Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Exploring Quests In The Elder Scrolls Online
firefly2003
Member UncommonPosts: 2,527
Fans of MMOs have killed their fair share of monsters. They've collected enough pelts and have returned plenty of missing items to quest-givers. The team behind The Elder Scrolls Online has the challenge of creating thousands of quests for their MMO that will hook players and share similarities with the Elder Scrolls games of the past. By implementing an exploration-focused quest structure and bringing in fan favorite quest-lines such as the thieves guild, creative director Paul Sage and lead content designer Rich Lambert hope fans of the series will feel right at home. Watch the video below to see Game Informer's Ben Reeves talk to Paul and Rich about their approach to designing quests, the main story of the game, and how the world will change depending on your actions as a player.
Video Interview in Linky Above
Comments
At the very least they are looking at changing quests up a bit, although I don't really understand what they want to accomplish yet. It seems like a much more story driven quest line ala TOR, I can't see how the examples they gave would play out without your own personal or group instance of that the quests. Its also interesting that they mention that two players not in a group don't have to fight over who gets to "tag" the mob, sort of like GW2.
Also, that interviewer is pretty wierd.
Some things I picked up in the interview.
They're going to "disguise" the mundaine quests like kill 10 rats, and they incorporate disguising quests a lot.
The world is heavily phased. Nothing like playing in a persistant online world with my firnd that looks nothing like the world he's playing in.
They think players don't like to not be able to do every quest in the game because a choice they made might prevent them from being able to do a quest. This is probably why I play an entirely nuetral character in every ES game, I don't like killing an NPC and then finging out that I wasn't able to do a quest later on because of it.
They want to reward exploring, so the compass will direct you towards quest givers. Granted, you can turn the compass off.
Variation on quest hubs is not the same thing as not having quest hubs. Either you don't have quest hubs or you have a variation of the quest hub. Sinse they constantly repeat that they are doing a variation on quest hubs, and that you'll go from one place to the next doing quests, that means there are quest hubs. Which is strange, because prior to this interview about doing quests, they kept saying there were no quest hubs, and now they're saying that they're using a variation of quest hubs.
They encourage grouping. One way is by making it fun, because playing with people isn't naturally fun. The other way is to not require you to group while you're soloing to play with someone else. Unlike other games that encourage grouping by having you group, they're going to encourage playing with others by allowing you to play solo, while that other guy is playing solo. For example, if guy A is out killing bears for a quest, and guy b comes along, other games would penalize you for killing the same bear. They're going to instead give you full rewards for killing the same mob, without the need to group. Were other games will try and encourage you to actually form a party with guy b, TESO will not encourage you to group by encouraging you to play together.
But then, they're pretty much saying you can solo the entire game.
I don't like this paul sage guy. It seems like he's been following MMO trends, but not actually playing the games. He's putting a lot of emphasis on being able to everything solo, making everything easilly accessable, creating single player driven storylines, and trying to disguise traditional MMO mechanics without removing traditional MMO mechanics (IE: quest grinding and the typical go kil this many of this or collect this many of this style quest, as well as simply moving the quest hubs fromt he towns to POI's and making quest into archs or chains instead of just a bunch of individual quests)
No problem with quest chains. That's fine, but not when you combine them with heavy use of phasing so that the world I play in isn't the same as the world my friend is playing in.
Encouraging grouping by not penalizing working together is great. That's fine as well, However, when you don't encourage grouping by literally encouraging people to not group, you're not really encouraging playing together, but instead encouraging people to play solo, with someone else who's playing solo. WAR and Rift both tried to encourage grouping and playing together, but only when I"m in a public quest or event area. And even when people did end up in a group, they never talked to each other, and would go their sperate ways when they were done the quest or event. If the content doesn't require you to group to do it, and is all soloable, people tend to not group. Yes, some people would be social, but for the most part they weren't. It's even a common complaint on the Rift forums that people only group for the events and then go their own way, because there's no reason to group outside of that. Even doing dungeons, people would rarely talk, but that was a problem of cross server grouping.
CoH required me to do a lot of grouping as did early EQ2, and it was fine. Grouping itself was never the problem. Getting a group was always a pain in the ass, that was the problem. LFG and LFD tools are requested and work because they make it easy to group. People don't want to shout in chanell for an hour straight that they are looking for a group to do something. Making content soloable isn't how you encourage people to play together, it's counter to the idea of grouping. And "fun" has never been an incentive to get people playing together.
They need to start talking about crafting and economy. Something tells me it's going to be your typical MMO crafting and AH economy. If so, that means the impression I came away with, watching this interview, is that TESO is yet another quest grinder to level to endgame, to then raid and do PvP. Same old same old.
Long post is long. I apologize.
Sage, one of the many reasons for outrage over this game taking the TES name. The just dont get it and most of us know they are using the name because they need its popularity.
