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

1111214161719

Comments

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Do you not see they have 3 sets of fans to deal with...

    1. MMO fans who will want one of the winning models we have come to know and love over the past 15 years and games with PvP in them tend to make more money and the fact its a TES games is not what decides if they will play this game.

    2. TES fans who like to explore and do so without getting attcked by players because thats not in their game they play now.

    3. MMO fans who are TES fans as well, who will nit pick this game to death to try and make it fit their vision.

    So what MMO model that will make them the most money and let the people from box 2 still live in the same pool as everyone else and not hate eachother? Because no MMO that wants to make it, plans on making money just from current MMO fans, they hope to make new MMO fans. 4 Maps, 1 for PvP, 1 for each faction is one that can make group 1 and 2 very happy. Group 3 will never be happy, so why try? There is always going to be people from group 3 upset no matter what way ya do it.

    As suggested in this thread having one open world with PvP everywhere, one open world where you can chose to flag PvP (lots of jurks know how to force you to flag so they can kill you, just stand next to you killing NPCs and one AE spell and you get to kill them, one of many ways to do that) all this would make most players from pool 2 not happy as a new fan and that would make this game a fail. IMO ESO did the right model for the game. We from pool 3 here on this forum are only one third of the target but we think we should be 80% of what decides what goes where. Look at the poll we win!!!!! LOL Noooo sorry. 

    I think they hit the nail on the head for this game with what model they picked and its one on many a MMO forum we PvP fans have been asking for, over and over again. Every new 2 faction game that comes out, lots of us keep saying... "Needs a 3rd faction. Pls look back to DAoC they did it right!!!" I think this will pull lots of people from pool 1 as well.

    If they try and follow the 3rd pool, we will have a new game every week!!!! 

    4. DAoC fans who will take things out of context to try and defend their little nugget of happiness.

    5. Suckers who blindly flock to the next big MMO and throw money at it until they've filled the hole in their meaningless lives.

    Seriously, some of you're descriptions sound about as retarded as 4 & 5.  TES fans do not want the game designed to our vision but we want ESO to be in TES' vision.  I am only speaking my mind about what defines TES for me.

    What does this have to do with my right to make a judgement on ESO with the information we have so far?

    Long way of saying, your and my input mean very little. ESO devs have spent a lot of time working out what model will get them the most money and make the game that will net them the most fans.

     No, they did not.

    Picking the DaoC model is not going to net you the most money or fans. DaoC was the 4th most popular MMO of its time behind EQ1, UO and SWG.

    UO and SWG had OPEN WORLDS, EQ1 had OPEN FACTIONS. DaoC was so UNPOPULAR with its PvP that how many games copied its closed factions area build? Well? HOW MANY? Where are the millions of players that long for segregation? There arent.

    Yeah...they chose to make TESO this way because they DONT KNOW HOW TO MAKE IT ANY OTHER WAY...not even Raph Koster and his BS ideas were so limited that he made every MMO he worked on the SAME WAY. Just what we need, another MMO made by people that cant come up with new ideas right...

    The model that is going to net you the most money and fans is to make the game as close to the IP as possible with an MMO...open world, open factions and the ability to PvP anywhere...no, NO I DID NOT SAY FFA PVP. A war is only a war if it can be on your front doorstep, not in some magical neverland behind an invisible wall.

    “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

  • Monstre0auSMonstre0auS SydneyPosts: 46Member

    I was going to diatribe about simplicity and people either being able to see a valid argument, or their inability to accept it but I'll not engage complicity in mud-flinging. Instead I'll say this.

    I am a fan of multi-coloured replies, as it makes it easy to break down arguments and whether or not the response is related to it. If anyone bashes on this style, they'll have me to deal with! image

    As for colours tasting like rainbows, Skittles b***h... (Jokes image)

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,456Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by sapphen
     

    Long way of saying, your and my input mean very little. ESO devs have spent a lot of time working out what model will get them the most money and make the game that will net them the most fans.

     No, they did not.

    Picking the DaoC model is not going to net you the most money or fans. DaoC was the 4th most popular MMO of its time behind EQ1, UO and SWG.

    UO and SWG had OPEN WORLDS, EQ1 had OPEN FACTIONS. DaoC was so UNPOPULAR with its PvP that how many games copied its closed factions area build? Well? HOW MANY? Where are the millions of players that long for segregation? There arent.

    Yeah...they chose to make TESO this way because they DONT KNOW HOW TO MAKE IT ANY OTHER WAY...not even Raph Koster and his BS ideas were so limited that he made every MMO he worked on the SAME WAY. Just what we need, another MMO made by people that cant come up with new ideas right...

    The model that is going to net you the most money and fans is to make the game as close to the IP as possible with an MMO...open world, open factions and the ability to PvP anywhere...no, NO I DID NOT SAY FFA PVP. A war is only a war if it can be on your front doorstep, not in some magical neverland behind an invisible wall.

    Sure... I will take 4th and wont argue that even if I dont agree. How many SWG open world MMOs have been made? How many WoW and EQ1 clones have we had? Many and many. How many have copied the DAoC model? None, not even Warhammer that was to be DAoC2 did. Every PvP game thats come out has been compaired to DAoC and when failed its been said many a time on every MMO forum, "Should have taken one for DAoC pages." Its time, its due time someone said, you know... there is lots of DAoC fans. Let give them what they have been asking for. There are lots of us =-) CU is not doing it. Its just a battleground and not a real MMO. This TES fan, that is also a DAoC fan and many like me will be very happy!!!!! 4th best is a good place to be in this market over filled with the other models. Right now... no one is doing the DAoC thing, not even DAoC as its not been updated sinse like 2003.


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


  • Monstre0auSMonstre0auS SydneyPosts: 46Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Do you not see they have 3 sets of fans to deal with...

    1. MMO fans who will want one of the winning models we have come to know and love over the past 15 years and games with PvP in them tend to make more money and the fact its a TES games is not what decides if they will play this game.

    2. TES fans who like to explore and do so without getting attcked by players because thats not in their game they play now.

