Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

Identity Crisis

1568101119

Comments

  • ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,474Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

    oh... lol I like the expression "pure TES fans".

    Well... I have no idea what a "pure TES fan" is... must be some type of master race crap talk again, STILL... a pure, and I mean PURE TES fan will never play TESO since its not a single player game. TES are single player games... therefor a "PURE TES fan" will never play anything but a TES game that is EXACTLY like the other TES games - single player because thats the first and foremost important aspect of TES.

    Therefore "pure TES fans" have no actual right to try to steer a mmo - stick to your "pure" single player game.

    Think this closes the conversation about "pure TES fans".

    Me? Well I'm pretty flexible... TES games are awesome and I think TESO will be awesome... but different. But I can embrace different games from a multitude of genres.

    Now if Mass Effect went the mmo way done right, damn I would be in trouble cause... mass effect mmo vs tes mmo I would be really in trouble. Thanks for who ever decided not to release a mass effect mmo and not forcing me to a very very hard decision.

    Ehummm...well said ;)

    Same here, definitly fit the the name of TES fan, but also MMORPG fan. I know what to expect from a singleplayer game and that feeling from playing them can never be matched by a MMORPG, you simply do not effect the world in a pve way like all TES games do. I feel people underastimate what a TES game gives and only imagine more people running around in the same game where the game is expected to behave the same like we know out of our singleplayer experiances.

    You simple can't have that "feel" try and we end up with games like SWtOR (which I liked as a Co-Op Online Star Wars Combat Game) but absolutely disliked for it's MMORPG aspects. With what they delivered they should have made a co-op singelplayer game and much of it's budget would have been much better spend and could have brought allot more depth to the game especially in the cause and effect section where you actually can influence the world.

    Now as said TESO is going to be a MMORPG, they actually show balls to bring us a different experiance then what we allready know and love from the regular TES series. That experiance simple can only be matched by another singleplayer game or hopefully with some co-op options. For a MMORPG it NEEDS to be different, yet I am sure it will also feel familiar.

    We get a change to actually be part of some faction that actually means something, we can have different type of players playing in one game world, sure we might be separated from other factions but do I really walk in real life into area's/lands/country's I really should not be in. Is it really that hard for some gamers to accept the faction lock?

     

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,904Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

    oh... lol I like the expression "pure TES fans".

    Well... I have no idea what a "pure TES fan" is... must be some type of master race crap talk again, STILL... a pure, and I mean PURE TES fan will never play TESO since its not a single player game. TES are single player games... therefor a "PURE TES fan" will never play anything but a TES game that is EXACTLY like the other TES games - single player because thats the first and foremost important aspect of TES.

    Therefore "pure TES fans" have no actual right to try to steer a mmo - stick to your "pure" single player game.

    Think this closes the conversation about "pure TES fans".

    Me? Well I'm pretty flexible... TES games are awesome and I think TESO will be awesome... but different. But I can embrace different games from a multitude of genres.

    Now if Mass Effect went the mmo way done right, damn I would be in trouble cause... mass effect mmo vs tes mmo I would be really in trouble. Thanks for who ever decided not to release a mass effect mmo and not forcing me to a very very hard decision.

    I wonder if they actually think rhetoric like that will actually change minds or win arguments? The thought is quite amusing if they do, as this isn't high school, I highly doubt anyone is concerned about joining their club or sitting at their lunch table.

    I will still play TES games like anyone else who loves them. Even this one if it turns out to be good.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • Yyrkoon_PoMYyrkoon_PoM Reseda, CAPosts: 150Member

    I wonder if some of the TES purists have really played all of the TES games?

    - Ted Peterson, Vijay Lakshman and Julian LeFay started working on Arena as a "medieval-style gladiator game."

    Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20070509175304/http://www.elderscrolls.com/tenth_anniv/tenth_anniv-arena.htm

    - Battlespire offered multiplayer gamming in the form of Player vs. Player deathmatches. This was in 1997 so PvP was introduced into Elder Scrolls before DAoC was even in production.