The more they try to make an MMO for TES fans the worse it will get for MMO players and the less they try...the worse it will get for fans of TES. There is no point at all to take a long standing series and make an MMO out of it for any reason other than riding its popularity...its not like it used to be with UO where it was Ultima, only online.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Or maybe because they're just doing the exact same thing as every other developed MMO?
He explained why in the video. It's designed to make everything accessible. He talks about being able to play for 15, 30, or 60 min blocks. In otherwords, like most every other game, it's designed around casual gameplay. Nothing wrong with that of course, and it goes in line with what they said in the GI interview that's coming out. They're trying to appeal to the "typical" mmo player.
Nothing wrong with that. However, one thing I've learned is that when an MMO is soloable and doesn't require any grouping, people don't really play together. Rifts in Rift didn't get people actually playing together, it just put them in a group and they played solo.
Like most MMO's, they're missing the part were you shouldn't just be grouping or killing the same thing, you should be interacting with each other. Player interaction is the part that most MMO's don't get, and why people aren't really playing together, even when they're grouped with a bunch of other people doing the same thing.
Again, an element they seem to be ignoring from the ES games. Interacting with the world and the people is a big part of the ES games, that same thing should be emphasized in TESO through player interaction. To me that's not done by using the trinity style combat system, raids, public events, or faction pvp. It's done like in EVE, were every player plays a role and everything you do has some impact on other players and therefore the world at large. It reamains to be seen if they're going to achieve this in TESO, as it stand it's looking more and more like a quest grinder with 3 faction pvp.
Paul was focusing more on the single-player ES aspect of the game, rather than the MMO aspect... likely to try to quell the onslaught of criticism that came from the ES SPRPG crowd complaining that the MMO wouldn't be SPRPG enough for them. But of couse, there is certainly reasons to group up as well. It's hard to take a keep, a castle, or even a farm by yourself, as it's also hard to do most dungeons by yourself.
You'll still have to group up to enjoy certain aspects of the game, but there's a solo aspect you can enjoy also.
P.S: As a footnote, I agree that Rifts sucked.
And Paul seems to be ignoring that many fans are using SWTOR as an example of WHY we dont want TES bastardized.
The only MMORPG that worked as a port from a stand alone RPG was Ultima Online and that is due to Ultima Online basiaclly being Ultima 7-8 ONLINE. The world was basically just ported over....into a larger online world that everyone could play in at the same time.
There were no massive changes to the way the game played...even the combat felt the same only with more attack options.
All Paul did here is confirm more fears that TESO is going to be another SWTOR...a game that bastardized its single player predecessors by trying to be more than what it is.
The only real options the game has is to be either
A: A really bad MMO trying to stay true to the TES games.
B: An MMO that is TES in name only.
C: A game that does neither right.
That cant be true you say? Really? Then tell me why I was just online playing Skyrim with a multi-player mod a few hours ago? Oh yeah, because I already have a TES game that is online...and yes, a few mods making dungeons with group based difficulty as well as one adding bosses.
If I can already play a TES game online, no MMO has a chance to match it. Especially one being made by people that have nothing to do with the TES series other than being owned by the same corporattion out for a quick buck.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
You're missing the point here. Obviously based on your post, you're more into SPRPG's then MMO's, and that's fine, but ESO is going to be an MMO. As far as your 3 options above I'd say none of the above, though B is closest to the correct answer. This game is for people who enjoy MMO's, and are looking for a new MMO with new features, that FINALLY brings back meaningful PvP, which was completely lost since 2004. It's first and foremost an MMO SET IN THE WORLD OF TAMRIEL, NOT Elder Scrolls 6.
Just like World of Warcraft didn't do anything to change the RTS Warcraft series, so won't ESO do anything to change the SPRPG series. People think that just because they both have "Elder Scrolls" in the name, and they're both RPG's, that they're somehow in the same LINE of games, and they're not.
If Zenimax was creating an RTS, instead of an MMORPG, you wouldn't hear people complain, but because the differences between a SPRPG and an MMORPG are less apparent, everybody's up in arms, thiinking that the outcome of the MMORPG will effect the SPRPG series (as you said above "bastardize it"). It won't, because the SPRPG series and the new MMORPG series are two seperate LINES of games, made by two seperate studios. If you like MMO's, then hop on board and give it a shot, if not, then you're more than welcome to stick with your Single-Player RPG's, no problem. Just don't confuse the two for being the same thing.
OR I like my SPRPGs to be SPRPGs and I want my MMORPGs to be god dman MMORPGs...
Are you going to tell me that I should be happy if hollywood is going to take the Lord of the Rings and turn it into a sitcom TV show? I mean, afterall...it IS named Lord of the Rings and I enjoyed the movies and novels right...well? WELL? No.
TES is TES, let it be TES and go make an MMORPG that can stand on its own.
And I know you must place everything into a nice neat little box...but that box is for YOU...not everyone else in the world.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
i vote for C. TESO will be a failure by all measures. The daftness of the devs is clear already.