    3. MMO fans who are TES fans as well, who will nit pick this game to death to try and make it fit their vision.

    So what MMO model that will make them the most money and let the people from box 2 still live in the same pool as everyone else and not hate eachother? Because no MMO that wants to make it, plans on making money just from current MMO fans, they hope to make new MMO fans. 4 Maps, 1 for PvP, 1 for each faction is one that can make group 1 and 2 very happy. Group 3 will never be happy, so why try? There is always going to be people from group 3 upset no matter what way ya do it.

    As suggested in this thread having one open world with PvP everywhere, one open world where you can chose to flag PvP (lots of jurks know how to force you to flag so they can kill you, just stand next to you killing NPCs and one AE spell and you get to kill them, one of many ways to do that) all this would make most players from pool 2 not happy as a new fan and that would make this game a fail. IMO ESO did the right model for the game. We from pool 3 here on this forum are only one third of the target but we think we should be 80% of what decides what goes where. Look at the poll we win!!!!! LOL Noooo sorry. 

    I think they hit the nail on the head for this game with what model they picked and its one on many a MMO forum we PvP fans have been asking for, over and over again. Every new 2 faction game that comes out, lots of us keep saying... "Needs a 3rd faction. Pls look back to DAoC they did it right!!!" I think this will pull lots of people from pool 1 as well.

    If they try and follow the 3rd pool, we will have a new game every week!!!! 

    4. DAoC fans who will take things out of context to try and defend their little nugget of happiness.

    5. Suckers who blindly flock to the next big MMO and throw money at it until they've filled the hole in their meaningless lives.

    Seriously, some of you're descriptions sound about as retarded as 4 & 5.  TES fans do not want the game designed to our vision but we want ESO to be in TES' vision.  I am only speaking my mind about what defines TES for me.

    What does this have to do with my right to make a judgement on ESO with the information we have so far?

    Long way of saying, your and my input mean very little. ESO devs have spent a lot of time working out what model will get them the most money and make the game that will net them the most fans.

     No, they did not.

    Picking the DaoC model is not going to net you the most money or fans. DaoC was the 4th most popular MMO of its time behind EQ1, UO and SWG.

    UO and SWG had OPEN WORLDS, EQ1 had OPEN FACTIONS. DaoC was so UNPOPULAR with its PvP that how many games copied its closed factions area build? Well? HOW MANY? Where are the millions of players that long for segregation? There arent.

    Yeah...they chose to make TESO this way because they DONT KNOW HOW TO MAKE IT ANY OTHER WAY...not even Raph Koster and his BS ideas were so limited that he made every MMO he worked on the SAME WAY. Just what we need, another MMO made by people that cant come up with new ideas right...

    The model that is going to net you the most money and fans is to make the game as close to the IP as possible with an MMO...open world, open factions and the ability to PvP anywhere...no, NO I DID NOT SAY FFA PVP. A war is only a war if it can be on your front doorstep, not in some magical neverland behind an invisible wall.

    Red: Really? I had this argument with you in another post. A war does not have to be on your front doorstep in order for it to exist. Australia in WWI never had threat of invasion, yet we went to war. In WWII, Australia was bombed in Darwin (the NORTHERN MOST tip of Australia, closest to our neighbours) long after we were already in Europe fighting. If a war is at your front doorstep, it doesn't mean it wasn't being waged beforehand, in some magical neverland behind an invisible wall (which describes censorship and properganda throughtout wars in history btw), it just means your now seriously close to losing that war.

    Blue: Give the dev team at Zenimax some credit. If they truly didn't know any other way to make it other than to clone DAoC, then why didn't they simply chose to clone another game more successful? As you've so clearly demonstrated, DAoC was actually the 4th most popular title from that era to chose from.

    They made a design decision that would fit in with lore that was sort of already pre-established (atleast that's the jist of what I've read from media and other forums), you know, like a plausability of history? If that history stated that Russians couldn't freely walk through Germany during WWII, then why would we expect the Altmer to be waltzing unaccosted through Skyrim?

    The answer is, because that's what you want the lore to be, and that my friend is a very subjective interprepation of TES history.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,456Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by sapphen
     

    Long way of saying, your and my input mean very little. ESO devs have spent a lot of time working out what model will get them the most money and make the game that will net them the most fans.

     No, they did not.

    Picking the DaoC model is not going to net you the most money or fans. DaoC was the 4th most popular MMO of its time behind EQ1, UO and SWG.

    UO and SWG had OPEN WORLDS, EQ1 had OPEN FACTIONS. DaoC was so UNPOPULAR with its PvP that how many games copied its closed factions area build? Well? HOW MANY? Where are the millions of players that long for segregation? There arent.

    Yeah...they chose to make TESO this way because they DONT KNOW HOW TO MAKE IT ANY OTHER WAY...not even Raph Koster and his BS ideas were so limited that he made every MMO he worked on the SAME WAY. Just what we need, another MMO made by people that cant come up with new ideas right...

    The model that is going to net you the most money and fans is to make the game as close to the IP as possible with an MMO...open world, open factions and the ability to PvP anywhere...no, NO I DID NOT SAY FFA PVP. A war is only a war if it can be on your front doorstep, not in some magical neverland behind an invisible wall.

    Sure... I will take 4th and wont argue that even if I dont agree. How many SWG open world MMOs have been made? How many WoW and EQ1 clones have we had? Many and many. How many have copied the DAoC model? None, not even Warhammer that was to be DAoC2 did. Every PvP game thats come out has been compaired to DAoC and when failed its been said many a time on every MMO forum, "Should have taken one for DAoC pages." Its time, its due time someone said, you know... there is lots of DAoC fans. Let give them what they have been asking for. There are lots of us =-) CU is not doing it. Its just a battleground and not a real MMO. This TES fan, that is also a DAoC fan and many like me will be very happy!!!!! 4th best is a good place to be in this market over filled with the other models. Right now... no one is doing the DAoC thing, not even DAoC as its not been updated sinse like 2003.

    P.S. How would you like it? Like WoW where factions can just walk into another factions area to do nothing more then look around? In games like that, how often did people really do that? Once in a blue moon and that poor lone guy trying to pop a map gets killed by 15 players because he was alone? Thats ground breaking content, map popping. Have a few areas where both factions quest side by side? How well would that fit lore? I hate you and want to kill you, but sinse you are here, can you help me kill this monseter? As I have said before, that just seems to water down the content and story.