    - Redguard - You were not even allowed to create your own character and played the entire game as Cyrus the Redguard, so I guess you could say that Faction Locking (in this case caracter locking) was introduced into the Elder Scrolls in 1998 again before DAoC.

    Granted that they were both terrible games, but they are part of the ES series.

    As to the exploration, I do not think you could ever explore the whole of Tamriel in any one game as each game was locked to an entire provice or a smaller portion of a province.

    So while it is easy to say that ESO is DAoC in Elder Scrolls clothing, I think a closer look at the history and roots of the ES series might make some people come to a different conclusion.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    So if people could explore the world but PvP only aloud in Cyrodil that would be ok?

    OK? - it depends...

    Better than not being allowed to explore the world and PvP only in Cyrodil - yes.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
     

    Hell the developers have justified having no PvP outside Cyrodil by saying all the factions have agreed to only fighting in the middle. If they can use bullshit like that to justify putting in artifical barriers to prevent exploration why couldn't they keep the same agreement in place with full exploration?

    PRECISELY!

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    I probably won't get it then because I played TES games not DAOC.

    Basically the designers are hoping that the couple of hundred thousand DOAC fans pitted against the couple of million TES fans is going to win through. Mighty big gamble for a system that didn't need to be so restrictive.

    But tell me this, if all this is to cultivate faction pride why do the developers justify not having an explorable world to just create alts. Which is it? Do thy want us to fight for one faction and have pride in it or create alts?

    You see, I can have faction pride while exploring the entire world. Quests and story will not do that, my choice of character does that. And fation pride will certainly not come from being forced to create alts to explore the whole world.

    And how can you claim faction pride is such a big thing when you are FORCED into a faction if you want to play a certain race. I don't want to fight for the DC but I want to make a Breton. So I either play for a faction I don't want to play for or a race I don't want to play. Either way I am a reluctant member of the faction or race.

    For me faction pride comes from CHOOSING the faction not being FORCED into choosing.

    As for the whole quest and story giving faction pride...well I will never see anyone else unles I go to Cyrodil so what is there to be proud of? Why not have an explorable world and if you really, really want to have faction pride quests, have some near other faction lands and have them involve the other factions by having resuce missings, attack missing, information gathering missions.

     

     

    Another cogent and well-reasoned point in favour of what I have been saying.

    Had any unreasonable flames aimed at you yet?

    Taking this position seems to attract them...

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs

    Poll highly scewed by far too many DaoC fans on this site.

    The only way to get a PURE poll is to got to a TES fansite where there are nothing but TES fans, even if they are also DaoC fans...here, you end up with more DaoC fans that dont play TES at all and dont give an eff as long as they get something close to the same crap they played 12 years ago.

    Pure TES fans are far more pissed off and can be plainly seen on the offical TES forums as well as the mod sites.

    I think on balance that your conclusion is correct.

    But then I expected skewed results - the OWPvP lobby are vocal and unswerving.

    However, even with this consideration, the poll shows consistently less than a third of respondents in clear favour of the current model.

    I am mightily weary of being told that articulating what a great multitude of TES players really don't like about this set-up is a waste of time by those with a poor grasp of marketting. Zenimax didn't choose to do a TES IP game without doing a great deal of potential market assessment - and central to this would have been the predicted uptake from established TES players. To believe otherwise would be an exercise in naivety.

    Only a fool would think they wouldn't be worried by a significant groundswell of dissaproval from what constitutes their predicted core customer base against a key game element.

    However, one has to admit, the likes of Funcom have proven that whilst pretending to be commercially astute, games companies are entirely capable of stuffing fingers in their ears and shouting 'la la la' to drown out the obvious.

    The idea however that anything ever changes for the better without a lobby behind it is equally naive.

    There may well be a low chance of success - but there is precisely zero chance without it...

  • mazutmazut SofiaPosts: 885Member Uncommon
    I think this game should be mostly PvE, it just feal right that way.
  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by Yyrkoon_PoM

    I wonder if some of the TES purists have really played all of the TES games?

