It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Crazyhorsek
Like he said in the post you quoted, guild leaders players are the "petty warlords".
Plus... research history... what exactly is a King without an army or what is the power of that king if the army is completely faithful and devoted to its General? Even today... any president always has to have the support of his army - if the army is not under the president, but instead under a particular general, you're sure that a coup d'etat will likely follow and that general will become president. So it can be seen as a turn of tables when you're faced with "upholding your honor and devotion to a king versus the possibility of turning the tables and become emperor"
Another way you can look at it, is that the man who takes over the ruby throne is nothing but a proxy of that faction's king - his puppet allowing the king to have control both over his own territory and over the imperial throne.
There is a lot to twist... I think its pretty good actually. Puppet governments come and go but the core of the nation is never put at risk. If you would put the King as the "Emperor", since the three factions are fighting for the same thing, he would most likely be killed in the next "invasion" leaving both the emperor and his faction thrones empty - that would be a bit worse I think. So yea, he puts a puppet as "emperor" having absolute control over him (quoting a movie) "until he dies or they find someone better" - both are short term "contract" hehe
I will ask again.
Who puts on the crown? The 'president' or the army general?
You see, everyone is fighting for their 'president' but the president isn't the guy who is going to put on the crown. And after a couple of weeks everyone goes at it again, oblivious to the recent problems where some 'petty warlord' (player) userped the crown. That userper is welcomed back into the fold to fight another round for the 'president' who will never wear the crown.
Lets got for what might happen in game. The Orcs have been promised land by the leader of the faction and so the Orcs all fight for him. Then a player comes along and puts the crown on and is powerless to grant said land. So now the Orcs, unable to get their land, unable to kill the userper to give the crown the the faction leader who made the promise and unable to leave the faction because they feel betrayed....simply forget about what happened and carry on fighting.
Complete and utter bullshit. The game follows no logic and is totally abstract.
As for the leader getting killed....look up how Tiber Septim got the crown!
Juesus H Christ I know it is a game but you guys would suck shit through a tube if is said on the TESO box you had to do it as it was in their lore. !
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
Originally posted by XAPGames They're already into beta signups. The framework of the game is done. I wouldn't expect major mechanics changes at this point.
Not expecting change but pointing out how stupid their design is and why I don't like it.
Originally posted by Maelwydd I will ask again. Who puts on the crown? The 'president' or the army general? You see, everyone is fighting for their 'president' but the president isn't the guy who is going to put on the crown. And after a couple of weeks everyone goes at it again, oblivious to the recent problems where some 'petty warlord' (player) userped the crown. That userper is welcomed back into the fold to fight another round for the 'president' who will never wear the crown. Lets got for what might happen in game. The Orcs have been promised land by the leader of the faction and so the Orcs all fight for him. Then a player comes along and puts the crown on and is powerless to grant said land. So now the Orcs, unable to get their land, unable to kill the userper to give the crown the the faction leader who made the promise and unable to leave the faction because they feel betrayed....simply forget about what happened and carry on fighting. Complete and utter bullshit. The game follows no logic and is totally abstract. As for the leader getting killed....look up how Tiber Septim got the crown! Juesus H Christ I know it is a game but you guys would suck shit through a tube if is said on the TESO box you had to do it as it was in their lore. !
Your answer may lay within the game itself, it could be explained, it could be illogical, can't really say without having the whole picture. Which we do not have. You're expecting answers here where there are none, we're not the ones writing this story.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at one's character in the face of logic and reason- Me
Solo music https://www.reverbnation.com/Cineris_md
Originally posted by Maelwydd Originally posted by XAPGames They're already into beta signups. The framework of the game is done. I wouldn't expect major mechanics changes at this point.
I think we all get that at this point...
I was looking forward to the game since it was announced but since actually seeing the population they have targeted though, it has died down alot. Actually stepping back and looking at the genre's new audience it has me doubting there will ever be any game I can get into anytime soon, that is for another topic though. But for this one it seems to me they are trying to please too many people here at once and will end up pleasing nobody.
MMO fans are hard as hell to please, actually pretty much impossible. They like to cry about everything and always want something else than what they have in the game. Most mmo gamers today like to get everything for free and love easy casual games (GW2, COD or any other F2P game out there) hence while games only last a few months than fade away. This is the market they are targeting, these are the people who will be playing the game.
