how much pve the game will have at max level. By reading this thread one is led to believe the game is mostly about pvp later on, if that is the case then I am not sure it is worth a sub for me. I would only play in cyrodiil from time to time, pvp fix comes mostly from fps shooters^^. If they intend to have a strong pve component at max level as well then they need to promote it and show it more.
I have the same fear about the game. I like PVP but it's just not what I consider a main activity for an MMO. I would rather focus on PVE and use PVP for variety. I'm mostly concerned with their statements regarding "no traditional raiding" which is the primary PVE end game activity to date but hopeful that the end game dungeons and these adventure zones pan out to be worthwhile PVE content to focus on.
I suppose if the PVP is really good I could change my mind but I have yet to find any PVP content I would want to do as a daily/regular/only activity. The Camelot Unchained looks interesting as well but that's even more PVP focused (as in no PVE at all) which will require unbelievably good PVP content for me to stay interested.
Well the main difference is MJ isn't limited by publishers.
It's very clear to anything who has followed TESO that the initial DAoC style design kept getting pushed back in favor of WoWification and making it more like a singleplayer game.
It's pretty clear that they found the initial DAoC design had little traction with the millions strong ES base. Having your signature endgame turn out to be of way less interest that you expected is going to cause some shake ups. If the game was to do as good as DAoC at its peak, it would be a failure, given their expectations and what they've spent.
I am uninterested in the RvRvR. So any of their original design decisions predicated on it (faction locking, etc) are negatives, for me. It's obvious the world design was gerrymandered to fit the requirements of RvR. While I am fully willing to grant that DAoC might have the best PvP around, it doesn't matter if that's not a selling point. None of my ES fan friends are at all interested in the RvR stuff. I think that's what the developers have been discovering, much to their chagrin. They can't change a lot of it, as it is their basic design, and they don't have much of a viable alternative to the end game, so there they are.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition...
There are no current MMos that do good RvR.
Pfft... RVR? I mean really? That's all you got? Frankly, it is not enough. Ignoring the troll that didn't read, as noted there are several factional warfare MOBAs that fill the same niche even if they aren't MMORPGs which actually works in their favor as pointed out already because they don't force a PVP player to deal with PVE bunk to get their kicks. TESO is bringing nothing new to the table nor anything that can compete. As other posters have mentioned they already have to overcome the fact that they are making a PVP oriented game for a PVE oriented audience in the elder scrolls fan base and they have nothing on tap to accomplish it. With the sub requirement for console players, box / disc / download fee on top, and misdirected gameplay features, they will be lucky not to be ran off the net.
It's very clear to anything who has followed TESO that the initial DAoC style design kept getting pushed back in favor of WoWification and making it more like a singleplayer game.
Nah.
EQ was the big cheese back then. And in an interview way back MJ said that "the team" decided to try and emulate EQ by releasing expansions to attract subscriptions. The EQ model being: sub covered the network costs (at least that's what it started out as) and content was provided by paid expansions c. every 6 months.
Back on topic:
As far as "end game" and "good game design" goes a key factor is the business model.
The business model is crucial because they have to decide how much of TESO they want to "sell" on day 1. What should be available for the price of the box. And at what price. And if that means they hold back all the dungeons then so be it.
There are some service costs obviously but if justification for having a sub is that "it is going to be used to provide content" then the content drops have to be proportional to the core game.
If they charge $60 for the box and deliver content drops every 8 weeks then each drop should add about 50% of the core game. Why? Because in 4 months people will have paid another $60.
If they charge $150 then each 8 week drop should add about 20%.
As I said there are some service charges but they are small. Content is the key. And if this means they hold back content from the initial release and drip feed it every 6-8 weeks that is what they have to do to justify the subscription charge. Remember the justification: it is to pay for the content.
If they don't the game will be in danger of becoming another victim of the content freeloaders. The content locusts who never sub or maybe sub for just a month. Not f2p freeloaders but the content freeloaders.
(And my view is that the game shouldn't have a sub but paid DLC because then people who buy the game in 12 months don't get the years content for free. Another variety of content freeloader!)
Well the main difference is MJ isn't limited by publishers.
It's very clear to anything who has followed TESO that the initial DAoC style design kept getting pushed back in favor of WoWification and making it more like a singleplayer game.
It's pretty clear that they found the initial DAoC design had little traction with the millions strong ES base.
I am uninterested in the RvRvR.
I'm not talking about RvR, I'm talking about the game as a whole. DAoC had some of the best PvE and raiding on the market.
Building an MMO for singleplayer fans is the fastest way to fail (SWTOR).
Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
Originally posted by Crazy_Stick
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition...
There are no current MMos that do good RvR.