    - Ted Peterson, Vijay Lakshman and Julian LeFay started working on Arena as a "medieval-style gladiator game."

    Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20070509175304/http://www.elderscrolls.com/tenth_anniv/tenth_anniv-arena.htm

    - Battlespire offered multiplayer gamming in the form of Player vs. Player deathmatches. This was in 1997 so PvP was introduced into Elder Scrolls before DAoC was even in production.

    - Redguard - You were not even allowed to create your own character and played the entire game as Cyrus the Redguard, so I guess you could say that Faction Locking (in this case caracter locking) was introduced into the Elder Scrolls in 1998 again before DAoC.

    Granted that they were both terrible games, but they are part of the ES series.

    This is a good reason to look at the design and wonder if they have made another mistake.

    I mean, you have a highly successful IP and series of games, but 2 games bombed and both deviated too much from expectations. Is that an ulucky co-incidence or a sign indicating what the customer wants and expects?

    As to the exploration, I do not think you could ever explore the whole of Tamriel in any one game as each game was locked to an entire provice or a smaller portion of a province.

    This argument makes me smile because it really is a dead end. You can't argue the logic either way. But the point is, in the other games these other area's didn't exist. In TESO they exist you just can't go there on 1 character but have to create alts. Not having something available because it doesn't exist is different from preventing access. The first is understandable, the second is a choice made by the developer to limit the game.

     

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    So if people could explore the world but PvP only aloud in Cyrodil that would be ok?

    OK? - it depends...

    Better than not being allowed to explore the world and PvP only in Cyrodil - yes.

    Funny thing is though, the designers have built the solution already and are proudly talking about it as part of their hype drive.

    The Megaserver

    They could have had a set of questions such as Open PvP, flagged  PvP, standard PvP and not had to worry about it.

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread PshPosts: 5,498Member Uncommon
    Meh. It's probably gonna be pertty good.
  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,289Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Yyrkoon_PoM

    I wonder if some of the TES purists have really played all of the TES games?

    - Ted Peterson, Vijay Lakshman and Julian LeFay started working on Arena as a "medieval-style gladiator game."

    Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20070509175304/http://www.elderscrolls.com/tenth_anniv/tenth_anniv-arena.htm

    - Battlespire offered multiplayer gamming in the form of Player vs. Player deathmatches. This was in 1997 so PvP was introduced into Elder Scrolls before DAoC was even in production.

    - Redguard - You were not even allowed to create your own character and played the entire game as Cyrus the Redguard, so I guess you could say that Faction Locking (in this case caracter locking) was introduced into the Elder Scrolls in 1998 again before DAoC.

    Granted that they were both terrible games, but they are part of the ES series.

    This is a good reason to look at the design and wonder if they have made another mistake.

    I mean, you have a highly successful IP and series of games, but 2 games bombed and both deviated too much from expectations. Is that an ulucky co-incidence or a sign indicating what the customer wants and expects?

    As to the exploration, I do not think you could ever explore the whole of Tamriel in any one game as each game was locked to an entire provice or a smaller portion of a province.

    This argument makes me smile because it really is a dead end. You can't argue the logic either way. But the point is, in the other games these other area's didn't exist. In TESO they exist you just can't go there on 1 character but have to create alts. Not having something available because it doesn't exist is different from preventing access. The first is understandable, the second is a choice made by the developer to limit the game.