TES fans are mostly console players and probably don't even have a computer from this decade that will run this game so they are already crying about that. TES fans also are impossible to please and are always crying about anything new in any of the games and the series has really turned into a watered down playable book instead of a game. TES fans also are used to very slooooooow repetative combat looking through first person while fighting 3-4 mobs at a time at the most where they can pause it and drink 20 pots to heal or stop to think about what they will do next and maybe even reload the game before they got into trouble. They will also probably never get into the PvP part of the game and leave after they run through the story once. But I played Skyrim for 1000 hours, yeah and you were alone so you obviously like being alone but this is a MMO.
What is this post even about? I don't know, it was just a small rant but to answer the OP question, yes. The community will probably canabalize the game in a few months and spit it out moving on the the next victim. If they cave into to the crying of too many different groups they will only shoot themselves in the foot by half assing the rest of the game and not pleasing anyone.
I think I will turn my attention to smaller niche games because these mass marketed games are really not worth it anymore. I will still check the game out (as long as its not F2P) and hope it turns out well but like I said before after seeing the people who will actually be playing the game, I have my doubts now.
I've yet to see much that is actually promising about the game from the perspective of an Elder Scrolls title. Pretty much everything about ES games that I love does not exist in this game. The parts they did implement are some of the weaker aspects, such as the combat system.
I have serious trouble finding a single reason why I'd put down my heavily modded Skyrim to play this... my perfect idea of a multiplayer game for ES is a small scale persistent server that I can play with a select group of friends,, where the modding alteration exist server side so they can proliferate to the clients connecting.... Kinda like the old school neverwinter night persistent worlds. Not the immersion destroying nonsense that comes from full fledged MMO kiddies.
i just don't get the appeal at all to an Elder Scrolls fan. To a RvR fan? Sure. But I don't really see a big crossover between those groups, and your not going to pull a person into RvR because they happen to like Skyrim, the gameplay styles are polar opposite.
Originally posted by Draemos I've yet to see much that is actually promising about the game from the perspective of an Elder Scrolls title. Pretty much everything about ES games that I love does not exist in this game. The parts they did implement are some of the weaker aspects, such as the combat system. I have serious trouble finding a single reason why I'd put down my heavily modded Skyrim to play this... my perfect idea of a multiplayer game for ES is a small scale persistent server that I can play with a select group of friends,, where the modding alteration exist server side so they can proliferate to the clients connecting.... Kinda like the old school neverwinter night persistent worlds. Not the immersion destroying nonsense that comes from full fledged MMO kiddies. i just don't get the appeal at all to an Elder Scrolls fan. To a RvR fan? Sure. But I don't really see a big crossover between those groups, and your not going to pull a person into RvR because they happen to like Skyrim, the gameplay styles are polar opposite.
I agree with this from Draemos.
In simple opinion I can say that this game isn't in my taste from just seeing the videos. I've been playing games since I first played Jumpman on my father's DOS based computer which led to things like Doom and so on and so forth. I have had enough experience to know when something smells sour on my radar to my tastes. I'm not here to point out its flaws or how bad it might or might not suck. I only wanted to pop in after reading every single post here and voice my own thoughts as we all have the generous freedom to do. Whether right or wrong it is allowed because we all have a voice no matter who may think they have the right to stifle or silence those who speak out boldly or in anger.
I have no issues with anyone voicing their opinions one way or another. To speak against them voicing their opinion is doing the same thing as you claim they are doing by having a heated opinion about their own personal thoughts. To lash out against one another speaks volumes about holier than thow thinkers (whether for a game's lore or against that person). Much like petty jabs at the way they type or having heard, read, or made up false information. It doesn't make them an enemy to be scorned it just means they don't think like you do or don't know what you do as many claim these developers do not think like we do. You cannot teach someone your way of thinking by making them feel stupid or trying to strip them of their voice. If a man is thirsty can you convince him he is not by yelling at him? True, a game isn't a basic need but you can convince him that he doesn't need water at this very second while your traveling to the next town and are rationing said water.
On these developers. Let me be real simple and plain for a moment. Developers are in it to make money it is their job to make money for their company. It is what keeps their children fed and families in nice homes and puts gas in their tanks. This however does not mean they can't love what they do while trying to make this money. Some people love money and have skills to make games. Others may love games with money being a bonus. There are many mixes of these types within a group of developers. They can be just as varied in opinion and mindset as all of us are here. The real question comes down to what is the lead opinion and direction of the product?
Games are made for a broad scope hoping to bring in as many potential buyers as possible. They hope to feed you words that will entice you to play and show love for their work by providing them with a living doing what they like. They show you visuals of amazing things and give you a glimpse of scope to try and tie you into their vision of grandeur. Finally they make promises to seal the deal. Like selling you a used car with a maintenance package however limited that is. Which of course you don't realize until reading the fine print much later after you got over the dizzy spray of flashy words and pretty pictures.