Pfft... RVR? I mean really? That's all you got? Frankly, it is not enough. Ignoring the troll that didn't read, as noted there are several factional warfare MOBAs that fill the same niche
No, there aren't. There are no MOBAs that do RvR because mobas, by their definition, are in arenas. Whereas RvR refers to an entire faction of thousands of people at war in massive zones with territory control, sieges, the like.
It's very clear to anything who has followed TESO that the initial DAoC style design kept getting pushed back in favor of WoWification and making it more like a singleplayer game.
Nah.
EQ was the big cheese back then. And in an interview way back MJ said that "the team" decided to try and emulate EQ by releasing expansions to attract subscriptions.
That's pretty much entirely unrelated to what I said. But the funny thing is, by shifting the game to be more like EQ, hundreds of thousands of players were driven out of DAoC, because it ruined the RvR.
Comments
With their own ads and public comments it's pretty much admitted that the game focuses on getting everyone into participating in AV3 warfare for the real meat of play particularly at end game. Just look at the recent ads hyping it. That's their selling point outside the ES name.
While much loved, DAOC is a dated game design not ready to compete in the modern market. An MMORPG can not afford to be good at just one thing as they can not compete with specialty games already available free to you that will do each part better. A MOBA will do PVP better as you'll never have to worry about PVE and can jump right into the action. LOL, MechWarrior, Planet Side, they got the faction warfare covered from the get go. Just PVE loot and level dungeon crawling? Pfft... Diablo has you beat. To compete you need a variety of activities, sometimes very personalized like costume and housing, to go with these features and make you personally value what's on tap that work together to create a greater whole game experience. Without that you have nothing to sell that some one else doesn't already do better individually. That's all MMORPGs have now. A lot of variety under one umbrella to try and compete.
Actually it isnt, heavy armor wearer in every MMO can wear any armor they want to, they just chose to wear the highest valued one. In this game while you can wear any armor you want it will also be limited by race traits. Bretons get a light armor buff. So a Breton Cleric might wear light armor to get that buff. But does he have a disadvantage against a cleric played by a race who gets a heavy or medium armor buff? I didnt get deep enough to test that fully in the last beta but I would say they will.
You can try to convince yourself and others all you want I know what I saw.
Its the same game as a half dozen or more others just in a different environment.
If its perpetual fighting why have pre made keeps at all? If the battles are going to be a 24/7 thing with no resets and no instanced timers then let people build where they want when they want.
I can see why GW2 does it the way they do it with all premade stuff everywhere because it is cyclical. But beyond a 'safe' starter area why have any other structures at all that are pre made? Well that is semi rhetorical, but the dumbed down answer is to give people a place to go to initiate fights. Which again feeds into the mind set of WoW like PvP. If its 'open' world or trying to mimic an open world the more areas you have to entice people to attack the less open it becomes. People will be congregating around the same places waiting.
Open world is just that OPEN, you run around doing your thing. Which if you had to build your own stuff would mean gathering resources. So youre out gathering and wham bam a group of people find you or you run into them. To add to that gathered loot should be lootable. Meaning if youre out gathering sticks and stones to build a keep or a ballisa or whatever and you get killed that loot is lootable for whomever killed you.
That would at least be semi-different or at least get back to some PvP roots.
Having a pre made map and just looking to control it is nothing different than what any arena type PvP does its just on a bigger scale.
Well, it depends, is it "perpetual fighting?"
Because, if it's like warhammer then that's kind of horrible. In Warhammer you would just keep flipping keeps.
I do know they said there would be some "pride in ownership" so maybe that can be a good thing in that sides/factions would want to keep their "keeps".
I personally prefer the lineage 2 way where every two weeks there would be a siege and contenders would fight for the keep.
They then had fortresses that one would make a play for but there were specific times that one could do this. It's my thought that ESO will have that system. maybe even a bit like Aion.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Exactly. Nicely stated.
You're the only one trying to do any convincing here with your dismissive attitude. I see most other people trying to be objective with their likes and dislikes.
The "heavy armor wearers can wear any armor" bit is just a pathetic attempt to grasp at straws to make your point that it's just the same old stuff.
if you'd just stuck to your collision detection argument, you might have gotten some traction: it's not a biggie for me but it can be argued logically that collision detection has more realism than not having it.
The problem is that when you start knocking everything about a game, including the parts that most people see as innovative and different in a good way, all you're doing is undermining your own credibility about whatever valid points you might otherwise have.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I am not knocking everything. I pointed out a couple obvious things. YOU or whoever brought up the armor issue as something 'new'. I just stated it wasnt and it isnt. Nor is it something that can be taken 'advantage' of off the cuff. I just pointed out the issues with it, as far as the NDA and what has been revealed allows anyway. There are other issues...