    =-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

    P.S. How would you like it? Like WoW where factions can just walk into another factions area to do nothing more then look around? In games like that, how often did people really do that? Once in a blue moon and that poor lone guy trying to pop a map gets killed by 15 players because he was alone? Thats ground breaking content, map popping. Have a few areas where both factions quest side by side? How well would that fit lore? I hate you and want to kill you, but sinse you are here, can you help me kill this monseter? As I have said before, that just seems to water down the content and story.

    What if you were not part of a faction till you CHOSE to be part of one. And when you DID choose to be part of one then hostile factions would not let you into their region. and until you CHOOSE to join a faction you could explore the world as you see fit and quest where you see fit. You could even flag certain quests as giving a faction bonus so that you wouldn't do quests for other factions.

    Wouldn't that be more realistic, fit the lore better and be more in line with a TES game?

    Of course none of that is possible because their design has remove any CHOICE or at least reduced it to the dumbest level. Might as well have an 'I win' button for the level on intelligence they seem to have their target audiance inhabiting.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,456Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    P.S. How would you like it? Like WoW where factions can just walk into another factions area to do nothing more then look around? In games like that, how often did people really do that? Once in a blue moon and that poor lone guy trying to pop a map gets killed by 15 players because he was alone? Thats ground breaking content, map popping. Have a few areas where both factions quest side by side? How well would that fit lore? I hate you and want to kill you, but sinse you are here, can you help me kill this monseter? As I have said before, that just seems to water down the content and story.

    What if you were not part of a faction till you CHOSE to be part of one. And when you DID choose to be part of one then hostile factions would not let you into their region. and until you CHOOSE to join a faction you could explore the world as you see fit and quest where you see fit. You could even flag certain quests as giving a faction bonus so that you wouldn't do quests for other factions.

    Wouldn't that be more realistic, fit the lore better and be more in line with a TES game?

    Of course none of that is possible because their design has remove any CHOICE or at least reduced it to the dumbest level. Might as well have an 'I win' button for the level on intelligence they seem to have their target audiance inhabiting.

    So we are back to ripping up the world the ESO devs have made. Back tracking in development with a game thats 6 years in the works? Cool idea but as I said in my last post, been done, been done lots. Know what has not been done? DAoC model. We have had many a game do what you are asking for, we had many a WoW, EQ1, SWG clones. On and on but DAoC fans have not had any MMO follow what made DAoC work so well. As I said, not even Warhammer did. They had to pick a model, being unique over the past 10 years has failed more times then not, other then EVE. So they picked one and this is what we have. About time.


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


  • rygard49rygard49 Huntington Beach, CAPosts: 975Member
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    My stand is simple, I agree with the direction of ESO. I will not stand by as haters go on and on and make a poop storm that has any chance to break this game. Come up with a good idea I would be glad to say so but at this point there has been none.

    I agree, your stand IS simple;

    Simple in understanding. Simple in execution. Simple in reasoning.

    As simple as thinking that any change to what YOU want will 'break' the game.

    Yes - I would characterise your point of view as 'simple'.

    Quite so...

    ... and perhaps in future you could refrain from giving everyone a multicoloured dayglow headache with your 'classy' posts.

    It draws attention to be sure - which is presumably what you want them to do - but it does smack of style over substance...

    ... in a BIG way...

    I picture you with an English accent, pipe in hand with a red smoking jacket. Sitting in front a great many leather-bound books with long, complicated titles, all of which you tell people you've read cover to cover and, honestly, have to question the author's understanding of the topic. Poo-pooing and tut-tuting those without the intellectual insight to simply agree with your point of view, and insulting their pathetic attempts at 'proper' discourse.

    Ah yes, those silly peons. Their ideas have no basis in any logic that you prescribe to, and they refuse to acquiesce to your genius. You must call them simple, compare their intellects to less than that of a village idiot, and disdain them for their lack of imagination. They won't know how truly stupid they are until someone tells them, and that burden may very well have to fall on your shoulders, you brilliant, insightful beast.

    Tip of the cap, old chum.

    But seriously, you can have a discussion here and not call people stupid for their ideas and opinions. Calling someone out for organinzing their post with color coding is beneath you.

  • KaosProphetKaosProphet Edmonton, ABPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by sapphen

    I like this thread because it calls ESO out for what it is.  I don't care what the developers are trying to feed us, they never intended to make a TES MMO (originally tab targeting, no proper FPV,  no faction choice and limited exploration is not TES).  They wanted to make money by creating a generic MMO with DAoC RvR in a TES skin.

    You know what else is not TES?

    Multiplayer.

    Just because it's going to be a MMO doesn't mean they have to forfeit important elements from the series.

    Once you start mucking about with some of the basics (like going from single player to massively-multiplyer,) everything else has to at least be open for evaluation.  Otherwise you risk jamming things that don't work well together into the same package, and ending up with shit.  (Like Morrowind's combat.  Blech.)

    I don't like some of the decisions they made either, but I understand why they were made.  BethSoft built a studio around a couple of DAOC guys to make an MMO, and the guys they hired went to what they knew instead of trying to muck about with systems they weren't familiar with.

  • KaosProphetKaosProphet Edmonton, ABPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    P.S. How would you like it? Like WoW where factions can just walk into another factions area to do nothing more then look around? In games like that, how often did people really do that? Once in a blue moon and that poor lone guy trying to pop a map gets killed by 15 players because he was alone? Thats ground breaking content, map popping. Have a few areas where both factions quest side by side? How well would that fit lore? I hate you and want to kill you, but sinse you are here, can you help me kill this monseter? As I have said before, that just seems to water down the content and story.

    What if you were not part of a faction till you CHOSE to be part of one. And when you DID choose to be part of one then hostile factions would not let you into their region. and until you CHOOSE to join a faction you could explore the world as you see fit and quest where you see fit. You could even flag certain quests as giving a faction bonus so that you wouldn't do quests for other factions.

    Wouldn't that be more realistic, fit the lore better and be more in line with a TES game?