TESO's announcement will be remembered as a PR failure and the game will shine in the light for nano second just before it falls in line with all the other games exactly like it.
ps. the screens from the Hero Engine look nothing like the TES games I've played and as generic as generic gets.
F-
The boxes aren't for me, the boxes are the simple truth of the matter. ESO is first and foremost and MMORPG, and is just going to an MMORPG set in Tamriel, just like WoW was an MMO set in Azeroth, but it didn't make a lick of difference for the Warcraft series. The fandom creates the idea for the world,, then the MMO brings it to life.
If you try to go into ESO expecting it to be like the other ES games you played, (which were SPRPG's), then yes, you'll be dissapointed, but the fact stands that they're two completely different types of games made by two completely different studios, and THAT my friend, is the reality. If you're mixing them together in your own mind, that's where your having the issue. You need to mentally seperate them, that way you won't be so concerned with the success or failure of the MMORPG and you can just relax and go back to enjoying your Skyrim, and your other SPRPG's.
You didn't see any screens from the HeroEngine, because they didn't use the HeroEngine to make the game.
They use they're own internal engine built specifically for ESO.
And the graphics look great.
Your entitiled to your opinion and I agree.
just read that, i stand corrected on the hero engine comment. Some of the early screens look pretty dam generic nonetheless.
The early screens I agree did point towards a Hero Engine - esque look, but since I've read and watched more tonight about the elder scrolls online I'm actually growing into a really fond attitude about the game in itself as a separte entity from Bethesda style TES.
M
"Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys. Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death!"
- Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Support the Indie Developers - Kickstarter
Since it is the true of the matter then please tell me what SPRPGs I have played and which MMORPGs I have played as well as how long I played them.
That information afterall is the only thing that can tell you...the truth of the matter.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
I can't tell you what MMO's you played, and I can't tell you what SPRPG's you've played, but I can tell you that the MMO's you played weren't SPRPG's, and the SPRPG's you've played weren't MMO's. :-)
And yet when GW2 does this same exact thing, everyone pats ArenaNet on the back for it. All they are doing is disguising mundane quests in the form of dynamic events, which are really just quest chains that are triggered by proximity.
Short of getting rid of quests altogether, there is no way to improve questing except to "disguise" it or present it in a different way. Any attempt to do that, whether it's GW2's dynamic quest chains, or TESO's take on questing, is a good thing.
Seems like people will always find a way to complain about something.
Yeah it's odd that people would complain about a roleplaying game having quests. Certainly there are ways to improve upon their delivery - something both GW2 and ESO are striving for - but those features will exist because quests are fundamental to the gamestyle.
Sounds good in terms of questing to me, similar to the DE concept but their own approach to it. I also like the sound of the mages guild. OF course it's easy to make any game sound good when using words, it's seeing these ideas in action that really counts, which I haven't yet.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'll believe it when i see it.
Right now they could be promising the sky and moon to me and i wouldn't care.
Agree'd. People seem to forget that an RPG needs quests - be it they are disguised or not, as they are fundamentaly an integral part of the overall system, hell RL has tasks and in essence quests therefore they are needed. And yes this even means the kill 10x quests, though it would be amazing if a developer could manage to find a way to make the final number a random and therefore maintaining a realistic stand-point.
Got to agree, especially with the talk in WAR about the Public Quests, which in the end turned out pretty lackluster in my opinion. Yet we have GW2 with their system which looks amazing and any ideas comparable to that system - which I feel TESO might be taking, is great.
"Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys. Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death!"
- Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Support the Indie Developers - Kickstarter
and I can tell you that you are wrong.
Dungeons Siege 2 was a SPRPG that had a multi-player mode played by 100,000s online making it more of an MMO than some MMOs...
And also that SWTOR...is less of an MMORPG than Unreal Tournament...its just a SPRPG pretending to be an MMO.
And I wont even talk about games like Mount and Blade which received a mod that makes it the only sandbox MMORPG to come out since SWG.
BTW, I loved how you tried to dodged having to prove that I like SPRPGs more than MMOs...yet another fail.
So far, your opinion of others fails...guess thats what you get for attacking the messenger instead of the message.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Nothing I said has failed. I'm quite aware that some MMO's have SPRPG aspects, and some SPRPG's have MMO aspects, but you can't have a true, pure MMO (such as ESO), and a true, pure SPRPG (such as Skyrim) at the same time. That's the whole point of Zenimax Media making an MMO, don't you see it? People were complaining that they wanted a multiplayer aspect to the already-great SPRPG games, and instead of doing like an X-box live co-op thing, they decided to SEPERATE the two, by making one purely mutliplayer, and keeping the other purely single-player, thus proving the original point I was trying to make, which was that they're two seperate lines of games, made by two seperate studios, you can't really logically deny that. And yes, I know Skyrim will have some Mods that make it Multi-Playerish, but Bethesda is keeping that series, at it's core, an SPRPG series, while also launching a (wait for it), SEPERATE series, that is MMORPG focued.