From what I saw and have seen of PvP it is a glorified arena where you chase each other around a map and capture shit and then play the turtle game. we all know how well that goes. Even three realms isnt enough, because inevitably one side sucks and quits or joins the other lesser team in some mishandled 'alliance' and they both get owned. Then that 'kills' PvP because people will just re-roll because it is a pretty clear fact that people only PvP when they win. The few that like a challenge are simply over run eventually and generally their times runs out and/or they get irritated and leave.
Some of that is speculation on my part but an educated speculation based on several factors. Hopefully the next beta goes alot better and lets more people into PvP so it can actually be tested with some numbers. As far as I can tell it hasnt been so far, and a two minute video spliced together isnt going to impress me.
I didn't bring up the armor. I said "The skill development system is different from other MMOs" (post #47)
You then tried to minimize that by saying "semantics" and focusing on just the weapon skills (post #50)
The skill development system is a hell of a lot more than just weapon or armor skills. It includes acquiring global skills from guilds (companions and Mages at launch, thief and Assasin later,) werewolf and Vampire skills, Cyrodill skills as well as armor and weapon skills for all types. Then you add the class-specific skills and you get a hybrid skill development system that is pretty damn unique.
To that you can add dual system of skill line advancement by using them to unlock actives and passives into which you can add the points you get from leveling and exploring (Skyhards.) Add skill morphing to that and you've got a skill system that is just a tiny semantics difference from everything else that's out there?
Yeah right... You're just sinking deeper and deeper if you keep saying that this skill development system is nothing new or just a tiny thing.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Seriously? DAoC had almost perfect game design, and many of its aspects are STILL great.
Are you going to try to argue that doing one thing amazingly well is a WORSE idea than doing a few things really poorly?
Error =
At the moment the only endgame they have talked about is there version of GW2 wvwvw (Its based on DAOC)in the form of cyrodil as one big 3 faction pvp zone.
PvE they have said once you finished your factions story you can simply switch and play through a different factions story. And besides the story there is harder modes of dungeons.
That's about all they have really talked about although they have said they are not planning any raid pve content at the moment and none is development they have mentioned this a few times. I get the feeling like GW2 they are hoping to make there 3 faction pvp a major focus of the endgame. Plus all the best gear in game is crafted so I imagine there will be a heavy foucs on professions too.
I would hope that they will provide details early in the New Year. Not much point in the run up to Christmas as things will get lost in the noise but once the Christmas sales have passed they need to start providing details.
The NDA ... well just over 3 months to publication. Sure they can tweak stuff and have a pre-launch patch but:
- discs need to be cut so they can be boxed and sent to distributors and then to shops
- if they want reviews in actual magazines then publishers want their copy usually 2 months in advance, so reviewers have to have their write-ups done before that ...
- and there has to be time for fixing bugs that any open test finds ...
Post Christmas we should hear ...
So the game is not even out yet...yet you all are sittin here deciding how you are gonna zip threw the content to get to endgame. Then cry about the game having nothing to do in a month. If a MMO is done right...there should be no endgame. Kinda sad when ppl worry so much about endgame. Endgame means just that...end of the game. You've gone threw everything and there is nothing left to do...so then it's time to move on.
I played UO for five years after I maxed out all skills on all my characters. I never did find the endgame.
Seriously. It's bad game design not ready to compete in today's market (even if you like it. Game is a has been.) There is simply too much specialty competition in the free to play market for an MMORPG to compete with by being good at only one thing. If people want to go PVP without all the BS entailed in a game with leveling PVE go play a MOBA like LOL or large scale like Planet Side with its corporate factions. Need I mention Call of Duty. You want loot and level dungeoning fine go hit up Diablo 3 and get right to business without worrying over all the other PVP BS you don't care about. The thing is that these specialty games have become so good at what they do that the classic MMORPG can only compete with them by offering a breadth of experience under one umbrella that adds up to a greater whole than the sum of its parts by linking everything together because if they focus on and offer just that one thing as a selling point then they were better off making a specialty game anyway. That's all an MMORPG has to offer in the face of existing competition in today's times, breadth of play experience that adds up to something greater with all the parts taken together. A virtual world...
As things stand they should have just focused on making a large scale fantasy MOBA to compete with Planet Side (Big Market potential here) out of this idea and then adding optional co-op to the next elder scrolls PVE RPG. They offer nothing to really to satisfy or hook anyone when compared to other available options that cost nothing to get started with. Its the same old crap they think MMORPG players must have.
Just look at the numbers specialty games are pulling in now a days compared to your typical MMORPG. They can't begin to compete in dollars raked in or playerbase retained and end up tanking shortly after release, after all the hopes and hype. We see the fall out right here in the forums every time and it's not because players are negative and hate-filled it's because they are making formulaic old games from old ideas that ultimately suck in the here and now.
Some body needs to understand this and break the mold or MMORPGS are going to go the way of the dinosaurs or simply be relegated to browsers. Heck, check the new game release list here on site and compare it to years past. There is some hope but nothing like earlier years with AAA titles lined up and so many big names right now like Star Citizen and Elite are kick starters.