     

    going to the earlier points about games such as battlespire and redguard, myself and i suspect a great many other TES enthusiasts, just didnt buy them, redguard in particular was an utter failure because it just wasnt a TES game despite its intentions, which is probably why such a thing wasnt attempted again, imo its that same failure of thinking that caused Redguard to be such an epic fail that will cause ESO to fail also, it just isnt representative of TES, also have to say, ESO is not a Bethesda game, thats pretty much 2 strikes against it already before we even get to the 'but you must create several alts in order to fully experience the game' rubbish, never mind that the sole function of the game seems to be a pvp feeder for the cyrodil part of it, which from the sound of it will also be a heavily instanced battleground with little consistency from day to day in terms of who you meet there, even the ones purportedly on the same side as you. Even the pvp in the game will be pointless imo, it may be based on DAoC but it sure seems to have ignored why pvp in DAoC even took place. If i had to quantify ESO in any particular way, i'd say it was a bit half a**ed. The other thing is, graphically, it doesnt look like a Bethesda game either, just one look at the races highlights just how much different from TES that ESO is.image

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    So if people could explore the world but PvP only aloud in Cyrodil that would be ok?

    OK? - it depends...

    Better than not being allowed to explore the world and PvP only in Cyrodil - yes.

    Funny thing is though, the designers have built the solution already and are proudly talking about it as part of their hype drive.

    The Megaserver

    They could have had a set of questions such as Open PvP, flagged  PvP, standard PvP and not had to worry about it.

    Which completely ruins the theme of the game, being the faction war.

    The entire game is about the three factions being at war.

    This isnt a single player TES game with tacked on multiplayer, its a fully fledged multiplayer game. And the game will be better for keeping the PvP in the central end game area, with real objectives rather than just ganking newbies.

    Does it impact on single character exploration? Sure, but you are already getting twice as much land mass with a single faction than you are in any other TES game.

    You cannot explore Daggerfall in Skyrim. So all the entitled demands are pretty much irrelevant. If they made a multiplayer version of Skyrim and then blocked off half that content, based on factions, I could see your point. But the sheer size of the territories means you really have no reason to complain.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,289Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    So if people could explore the world but PvP only aloud in Cyrodil that would be ok?

    OK? - it depends...

    Better than not being allowed to explore the world and PvP only in Cyrodil - yes.

    Funny thing is though, the designers have built the solution already and are proudly talking about it as part of their hype drive.

    The Megaserver

    They could have had a set of questions such as Open PvP, flagged  PvP, standard PvP and not had to worry about it.

    Which completely ruins the theme of the game, being the faction war.

    The entire game is about the three factions being at war.

    This isnt a single player TES game with tacked on multiplayer, its a fully fledged multiplayer game. And the game will be better for keeping the PvP in the central end game area, with real objectives rather than just ganking newbies.

    Does it impact on single character exploration? Sure, but you are already getting twice as much land mass with a single faction than you are in any other TES game.

    You cannot explore Daggerfall in Skyrim. So all the entitled demands are pretty much irrelevant. If they made a multiplayer version of Skyrim and then blocked off half that content, based on factions, I could see your point. But the sheer size of the territories means you really have no reason to complain.

    the reason pvp is also kept to the center is because its the most heavily instanced part of the game, every time you leave the area and zone back in again you probably won't even end up on the same instance you were in minutes before, unless of course they allow you to choose which instance zone into, which is unlikely.  Either way without persistancy it all becomes a bit pointless.image

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,981Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by jtcgs

    Poll highly scewed by far too many DaoC fans on this site.

    The only way to get a PURE poll is to got to a TES fansite where there are nothing but TES fans, even if they are also DaoC fans...here, you end up with more DaoC fans that dont play TES at all and dont give an eff as long as they get something close to the same crap they played 12 years ago.

    Pure TES fans are far more pissed off and can be plainly seen on the offical TES forums as well as the mod sites.

    I think on balance that your conclusion is correct.

    But then I expected skewed results - the OWPvP lobby are vocal and unswerving.

    However, even with this consideration, the poll shows consistently less than a third of respondents in clear favour of the current model.

    I am mightily weary of being told that articulating what a great multitude of TES players really don't like about this set-up is a waste of time by those with a poor grasp of marketting. Zenimax didn't choose to do a TES IP game without doing a great deal of potential market assessment - and central to this would have been the predicted uptake from established TES players. To believe otherwise would be an exercise in naivety.