    Not really.  There's a big war going on, after all, and the feudal lords of comparable periods weren't at all shy about conscription or selective racism.  Even if this is ES rather than Medieval Earth, there's enough cultural echo to justify going either way on that.

    As for TES games:  Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim all have the common starting ground of "you're a prisoner, roped into a mythic role you never chose."  Where you go from there is up to you; you could ignore it entirely if you wanted, just like you can ignore the faction wars.  But you couldn't avoid being Nerevarine, or Dragonborn, or the face from Septim's dreams, and if you went any place where that mattered, you were reminded of that role.

    Of course none of that is possible because their design has remove any CHOICE or at least reduced it to the dumbest level. Might as well have an 'I win' button for the level on intelligence they seem to have their target audiance inhabiting.

    The petulance of that remark doesn't exactly speak against that view.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

     

     

     

     

    My stand is simple, I agree with the direction of ESO. I will not stand by as haters go on and on and make a poop storm that has any chance to break this game. Come up with a good idea I would be glad to say so but at this point there has been none.

    I agree, your stand IS simple;

    Simple in understanding. Simple in execution. Simple in reasoning.

    As simple as thinking that any change to what YOU want will 'break' the game.

    Yes - I would characterise your point of view as 'simple'.

    Quite so...

    ... and perhaps in future you could refrain from giving everyone a multicoloured dayglow headache with your 'classy' posts.

    It draws attention to be sure - which is presumably what you want them to do - but it does smack of style over substance...

    ... in a BIG way...

    If you dont get each color was in response to what I highlighted in your reply there is no hope for you. If my support of the game shows how simple minded I am, then so must all the devs making ESO. I can live with that, what do you do for a living? They do more creative projects in a day then most do in a month. 

    Of course I got that - but you didn't understand my response - I never criticised you answering each point in turn - I criticised how you did it.

    A multicoloured melange which is more successful at inducing a headache than clear communication.

    ... and I don't discuss what I do for a living with just anyone...

    My wife is a developer, and something of a gamer, so I don't need nebulous unspecific comments on what they do, I know enough to speak with at least some confidence on the generalities.

    It is what gives me the ability to know the difference between an element of a games development made because of strategic choice, and that which is a capability limitation which must be worked to or around.

    There is a great deal of crapola posted on these forums by people who don't know their ass from their elbows as far as what developers can do, and what they are told to do because a games company has made a design choice.

    Not surprisingly, most of this 'confusion' seems to be in favour of the interests of the person posting, rather than the facts.

    In many cases, developers try to achieve the goals they are set by management, who, as the endless conversations I hear attest to (and we have had enough of them around the dinner table from more than one company...) complain endlessly about the lack of understanding of the technical stuff by the very same.

    Only the very best companies and teams have anything like the level of reiterative and cooperative working regimes which allow understanding 'in the round' on every related part of a project. It is human nature to turtle and 'stick to your bit' - especially amongst dev's , who are in many cases not the gregarious and extrovert type...

    In short - many of the things the 'mob' think are design limitations there is no way to change, or no way to do, or now way to resolve, are nothing of the kind - they were choices made at conception or interim strategic meetings, and as such, CAN BE CHANGED.

    Sure - some issues can't be changed easily due to the game having been through so many builds that there is too much interelated coding. But it is only rarely that it cannot be done - it is far more common that it is judged to be too expensive or inconvenient.

  • NeherunNeherun St. MichelPosts: 278Member

    So, we have over ten pages of arguing about a spin-off game? (yes its a god damn spin-off.) How about we wait and actually see what it is like before actually arguing about the game? Not to mention half of the posts are obviously from people who have read shit about the game.

     

    image

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by Neherun

    So, we have over ten pages of arguing about a spin-off game? (yes its a god damn spin-off.) How about we wait and actually see what it is like before actually arguing about the game? Not to mention half of the posts are obviously from people who have read shit about the game.

     

    Why do we need to wait for the game to argue about facts already established by Zenimax?

    At least you aren't amongst the critics who think it's pointless talking about it because it won't change anything as it's already too late!

    You don't want to read ten pages, then read something else...

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by sapphen

    I like this thread because it calls ESO out for what it is.  I don't care what the developers are trying to feed us, they never intended to make a TES MMO (originally tab targeting, no proper FPV,  no faction choice and limited exploration is not TES).  They wanted to make money by creating a generic MMO with DAoC RvR in a TES skin.

    You know what else is not TES?

    Multiplayer.

    Just because it's going to be a MMO doesn't mean they have to forfeit important elements from the series.

    Once you start mucking about with some of the basics (like going from single player to massively-multiplyer,) everything else has to at least be open for evaluation.  Otherwise you risk jamming things that don't work well together into the same package, and ending up with shit.  (Like Morrowind's combat.  Blech.)

    I don't like some of the decisions they made either, but I understand why they were made.  BethSoft built a studio around a couple of DAOC guys to make an MMO, and the guys they hired went to what they knew instead of trying to muck about with systems they weren't familiar with.

    Then they should've done it with a new IP and then told everyone "from the creator's of Elder Scrolls".  Then they could muck up whatever they wanted without trying to work around systems they are not familar with.  They can't dismiss TES like it has no weight, it has been redefining the RPG genre for years.  Many MMOs have been inspired by TES (including WoW), there is SO MUCH MORE to the basics than going from single player to MMO.

    This is fail / fail for everyone invovled; fail for the fans of TES expecting an acutal TES game, fail for MMO players who was wanting something fresh, and a fail for the RvR fans who actually thinks ESO could magically recreate DAoC.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by rygard49
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    My stand is simple, I agree with the direction of ESO. I will not stand by as haters go on and on and make a poop storm that has any chance to break this game. Come up with a good idea I would be glad to say so but at this point there has been none.

    I agree, your stand IS simple;

    Simple in understanding. Simple in execution. Simple in reasoning.

    As simple as thinking that any change to what YOU want will 'break' the game.

    Yes - I would characterise your point of view as 'simple'.

    Quite so...

    ... and perhaps in future you could refrain from giving everyone a multicoloured dayglow headache with your 'classy' posts.

    It draws attention to be sure - which is presumably what you want them to do - but it does smack of style over substance...

    ... in a BIG way...