It is what it is.
There are no current MMos that do good RvR.
You lost all credibility on the second line of this post which is where I stopped reading. What F2P competition, exactly? Neverwinter? Are you kidding me? The only other thing I can think you mean is one of the aging games that have been converted to some F2P bastardization like LOTRO or maybe SWTOR (which isn't really even F2P) but those are hardly competition for anything.
And thank at least one gaming god (MJ) for Camelot Unchained. 2015 seems so far away though.
You stay sassy!
Sounds like a cult when you put it that way. ESO is led by another co-founder of Mythic, Matt Firor. So who can say, I hope they'll both be good.
Well the main difference is MJ isn't limited by publishers.
It's very clear to anything who has followed TESO that the initial DAoC style design kept getting pushed back in favor of WoWification and making it more like a singleplayer game.
I have the same fear about the game. I like PVP but it's just not what I consider a main activity for an MMO. I would rather focus on PVE and use PVP for variety. I'm mostly concerned with their statements regarding "no traditional raiding" which is the primary PVE end game activity to date but hopeful that the end game dungeons and these adventure zones pan out to be worthwhile PVE content to focus on.
I suppose if the PVP is really good I could change my mind but I have yet to find any PVP content I would want to do as a daily/regular/only activity. The Camelot Unchained looks interesting as well but that's even more PVP focused (as in no PVE at all) which will require unbelievably good PVP content for me to stay interested.
It's pretty clear that they found the initial DAoC design had little traction with the millions strong ES base. Having your signature endgame turn out to be of way less interest that you expected is going to cause some shake ups. If the game was to do as good as DAoC at its peak, it would be a failure, given their expectations and what they've spent.
I am uninterested in the RvRvR. So any of their original design decisions predicated on it (faction locking, etc) are negatives, for me. It's obvious the world design was gerrymandered to fit the requirements of RvR. While I am fully willing to grant that DAoC might have the best PvP around, it doesn't matter if that's not a selling point. None of my ES fan friends are at all interested in the RvR stuff. I think that's what the developers have been discovering, much to their chagrin. They can't change a lot of it, as it is their basic design, and they don't have much of a viable alternative to the end game, so there they are.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Pfft... RVR? I mean really? That's all you got? Frankly, it is not enough. Ignoring the troll that didn't read, as noted there are several factional warfare MOBAs that fill the same niche even if they aren't MMORPGs which actually works in their favor as pointed out already because they don't force a PVP player to deal with PVE bunk to get their kicks. TESO is bringing nothing new to the table nor anything that can compete. As other posters have mentioned they already have to overcome the fact that they are making a PVP oriented game for a PVE oriented audience in the elder scrolls fan base and they have nothing on tap to accomplish it. With the sub requirement for console players, box / disc / download fee on top, and misdirected gameplay features, they will be lucky not to be ran off the net.
Nah.
EQ was the big cheese back then. And in an interview way back MJ said that "the team" decided to try and emulate EQ by releasing expansions to attract subscriptions. The EQ model being: sub covered the network costs (at least that's what it started out as) and content was provided by paid expansions c. every 6 months.
Back on topic:
As far as "end game" and "good game design" goes a key factor is the business model.
The business model is crucial because they have to decide how much of TESO they want to "sell" on day 1. What should be available for the price of the box. And at what price. And if that means they hold back all the dungeons then so be it.
There are some service costs obviously but if justification for having a sub is that "it is going to be used to provide content" then the content drops have to be proportional to the core game.
If they charge $60 for the box and deliver content drops every 8 weeks then each drop should add about 50% of the core game. Why? Because in 4 months people will have paid another $60.
If they charge $150 then each 8 week drop should add about 20%.
As I said there are some service charges but they are small. Content is the key. And if this means they hold back content from the initial release and drip feed it every 6-8 weeks that is what they have to do to justify the subscription charge. Remember the justification: it is to pay for the content.
If they don't the game will be in danger of becoming another victim of the content freeloaders. The content locusts who never sub or maybe sub for just a month. Not f2p freeloaders but the content freeloaders.
(And my view is that the game shouldn't have a sub but paid DLC because then people who buy the game in 12 months don't get the years content for free. Another variety of content freeloader!)
I'm not talking about RvR, I'm talking about the game as a whole. DAoC had some of the best PvE and raiding on the market.
Building an MMO for singleplayer fans is the fastest way to fail (SWTOR).
No, there aren't. There are no MOBAs that do RvR because mobas, by their definition, are in arenas. Whereas RvR refers to an entire faction of thousands of people at war in massive zones with territory control, sieges, the like.
That's pretty much entirely unrelated to what I said. But the funny thing is, by shifting the game to be more like EQ, hundreds of thousands of players were driven out of DAoC, because it ruined the RvR.