    Only a fool would think they wouldn't be worried by a significant groundswell of dissaproval from what constitutes their predicted core customer base against a key game element.

    However, one has to admit, the likes of Funcom have proven that whilst pretending to be commercially astute, games companies are entirely capable of stuffing fingers in their ears and shouting 'la la la' to drown out the obvious.

    The idea however that anything ever changes for the better without a lobby behind it is equally naive.

    There may well be a low chance of success - but there is precisely zero chance without it...

    Uptick from established TES players, sure, that was definitely a goal, but I suspect those folks are not actually the target market for this title.

    Think about the demographic for a typical TES player, spends large amount of time playing "single player titles such as Skyrim", therefore doesn't spend as much time playing MMORPG's as they could. 

    Contrast that with a MMORPG "purist" such as myself, I bought Skyrim, played 80 hours total (about 50% of that time was AFK I think) and tossed it in the bin and went back to playing hundreds of hours of MMORPG's.

    If you are creating a subscription based MMO where you are hoping to draw in regular amounts of money from the customer, who do you target your design to, people who regularly play (and pay) for MMORPG's (actually, the WOW crowd when you think about it) or people who enjoy buying and playing single player games?

    Seems pretty obvious they decided to cater to the standard MMORPG player, focus on the DAOC aspects of RVR to draw in that player base which has been largely underserved but seems in vogue these days and then finally, draw in any TES fans who enjoy standard MMORPG's.

    TES fans might actually be pretty far down the list, the IP was likely used to generate some name recognition for standard MMORPG fans so they didn't run into the same challenges the Rift team did by having to create their own IP to support their game.

    I will likely buy and play TESO for a period of time because 1st and foremost, it's a MMORPG, 2nd because of its DAOC affiliation, and finally, because I am loosely familiar with the TES IP (lore never being really a big consideration).

    So at the end of the day, they are targeting me, not you, and no, they can't create a title that would please everyone.

    So while I would like to explore the entire world on a single character (which is one big reason why I played DAOC on the FFA PVP server, because you could explore all 3 realms with one character there) it isn't enough of a game breaker for me not to play. 

    There's probably more folks with my mind set of playing MMO's than TES fans who will eschew the title over this one issue.

     

     

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

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by evilastro

    Which completely ruins the theme of the game, being the faction war.

    Strike 1 - TES games are about freedom to play the game how you want.

    The entire game is about the three factions being at war.

    This isnt a single player TES game with tacked on multiplayer, its a fully fledged multiplayer game. And the game will be better for keeping the PvP in the central end game area, with real objectives rather than just ganking newbies.

    Strike 2 - Why do the unimaginative always think that ganking newbies is the only option avaialble outside closeted PvP? As has ALREADY been mentioned, you could have an open world without having open world PvP. The designers have already justified faction blocking exploration by saying no one outside Cyrodil can fight. Why not use the same justification to open the borders and say no one can fight? I will offer a suggestion - lack of imagination and design vison.

    Does it impact on single character exploration? Sure, but you are already getting twice as much land mass with a single faction than you are in any other TES game.

    Strike 3 - Does having open borders affect the PvP? No. So one way has an affect the other doesn't. Why did they choose the way that causes MORE disrurption and complaints?

    You cannot explore Daggerfall in Skyrim. So all the entitled demands are pretty much irrelevant. If they made a multiplayer version of Skyrim and then blocked off half that content, based on factions, I could see your point. But the sheer size of the territories means you really have no reason to complain.

    Strike 4 - Your inability to understand another side of the argument blinds you. You see the point is, they have created Skyrim and blocked off half the content. They have called it TESO.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,447Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    So if people could explore the world but PvP only aloud in Cyrodil that would be ok?

    OK? - it depends...

    Better than not being allowed to explore the world and PvP only in Cyrodil - yes.

    Funny thing is though, the designers have built the solution already and are proudly talking about it as part of their hype drive.

    The Megaserver

    They could have had a set of questions such as Open PvP, flagged  PvP, standard PvP and not had to worry about it.