I don't think this makes them evil or gives me any reason to hate them. It is simple understanding that they are business men first and foremost. Yes, they make games but those games were made to make money. Don't worry about speakers against or in favor of these companies. They factor in how many will play the game and how many won't right off the bat. Otherwise they wouldn't have wanted the property in the first place. They know the name alone will get them preorder sales. They know no matter what they do many of the hardcore fans will be turned off by the smallest change in the lore. They continue in it because they want to continue doing what they enjoy.
My lack of support for their product is no hate toward them or because I'm some bitter dried up overly opinionated 80s gamer. It is simply because I can tell from personal experience that the game isn't in my taste for one or many reasons. Be it lore, gameplay, graphics, or just because I didn't like their sales pitch. I don't really need a reason to justify why. Just as I don't really need a reason to post all this here other than being up way to early in the morning and thinking deep thoughts while reading a bunch of posts from a numerous amount of individual thinkers.
I will as I have stated before wait for a free trial or something along those lines to form a more hands on opinion of the game. I am willing to wait. I am patient and I am still opinionated about things. Just because I voice something in a heated way does not mean I have to be razzed about being childish or ignorant for not choosing to play a game. It's like being told your acting like a sissy for not wanting to join in a rousing game of tag. Maybe my leg hurts today, I might feel ill, I might just not be in the mood. What does matter is my passionate display of irritation toward someone changing the rules or style of the game gets met with mockery and chastisement for an opinion. That tons come out of the wood work to then voice their heated opinions about an opinion. I mostly just find it funny and redundant in many ways. Not to say anyone is wrong of right for doing so. On a game of tag however I'm not paying $30-60 to join in.
In all truth it's a game. Trying to convince others to play or not with insults, slander, or out right abuse is just ignorant. If you don't like something don't direct it at anyone please. When an opinion is pointed at a game and not a person it doesn't need defending against or rallying to, but that won't stop those opinions from either side of that fence. I just think it can be approached with level heads over matched fanaticism for a laid back personal way of buying games. Oh your too crazy about lore well at least they know what they like and yeah many could lighten up. Going off on them because you have a different "I'll play anything that is put in front of me" attitude doesn't make you any better. It comes off as your a fanatic about being an all gamer anything goes. I didn't mean it makes you this way it just appears that way. Oh it's just a game. I guess if they changed your favorite meal in the whole world it's no big deal. How about your favorite car, toy, ring, on and on. They tied themselves to something just as you might have tied yourself to an ideal of I'll give anything a shot, but let it be something you really like then how it becomes a personal issue for you.
I'm not really caring if I made any sense with all that. I'm not bothered if you chose not to read this. It was just what was floating around in my head. I did not pick out any one person to reference or slander in this long opinion. I simply wanted to talk about the game and remove those floating thought bubbles from my mind. If anyone found what I wrote offensive I apologise. If anyone found my grammar or spelling in bad form I apologise, but in my opinion it's not how something is said that makes the difference but what is said. Course I'm not trying to please everyone. I'm not trying to sell a product or an idea just voicing one.
I am a fan of TES. I do not all together agree with this new game. It doesn't mean I'm a horrible person it just means I don't like the change. When you don't like a change you can either stay still and refuse to change or you can make a choice to go with the new direction or disconnect yourself from that change. There are two paths and both have many opinions about their outcomes from many different travelers.
There are five options for two paths. 1: You can choose to stay right where you are and stick to your guns and feel secure that you stand for something you think is right. 2: You can choose to go along with the new path and are not bothered by the changes because your just looking for the next thing to do. 3: You choose the new path because you feel it's the newest and best route for you designed partially by the original road workers you feel secure in your future with this choice. 4: You choose to travel the new path a ways and see whether you like it or not. If not you'll find a side path to get off. 5: You choose the other path and give up on the main road all together leading to different adventures in other places. 6: There is no other option. You cannot go back and change the past. Burnt bridges and ruin are all that remain of what you left behind. The road is blocked on either side so the two paths or staying where you are currently is all that you have.
It's all in good fun and I hope for all to have fun in whatever games you choose to play.
"Love can be innocent and can be sweet, but sometimes about as nice as rotting meat."
whoever is writing in these days about the good or the bad of TESO is a liar.
It's pathetic how ppl can fall for such internetz-traps when nobody really has touched the game...
Wait until it goes real beta and then MAKE UP your OWN consideration and don't follow the sheepherd (SWTOR teaches...).
Every game has potential in our eyes in something but it's just OUR eyes and not necessarily the eyes of the Devs or my best friends.
You like the game ? pay for it... You don't like ? don't pay for it... the rest is fluff and else...