    I picture you with an English accent, pipe in hand with a red smoking jacket. Sitting in front a great many leather-bound books with long, complicated titles, all of which you tell people you've read cover to cover and, honestly, have to question the author's understanding of the topic. Poo-pooing and tut-tuting those without the intellectual insight to simply agree with your point of view, and insulting their pathetic attempts at 'proper' discourse.

    Ah yes, those silly peons. Their ideas have no basis in any logic that you prescribe to, and they refuse to acquiesce to your genius. You must call them simple, compare their intellects to less than that of a village idiot, and disdain them for their lack of imagination. They won't know how truly stupid they are until someone tells them, and that burden may very well have to fall on your shoulders, you brilliant, insightful beast.

    Tip of the cap, old chum.

    But seriously, you can have a discussion here and not call people stupid for their ideas and opinions. Calling someone out for organinzing their post with color coding is beneath you.

    Apart from the stereotyping you begin with, I really thought you were on to something as far as good debating positions go - right up until the bit where you switched from having a go at my position and what you characterised as my approach - to saying I insulted Nanfoodle.

    I never called Nanfoodle simple, or accused Nanfoodle of being stupid. I referred at all times, as I always aim to do, to the characteristics of what was said, not by whom it was said.

    Additionally, in arguing my corner I always argue strongly for what I think is right. I get it in the neck for doing so, but I don't flame, rage or casually insult as others seem to think is acceptable.

    I often find the position taken by posters to be based on prejudice and supposition, assumption and misunderstanding - or just plain lack of appreciation of the full consequences what has already been claimed or posted.

    I am not shy about saying so. Should I merely curtail my activities by reducing the word count in the traditonal fashion? Labels are so dismissive don't you think - especially as they mean different things to different people?

    But hey - they do save time when dealing with 'Carebears' 'No-Lifers' and 'Mouth Breathers' huh!?

    It is your perspective that I am what you characterise me as. It is your supposition alone which leads to this conclusion.

    I for one try to avoid putting words in mouths of others, describing the unuttered thoughts in their heads or ascribing characteristics to them that THEY haven't made abundantly clear.

    I would recommend the approach to everyone.

    As far as the colour coding is concerned - I asked Nanfoodle not to do it again because I and others find it irritating to the eye - I made damn sure I didn't state what I thought of the psychological make-up of the kind of person who feels a desire to do it...

    ... that would have been breaking my own rules - as it isn't something Nanfoodle has yet felt the need to make himself clear about.

  • KaosProphetKaosProphet Edmonton, ABPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by sapphen

    I like this thread because it calls ESO out for what it is.  I don't care what the developers are trying to feed us, they never intended to make a TES MMO (originally tab targeting, no proper FPV,  no faction choice and limited exploration is not TES).  They wanted to make money by creating a generic MMO with DAoC RvR in a TES skin.

    You know what else is not TES?

    Multiplayer.

    Just because it's going to be a MMO doesn't mean they have to forfeit important elements from the series.

    Once you start mucking about with some of the basics (like going from single player to massively-multiplyer,) everything else has to at least be open for evaluation.  Otherwise you risk jamming things that don't work well together into the same package, and ending up with shit.  (Like Morrowind's combat.  Blech.)

    I don't like some of the decisions they made either, but I understand why they were made.  BethSoft built a studio around a couple of DAOC guys to make an MMO, and the guys they hired went to what they knew instead of trying to muck about with systems they weren't familiar with.

    Then they should've done it with a new IP and then told everyone "from the creator's of Elder Scrolls".  Then they could muck up whatever they wanted without trying to work around systems they are not familar with.  They can't dismiss TES like it has no weight, it has been redefining the RPG genre for years. 

    And redefining itself in the process.  Or did you miss the evolution between Morrowind and Skyrim? 

     

    Many MMOs have been inspired by TES (including WoW), there is SO MUCH MORE to the basics than going from single player to MMO.

    This is fail / fail for everyone invovled; fail for the fans of TES expecting an acutal TES game, fail for MMO players who was wanting something fresh, and a fail for the RvR fans who actually thinks ESO could magically recreate DAoC.

    Every one of those people, sound like inflexible twats I'd rather not play with in the first place.  So I guess that's something of a win for me?

  • KaosProphetKaosProphet Edmonton, ABPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by Caliburn101

    I for one try to avoid putting words in mouths of others, describing the unuttered thoughts in their heads or ascribing characteristics to them that THEY haven't made abundantly clear.

    As far as the colour coding is concerned - I asked Nanfoodle not to do it again because I and others find it irritating to the eye - I made damn sure I didn't state what I thought of the psychological make-up of the kind of person who feels a desire to do it...

     

    "It draws attention to be sure - which is presumably what you want them to do - but it does smack of style over substance...

    ... in a BIG way..."

     

    Being outside your head, it's really hard not to interpret those sentences as having done exactly what you say you're trying to avoid. 

    I don't question your intent.  Merely your execution. 

  • Monstre0auSMonstre0auS SydneyPosts: 46Member
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by Caliburn101

    I for one try to avoid putting words in mouths of others, describing the unuttered thoughts in their heads or ascribing characteristics to them that THEY haven't made abundantly clear.

    As far as the colour coding is concerned - I asked Nanfoodle not to do it again because I and others find it irritating to the eye - I made damn sure I didn't state what I thought of the psychological make-up of the kind of person who feels a desire to do it...

     

    "It draws attention to be sure - which is presumably what you want them to do - but it does smack of style over substance...

    ... in a BIG way..."

     

    Being outside your head, it's really hard not to interpret those sentences as having done exactly what you say you're trying to avoid. 

    I don't question your intent.  Merely your execution. 

    I concur with KaosProphet; what you're saying has an implied context of superiority to those your saying it to. Every time I've read one of your posts in the later part of this thread, with a predefined writing style yet always an overbearing sense of egotistic elitism, I couldn't help but voice it in the style that Rygard49 gave a description to.

    Again, I'm not questioning your intent, but I'll be damned if your execution didn't smack of backhanded dasterdliness.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by Monstre0auS
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by Caliburn101

    I for one try to avoid putting words in mouths of others, describing the unuttered thoughts in their heads or ascribing characteristics to them that THEY haven't made abundantly clear.