    Which completely ruins the theme of the game, being the faction war.

    The entire game is about the three factions being at war.

    This isnt a single player TES game with tacked on multiplayer, its a fully fledged multiplayer game. And the game will be better for keeping the PvP in the central end game area, with real objectives rather than just ganking newbies.

    Does it impact on single character exploration? Sure, but you are already getting twice as much land mass with a single faction than you are in any other TES game.

    You cannot explore Daggerfall in Skyrim. So all the entitled demands are pretty much irrelevant. If they made a multiplayer version of Skyrim and then blocked off half that content, based on factions, I could see your point. But the sheer size of the territories means you really have no reason to complain.

    the reason pvp is also kept to the center is because its the most heavily instanced part of the game, every time you leave the area and zone back in again you probably won't even end up on the same instance you were in minutes before, unless of course they allow you to choose which instance zone into, which is unlikely.  Either way without persistancy it all becomes a bit pointless.image

    You made that up lol Devs have told us nothing about the PvP area other then there is one.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Uptick from established TES players, sure, that was definitely a goal, but I suspect those folks are not actually the target market for this title.

    Think about the demographic for a typical TES player, spends large amount of time playing "single player titles such as Skyrim", therefore doesn't spend as much time playing MMORPG's as they could. 

    Contrast that with a MMORPG "purist" such as myself, I bought Skyrim, played 80 hours total (about 50% of that time was AFK I think) and tossed it in the bin and went back to playing hundreds of hours of MMORPG's.

    If you are creating a subscription based MMO where you are hoping to draw in regular amounts of money from the customer, who do you target your design to, people who regularly play (and pay) for MMORPG's (actually, the WOW crowd when you think about it) or people who enjoy buying and playing single player games?

    Seems pretty obvious they decided to cater to the standard MMORPG player, focus on the DAOC aspects of RVR to draw in that player base which has been largely underserved but seems in vogue these days and then finally, draw in any TES fans who enjoy standard MMORPG's.

    TES fans might actually be pretty far down the list, the IP was likely used to generate some name recognition for standard MMORPG fans so they didn't run into the same challenges the Rift team did by having to create their own IP to support their game.

    I will likely buy and play TESO for a period of time because 1st and foremost, it's a MMORPG, 2nd because of its DAOC affiliation, and finally, because I am loosely familiar with the TES IP (lore never being really a big consideration).

    So at the end of the day, they are targeting me, not you, and no, they can't create a title that would please everyone.

    So while I would like to explore the entire world on a single character (which is one big reason why I played DAOC on the FFA PVP server, because you could explore all 3 realms with one character there) it isn't enough of a game breaker for me not to play. 

    There's probably more folks with my mind set of playing MMO's than TES fans who will eschew the title over this one issue.

     

     

    You are probably right.

    And that is probably why people don't want the game to be associated with the TES IP and brand. It is using somethin gpopular to try and sell something on the coattails of it's success. Great marketing (in that I think marketting is basically selling stuff to idiots without the ability to think for themselves) but not great for lovers of the IP.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    You made that up lol Devs have told us nothing about the PvP area other then there is one.

    And that there are things called campaigns which are essentially the same as an instance (apparently 2000 per camoaign with 200 on screen at any time).

    The fact that you can switch campaign (spending some sort of resource or currency, no mention of frequency or cut-off though).

    The fact that campaigns are not linked to megaserver preferences outside Cyrodil so if you left Cyrodil with someone who has made different choices then you on the megaserver you wouldn't be able to link up for PvE.

    But yeah, not much information but more then your current research has found out.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,447Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    You made that up lol Devs have told us nothing about the PvP area other then there is one.

    And that there are things called campaigns which are essentially the same as an instance (apparently 2000 per camoaign with 200 on screen at any time).

    The fact that you can switch campaign (spending some sort of resource or currency, no mention of frequency or cut-off though).