Hypes and Monkeys have to go back to the wardrobe... these are the real enemies of the mmo-scene in these days
I think its a mistake to make Elder Scroll's a pvp focused game.
Elder Scrolls has been a game about exploration, developing character builds, dungeons, Guild quests, crafting, content that seems to spring up out of nowhere.
When was the last time anyone played a Elder Scrolls and thought to themselves "you know, I should be ganked right here... just camped all day in this dungeon, that would be great"
I'm going to try to play this game but the second i feel a forced limitation like a pvp only zone or something in the open world that i can't take on myself because of ganking im uninstalling and unsubscribing.
Originally posted by Clawzon Invisible walls?(God forbid!) One guy asked for access to the entire world and was nicknamed "ganker"! Ganker? What that has to do with anything? They can easily make it impossible to attack other players in certain areas if they so desire.
Okay, so if i'm reading this right, you are against arbitrary invisible walls that prevent you from traversing from one location to another, but you are okay with arbitary "invisibile walls" that prevent you from attacking another player? If you want realism, you need to allow for the repercusions of that realism.
Originally posted by crasset15 First off, it doesn't make sense from a lore perspective, that you can just enter an area that is controlled by an enemy alliance. A few smaller MMOs have had faction limited areas and they worked just fine. Provided that you could still enter the enemy areas, but it instantly marked you for PvP. If the lore states that dunmer and altmer are a part of opposing factions, and kill eachother over the central cyrodiil, then it is moronic that they would happily be able to be friends outside of that area. Quite frankly, I'm sick of MMOs where everyone is entitled to do everything, has equal opportunities, and in general built up in a way which aims to lure in as many different types of players as possible. While I think that faction areas are a good move on their part, I have to agree that making them completely inaccessible for other faction members is BS. It should be possible, but at your own risk of getting PvP-ed, or perhaps having completely different content in enemy areas (spying, sabotage, assassination). Walling them off with mountains, gates or invisible walls is not something I support. What I do support, is having the knowledge that certain areas are enemy territory, and if you set foot in them, you'd better be prepared for whatever is coming your way.
That sounds about right. You should be able to enter any place in the game but some places at your own risk.
PvP flagging people in enemy territory is simple and makes sense even in a PvE game (and this isnt a PvE game). Just locking people out on the other hand is just boring and makes the game feel small and restricted.
Originally posted by BlazeIV Okay, so if i'm reading this right, you are against arbitrary invisible walls that prevent you from traversing from one location to another, but you are okay with arbitary "invisibile walls" that prevent you from attacking another player? If you want realism, you need to allow for the repercusions of that realism.
For me, that is the difference between PvP and PvE servers, that is an easy solution but servers with invisible walls and without makes less sense.
You can choose to play on a PvE server (even though I still think you should be PvP flagged on them as well when you enter enemy towns and similar).
Having both kinds of servers is just good, gives us more choices (that is PvP and PvE, not invi walls or not).
Originally posted by Loke666 That sounds about right. You should be able to enter any place in the game but some places at your own risk. PvP flagging people in enemy territory is simple and makes sense even in a PvE game (and this isnt a PvE game). Just locking people out on the other hand is just boring and makes the game feel small and restricted.
Wouldn't a better phrase be, makes a game sound small and restricted at this point? I must say though I don't remember DAOC feeling small and restrictive.
Originally posted by PyrateLV Originally posted by Maephisto Community Imperative #1: Under no circumstance will you ever accept a developer's vision for their game. We know better what makes a good game, such things can't be left to the whims of developers.
I wouldnt say we know better, but as gamers we do play them alot so you cant say we dont have an informed opinion of what makes a good game. At least from the Players Perspective
Often it seems that a Developers "Vision" is too far removed from the "players perspective" of what makes a good game because they have a "developers perspective"
I dont think Developers actually play games as much as Games do and therefore their point of view is from a developmental side which often times doesnt translate all that well into "play"
Even though from their perspective it should.
We "know better" because we are the ones that have to deal with the end result of the whims of developers
Its not the developers themselves we have to worry about. Many of them are gamers, and know what makes a good game.
No, its the bigwigs in suits that have never played a game in their life, could care less about a game, and frankly would take a shit on every single gamer if it meant a bonus check. They only look at the stats, see what makes the fastest money at the lowest cost. They don't think long term anymore. They think, how can we make this shit ass game as cheaply as possible, but hype it enough that we will make a nice return on our investment before people realize we just fucked them in the ass without lube.