    As far as the colour coding is concerned - I asked Nanfoodle not to do it again because I and others find it irritating to the eye - I made damn sure I didn't state what I thought of the psychological make-up of the kind of person who feels a desire to do it...

     

    "It draws attention to be sure - which is presumably what you want them to do - but it does smack of style over substance...

    ... in a BIG way..."

     

    Being outside your head, it's really hard not to interpret those sentences as having done exactly what you say you're trying to avoid. 

    I don't question your intent.  Merely your execution. 

    I concur with KaosProphet; what you're saying has an implied context of superiority to those your saying it to. Every time I've read one of your posts in the later part of this thread, with a predefined writing style yet always an overbearing sense of egotistic elitism, I couldn't help but voice it in the style that Rygard49 gave a description to.

    Again, I'm not questioning your intent, but I'll be damned if your execution didn't smack of backhanded dasterdliness.

    Of course I am being critical.

    As for the 'dastardliness' of it - let me put this to you...

    In the face of a constant stream of blatant insults mixed with deliberate or unwitting recharacterisations of what you say, what is wrong with implying the people doing to you lack the ability to do otherwise?

    The only alternative is that they are doing it on purpose - and I have implied this at times too.

    Which of these two root causes is worse?

    Take your pick... but I always try to have the debate first...

    If you want to call me a dastard, then please review my posts with people who confine themselves to the debate, and not the kind of behaviour demonstrated above.

    You will find my posts as respectful as you might wish to encounter yourself - as indeed I hope you find this response.

    That's because the two of you, whilst fundamentaly questioning my motives, and suggesting I might be something really quite unpleasant, did so in a mature and constructively critical way. It's truly refreshing to see it I can tell you...

    The central truth of human communication over the millenia as been that - 'you reap what you sow'. That this principle can be ignored by 'generation troll' is I believe an unfortunate result of the period of adjustment necessary to adapt the rules to new media.

    Bad arguments need shooting down; rude and lazy debaters need challenging - these are my opinions.

    Not everyone would agree - but that's their perogative...

    ... but I'm happy to listen to their point of view if they can put it across without resorting to.... well, pick a random thread and read for long enough... you'll find 'it'.

  • AnakamiAnakami BielefeldPosts: 103Member

    I have been thinking a while about this topic and tried to figure out where exactly my own issues with the path the developers have taken lie, and indeed, it is something like the title of this thread implies. It is about the general vibe of the game world using a war setting like this AvA with certain races locked into such an alliance.

    Because, when I played the Elder Scrolls games, there was always conflict and strife, which is necessary for a good story, but ... and it is a pretty big but, it was never about racial wars, or nations vs nations. It was never about fanning the flames of hate towards another race or to instill pride for your homeland. You could have that of course, by roleplaying a character like that, but it was your choice to do so and the game supported you in that choice (like ambushing imperials whenever you meet them, or refusing to speak with any elven type, etc.)

    I enjoyed the multi cultural aspect of the region that was featured in the games, where one race was of course predominant, but also had all the other cultures present in one way or another. Daggerfall you even had most of Tamriel featured, and tbh I had hoped TESO would have been a bit like Daggerfall, but I am ok with a more themepark approach if it is done well.

    What I am not ok with is killing the spirit of TES. As much as I try to work my mind around the design decisions they have taken, I just cannot make it feel like it is the ES I have come to love and appreciate. What it does feel like is Albion, Hibernia and Midgard all over again. I loved that setting, I loved DAoC, and within that setting faction/realm pride and supporting race hostility made a lot of sense to me. It just does not work nor belong in Elder Scrolls.

    What I do think belongs to TES as a key defining feature is walking into any major town within a region and into a tavern, and seeing lots of people from all the different regions of Tamriel. Chatting with each other, drinking, fighting, all the good stuff. There will still be animosity between different races, maybe even outright hatred, but it will not be forced upon you and also not encouraged at every opportunity.

    I would like to be able to choose a faction based on their motives, their agenda, and whether I personally like it or not. Race should not be a deciding factor there. I remember becoming very hostile towards Dunmer in Morrowind, not because I was supposed to feel like that but rather because I absolutely hated their stance towards slavery. I then made it my own motivation to kill all those Dunmer slavers and free the lantation workers whenever I could.

    My motivation to join the House that was mainly responsible for that slave practice was because in the end I could abolish it. That is how you bring players to a faction and make them feel about it. Not this "Uh...you fight with us because...because...uhm...and you hate these other races because....because...oh screw this, who cares, it's WAAAAAR"

    I think what most need to understand is that the general uproar from the fans of TES is not because they decided to make an MMO out of it. Or use some mechanics from DAoC. It is in fact a more personal, call it emotional thing. It is because the developers seem to have brute forced certain MMO/DAoC elements into a beloved franchise with an established lore/feeling, thereby basically killing that unique feel/spirit that most have come to like about this game series. Or, to word it more poetically, they have stomped on our dreams.

    I am severely disappointed right now, because they could have made this a great game without the need for so many restrictions and unnecessary lore altering to explain away certain aspects or mechanics that make no sense at all in TES. So much wasted potential, it is such a shame. I will still watch this game develop and probably even try it out, just to see if there is the chance that I can at least get a glimpse of the greatness that I usually encounter when imagining the world of TES.

    As it is right now, I really do not know what kind of game this is nor if it is DAoC or TES.

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    Originally posted by Anakami

    I have been thinking a while about this topic and tried to figure out where exactly my own issues with the path the developers have taken lie, and indeed, it is something like the title of this thread implies. It is about the general vibe of the game world using a war setting like this AvA with certain races locked into such an alliance.

    Because, when I played the Elder Scrolls games, there was always conflict and strife, which is necessary for a good story, but ... and it is a pretty big but, it was never about racial wars, or nations vs nations. It was never about fanning the flames of hate towards another race or to instill pride for your homeland. You could have that of course, by roleplaying a character like that, but it was your choice to do so and the game supported you in that choice (like ambushing imperials whenever you meet them, or refusing to speak with any elven type, etc.)