    The fact that campaigns are not linked to megaserver preferences outside Cyrodil so if you left Cyrodil with someone who has made different choices then you on the megaserver you wouldn't be able to link up for PvE.

    But yeah, not much information but more then your current research has found out.

    Thats not  heavily instanced as was stated. Thats about how large a war a server would have. PvP is devided into wars you must sign up for but at this point that area could be one persistent area or instanced. As this will be a RvR style conflict its most likely one persistent area. 


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Thats not  heavily instanced as was stated. Thats about how large a war a server would have. PvP is devided into wars you must sign up for but at this point that area could be one persistant area or instanced. As this will be a RvR style conflict its most likely one persistant area. 

    Well they have stated that it is more like a LOT of persistant area's. There is ony 1 server - the megaserver. So if there are 2,000 people per campaign then that is going to be a lot of different persistant area's to fight in. If they get 1,000,000 people then that will be 500 instances/campaigns.

     

    Edit - The conversations outside campaigns will be fun.

    "Our faction is the best, we kick arse!"

    "What? We have lost 95% of the map!"

    "Huh? We just elected a new emperor!"

    "New Emperor? We barely escaped with our lives, they destroyed us"

    "Destroyed us, hardly anyone fights in Cyrodil"

     

    All those different PvE conversations going on wit hno cohesive, unified idea about WTF is going on in the middle.

  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Thats not  heavily instanced as was stated. Thats about how large a war a server would have. PvP is devided into wars you must sign up for but at this point that area could be one persistant area or instanced. As this will be a RvR style conflict its most likely one persistant area. 

    Well they have stated that it is more like a LOT of persistant area's. There is ony 1 server - the megaserver. So if there are 2,000 people per campaign then that is going to be a lot of different persistant area's to fight in. If they get 1,000,000 people then that will be 500 instances/campaigns.

     

    Edit - The conversations outside campaigns will be fun.

    "Our faction is the best, we kick arse!"

    "What? We have lost 95% of the map!"

    "Huh? We just elected a new emperor!"

    "New Emperor? We barely escaped with our lives, they destroyed us"

    "Destroyed us, hardly anyone fights in Cyrodil"

     

    All those different PvE conversations going on wit hno cohesive, unified idea about WTF is going on in the middle.

    Think the majority of players would perfer it that way.  Most player prefer PvE with some PvP not PvP with some PvE.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,447Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Thats not  heavily instanced as was stated. Thats about how large a war a server would have. PvP is devided into wars you must sign up for but at this point that area could be one persistant area or instanced. As this will be a RvR style conflict its most likely one persistant area. 

    Well they have stated that it is more like a LOT of persistant area's. There is ony 1 server - the megaserver. So if there are 2,000 people per campaign then that is going to be a lot of different persistant area's to fight in. If they get 1,000,000 people then that will be 500 instances/campaigns.

    Your not getting it. Yes we have a mage server but if we didnt and we had 1'000'000 players devided over many servers and each server had its own PvP they all shared, we would not be calling it heavely instanced. Heavely instanced is where an area on one server is devided over and over again when that area is over populated and will keep deviding as long as people try to zone into that area. The PvP area will have a cap and not sharded when more people want in, there will be a Q. 


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Your not getting it. Yes we have a mage server but if we didnt and we had 1'000'000 players devided over many servers and each server had its own PvP they all shared, we would not be calling it heavely instanced. Heavely instanced is where an area on one server is devided over and over again when that area is over populated and will keep deviding as long as people try to zone into that area. The PvP area will have a cap and not sharded when more people want in, there will be a Q. 

    er...

    An instance is an instance. When a campaign gets to 2,000 another instance is created. Sure it is another fight but apparently you can swap campaigns so I don't get your point.

     

    Oh and for someone who argued that there was only info that there is PvP and nothing else you sure seem to be arguing the point over what that PvP is or isn't.

  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    From what I thought there is like A, B, and C PvP senerio's to play....if those are full you get qued until people leave or it finishes...A, B, and C are all different from objective to map.
1568101119
Sign In or Register to comment.