So, in truth, the players DO know more about what makes a good game then a COMPANY does. Anyone who says otherwise are either working for the company, or are just stupid. Because in the end, the people calling all the shots, are the people that know the LEAST about what makes a good game. Sure they can make a profitiable game, but most of that is done through marketing and hype, putting a high profile name on it(looking at you SWTOR), and catering to the more casual gamers that frankly, should not be the sole market for every single MMO made. But well, they are the biggest portion of the market, and they are also the most ADHD. When people complain a game has no staying power, no long term content, it is generally because the company never planned it to last at all. It was cheaper to just make the game as cheaply as possible, but still look good on the outside(and be empty and hollow on the inside) and hope to make a profit before people started to flee and move to the next new game.
The developers themselves, are just trying to make a living. They have two options, they can sell their soul to the likes of EA, Activision, or all the rest and keep their job, or they can walk out with their dignity and say fuck you old man in a suit, I will not insult an entire franchise just to fatten your pockets (you know like SWTOR pretty much just took a shit on the Star Wars legacy, because EA stepped in, bought out Bioware, and then tried to use their name to sell a product that never should have seen the light of day). When you have bills to pay or kids to feed, you often leave your pride and dignity at the door and do what the moron upstairs tells you, even though it hurts with every keystroke you do, knowing that your going to ruin what could be a great game, and piss off a lot of loyal fans.
We can only hope TESO does not do the same, but sadly, we have made these hopes far to many times for me to have any reasonable chance of expecting this game to be any different.
The faction lock system itself alrady smells of 'fuck it, forcing factions will be way easier to do, so who cares if it goes against everything TES games stood for in the past"
Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by ghostinfinit Originally posted by Maephisto Community Imperative #1: Under no circumstance will you ever accept a developer's vision for their game. We know better what makes a good game, such things can't be left to the whims of developers.
I dunno, this was meant to be sarcasm I think but it some ways it's sorta true. Why not give MMO fans what they want in a game not what you think they want. I think this has been the undoing of many recent releases over the past few years.
Because MMORPG fans:
1) Can't all agree what they want in a MMORPG, so Dev's are left to try and guess what will draw the most subscribers.
2) Frequently don't know what is good for them or the design of a MMORPG.
Dev's may miss the mark, an quite likely the fans would not fair much better.
^^^ This. Just go to your favorite MMO forum and read some of the God awful suggestions. Players want different and mutually exclusive things. For instance...I'm thrilled to death the game will be faction and zone locked (and so are many others). I don't want to see any stinkin elves or furries in my lands. Unfortunately, they can't make everyone happy.
As to the OP's question on whether or not it's too late to change this, I would guess the answer is "yes", based on the fact they are about to start public closed beta. Frankly, I hope they don't change it. Voted "no", obviously.,
Originally posted by ShakyMo Why they picked rvr for pvp. You've got one group who think TESO should be a ffa sandbox, a big budget darkfall if you will. You've got your usual hardcore pve raid crowd, passed off because wow looks after casual better these days, who jump all over every new game wanting it to be everquest 1 reborn You've got a bunch of butthurt swg fans inhabiting forums looking for a pure pve sandbox to play since their game got shut down. What the last 2 would think would be "great pvp", I.e. none, using a shite voluntary flag system or ghettoed off into meaningless mini games would pods off the first crowd. What the 1 group would want would scare away the other 2 So they pick a system in the middle, that they know will work, which the the last 2 groups can ignore, the first group won't like as much as ffa but would find much better than minigames and will also appeal to people who like rvr type pvp and the silent majority, people who like both pve and pvp, just not both at the same time.
At what point do you even mention any TES fan or TES game? Answer - NEVER.
THAT is why this game design is bad. It seems the last thing they thought about was the TES games and fans.
The took everything we like about Elder Scrolls games, removed it, applied some WOW to it, and are calling it a TES despite it having it's soul removed. Did we bring it down? No. I say the guy that wrote that game plan killed it when he made it more WOW and ES.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Because tes is a single player game, if they made the mmo exactly like tes. 1 it would be a shit mmo, swtor level of shit. 2 there would be no point bethseda working on tes6 which I really really want them to do, I enjoy skyrim because IT ISN'T A MMO, the things I like about it are decidedly un mmo like, the things I like about it are all about getting lost in an imersive world, that will be lost in ANY mmo implementation, just having chat, lfg etc.. would stop it feeling like tes to me.
it's already going to be extremely similar to SWOTR outside of RvR. massive use of phasing for PVE, massive use of instancing for PVE, solo only story(i believe as a multiplayer game even swtor beats this). TBH, they could have made a MMO TES title, instead the lead on the prjoect chose to regurgitate an old game and slap TES coating onto it.
it will probably still be a good game of course.