    I enjoyed the multi cultural aspect of the region that was featured in the games, where one race was of course predominant, but also had all the other cultures present in one way or another. Daggerfall you even had most of Tamriel featured, and tbh I had hoped TESO would have been a bit like Daggerfall, but I am ok with a more themepark approach if it is done well.

    What I am not ok with is killing the spirit of TES. As much as I try to work my mind around the design decisions they have taken, I just cannot make it feel like it is the ES I have come to love and appreciate. What it does feel like is Albion, Hibernia and Midgard all over again. I loved that setting, I loved DAoC, and within that setting faction/realm pride and supporting race hostility made a lot of sense to me. It just does not work nor belong in Elder Scrolls.

    What I do think belongs to TES as a key defining feature is walking into any major town within a region and into a tavern, and seeing lots of people from all the different regions of Tamriel. Chatting with each other, drinking, fighting, all the good stuff. There will still be animosity between different races, maybe even outright hatred, but it will not be forced upon you and also not encouraged at every opportunity.

    I would like to be able to choose a faction based on their motives, their agenda, and whether I personally like it or not. Race should not be a deciding factor there. I remember becoming very hostile towards Dunmer in Morrowind, not because I was supposed to feel like that but rather because I absolutely hated their stance towards slavery. I then made it my own motivation to kill all those Dunmer slavers and free the lantation workers whenever I could.

    My motivation to join the House that was mainly responsible for that slave practice was because in the end I could abolish it. That is how you bring players to a faction and make them feel about it. Not this "Uh...you fight with us because...because...uhm...and you hate these other races because....because...oh screw this, who cares, it's WAAAAAR"

    I think what most need to understand is that the general uproar from the fans of TES is not because they decided to make an MMO out of it. Or use some mechanics from DAoC. It is in fact a more personal, call it emotional thing. It is because the developers seem to have brute forced certain MMO/DAoC elements into a beloved franchise with an established lore/feeling, thereby basically killing that unique feel/spirit that most have come to like about this game series. Or, to word it more poetically, they have stomped on our dreams.

    I am severely disappointed right now, because they could have made this a great game without the need for so many restrictions and unnecessary lore altering to explain away certain aspects or mechanics that make no sense at all in TES. So much wasted potential, it is such a shame. I will still watch this game develop and probably even try it out, just to see if there is the chance that I can at least get a glimpse of the greatness that I usually encounter when imagining the world of TES.

    As it is right now, I really do not know what kind of game this is nor if it is DAoC or TES.

    This is a really good post, I agree with everything you said.  You put into words what I could not.

  • jimdandy26jimdandy26 salem, ORPosts: 527Member
    Originally posted by Anakami
    Or, to word it more poetically, they have stomped on our dreams.

    I find this line imparticular the worst form of hyperbole. For someone who gets so caught up in, and so focused on "feeling" and "spirit" you are sure willing to blatantly ignore gigantic glaring holes that the game delivers in terms of the narrative itself. Even skipping the base trope that you are the chosen one in pretty much every game, how about the base mechanics of the game? The logistics of pausing mid combat to scarf down 50 cabbages to get you back to full health (much less carrying 50 cabbages) or the lack of locational damage? How guards taunt you, even after you have been elevated to thane, or legate, or the fact that ALL of them have managed to have received identical wounds. I  can easily continue but I think you get the point.

    You have made it rather clear by your statement that mechanics are more important than immersion. So with that in mind race locks are a pretty minor contrivance, which goes hand in hand with your exploring whim, which is also hilarious since you will get more area to explore per faction than you have had in any single Elder Scroll game before. In essence, they "stomped on your dreams" entirely because they did not make the game that you wanted, which is a piss poor thing to whine about honestly. Hearing "Elder Scrolls Online" and immediately thinking, FUCK YEAH MULTIPLAYER SKYRIM! was a pretty dumb thing for you to do, especially when you consider the market itself. The majority of players do both pve and pvp, which makes pvp important. Considering how much people whine about making WoW clones one would think that players would be praising that they are doing something that is not currently available on the market.

    Perhaps next time you will stop and think before jizzing your pants and trampling all over your dreams.

    I did battle with ignorance today, and ignorance won.

    To exercise power costs effort and demands courage. That is why so many fail to assert rights to which they are perfectly entitled - because a right is a kind of power but they are too lazy or too cowardly to exercise it. The virtues which cloak these faults are called patience and forbearance.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,295Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jimdandy26
    Originally posted by Anakami
    Or, to word it more poetically, they have stomped on our dreams.

    I find this line imparticular the worst form of hyperbole. For someone who gets so caught up in, and so focused on "feeling" and "spirit" you are sure willing to blatantly ignore gigantic glaring holes that the game delivers in terms of the narrative itself. Even skipping the base trope that you are the chosen one in pretty much every game, how about the base mechanics of the game? The logistics of pausing mid combat to scarf down 50 cabbages to get you back to full health (much less carrying 50 cabbages) or the lack of locational damage? How guards taunt you, even after you have been elevated to thane, or legate, or the fact that ALL of them have managed to have received identical wounds. I  can easily continue but I think you get the point.

    You have made it rather clear by your statement that mechanics are more important than immersion. So with that in mind race locks are a pretty minor contrivance, which goes hand in hand with your exploring whim, which is also hilarious since you will get more area to explore per faction than you have had in any single Elder Scroll game before. In essence, they "stomped on your dreams" entirely because they did not make the game that you wanted, which is a piss poor thing to whine about honestly. Hearing "Elder Scrolls Online" and immediately thinking, FUCK YEAH MULTIPLAYER SKYRIM! was a pretty dumb thing for you to do, especially when you consider the market itself. The majority of players do both pve and pvp, which makes pvp important. Considering how much people whine about making WoW clones one would think that players would be praising that they are doing something that is not currently available on the market.

    Perhaps next time you will stop and think before jizzing your pants and trampling all over your dreams.

     

    i dont really feel that you actually read his post, let alone understood what he was trying to say, if you had then you'd probably have been able to make a more concise argument, perhaps, and yes i do agree that Skyrim did have some pretty bizarre problems with factions - something that has been gradually dumbed down ever since morrowind tbh, you might even say post morrowind that faction standings became less and less important and integral to the game. Most of the blame for this i lay squarely at the developers for catering to the console kiddies.. but thats another argument altogether.

     Then there is your argument saying that in ESO you will get more room to explore than in any other TES game, which, given that we don't even know how big cyrodil is in ESO, let alone the PVE portions of the game, is nothing less than a baseless assumption, it might after all be smaller, it might be the same size, it might be bigger after all, who knows? but yet again your argument totally ignores the fact most of hte complaints are because players can't explore beyond the racially locked faction pve area not to mention that also ignores the very strange composition of the factions themselves which is also a point of contention.

    But your right about one thing, nobody afaik wants just another wow clone, the trouble is, we're not getting a TES game either, but what appears to be just a poor DAoC knock off. Which seems to also have totally ignored why DAoC even failed in the first place. image

  • AnakamiAnakami BielefeldPosts: 103Member

    I would like to further elaborate on the points I made, specifically that this does not feel like Elder Scrolls anymore.There is some proof that they did not really care about the established lore and rather concerned themselves mostly with their PvP mechanics. Saying that, I do know that they try to recreate the regions close to the single player games. I also know that they add lore books and that there is probably more written lore in this game than in all the other games together.

    The problem is just that if the game fails to cover the basics of what makes TES what it is, all the extra lore will not help make it into a world i can believe in. Of course, opinions and perceptions will differ when it comes to the question of what defines TES, so I will just state before what it is for me: Unrestricted travel within the featured regions, cultural diversity within those regions, factions that are united by a shared belief and not by race, freedom of choice how you want to play the game and what your character believes is right or wrong.

    Which leads me to the first point I would like to make. In the list of things I associate with TES, did you notice a predominance of war themes? There are not any, because that is not what the spirit of TES is all about. Yes there is conflict and strife, but all out war?

    I remember when I started reading up on this project, that the first shock came when I read the "explanation" they gave for the conflict betwen the alliances and the war in general.

    The drums of war have reached a fever pitch, calling the warriors of Tamriel to the field of battle.  The Daggerfall Covenant, the Ebonheart Pact, and the Aldmeri Dominion will take up arms and fight for control of Cyrodiil, the Imperial City, and the throne of Tamriel.

    Yes, that's it. After this they just go on about their glorious PvP mechanics. But let us take a look at the Story section of their website. Starts out fairly well with Molag Baal being established as the big bad villain. At that point I was thinking "hey, that's great, maybe the races of Tamriel will join forces and battle this together. Imagine my joy when I then read:

    In the midst of this chaos, three alliances vie for control of the Imperial City and the White-Gold Tower. High Rock, Sentinel, and Orsinium stand as one, united under the rule of the High King in Wayrest. Valenwood and Elsweyr have forged an alliance of their own with Summerset, while Black Marsh, Morrowind, and Skyrim have formed a third, uneasy pact.

    The Daggerfall Covenant. The Aldmeri Dominion. The Ebonheart Pact.

    Three armies will take up arms against the Empire, and against each other, to wrest control of the Imperial City and White-Gold Tower from the dark forces of Oblivion itself.

    Where do your loyalties lie?

    I mean, what?! I don't even...

    Ok, maybe there is a good explanation somewhere in the more detailed Alliances page. Let's take a look at the Daggerfall Covenant and their leader, High King Emeric.

    High King Emeric is a Breton merchant lord whose shrewd policies and masterful diplomacy earned him the trust of the Kings of High Rock, an alliance by marriage with the Redguards, and ultimately, a war treaty with the Orcs.

    Also note the description in the Alliance War section:

    Working together, the three races have formed a powerful alliance that aims to restore the Second Empire and bring peace and prosperity back to Tamriel.

    Ok, I thought, that at least sounds like it could have potential and add some complexity to the whole story. But then they revealed their true focus by letting the High King speak himself:

    Let us take up arms!  Let the fields of Cyrodiil run red with the blood of our fallen enemies!

    But let us spare the lives of a few, so that they may return to their homelands to tell their fellows the fate they met at the hands of the Daggerfall Covenant.

    One land! One Emperor!

    Who among you will stand with me?

    Ah, now that's a shrewd diplomat! Amazing how they aim to bring back the peace and prosperity back to Tamriel. Well, despite my sadness and the shock I got from this, I also had a good laugh.

    In that first intro on the Story page, if you take out the TES specific names, would you still know that this is a game set in the TES universe? Would all the focus on bloodshed and war make you immediately think "Hey, now thats my Elder Scrolls right there!"

    Or conversely: If you take a look at the map of Tamriel and the 3 Alliances, wouldn't you think "Now that's some convenient grouping of regions and races. I mean, look, they all lie next to each other, therefore they must band together!"

    I can only shake my head at what the dev team has done with TES. I would not have an issue at all with this porject if they had been honest from the start and would not try to sell more copies just by using the established name. They could have named this: "Realms of Tamriel - A loose interpretation of TES" Or: "Tamriel - Alternate Realities". Or maybe "Matt Firor's competition with Mark Jacobs' CU...in Tamriel!"

    You know, I can live with alot of conventions and compromises needed to make this into an MMO, but to take an established lore and kill its core features and then hope to still sell it to the fans of the series is not the smartest move imo. I don't want to play a TES where I am forced to pick a side and agree with it no matter what. I don't want to play a TES where most of the quests I encounter are there to incite me against other races that were unlucky enough not to be located near my own race's borders. I don't want to play a TES that is DAoC in a TES skin.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member

    Anakami.

    Don'y take any notice of 'Captain America' - he doesn't seem to be able to post unless he's calling someone, somewhere 'stupid', or some variant of it...

    .... as long as they aren't agreeing with him of course...

    I personally think your post was a little too poetical in style for these brute-swarmed forums - but you made a good point nevetheless.

    Zenimax have thrown too much of the 'soul' of TES out with the dishwater.

    They seem to have lacked significant appreciation that a great many people really enjoy playing TES because of it's 'soul'.

    Games are about more than mechanics - they are a form of escapism, and escapism requires to one extent or another - immersion, suspension of disbelief and emotional buy-in to be successful.

    Anyone claiming otherwise has fallen off the left hand side of the IQ bell-curve...

Sign In or Register to comment.