This article didn't do anything for me. I have no investment in the Elder Scrolls IP and nothing in this article has sold me on ESO over WIldstar - which sounds fun and exciting.
Rob: You can talk about squirrels and houses all you want. If I wanted cute I’d buy a puppy. I want a war. Not a warplot. I want blood, I want guts, I want to fight for the throne. I want to rescue my soul. Yes, my soul. I want to become the emperor. I want to play in a world that I have spent 100s of hours in over the decades and have grown to love. I want to craft too but I want to get my crafting resources while reaching over the corpse of a dead enemy, not by picking flowers that I grew in my garden or had to fight off some silly worm to mine.
You're basically asking for Age of Conan with an Elder Scrolls skin. "Blood, guts, and war" are all things that Age of Conan touted as it proudly displayed it's Mature rating in style. The game pre-praised it's siege warefare in it's borderlands, only to completely disappoint with an engine that chugged and crashed at more than 20 players in an area.
As for crafting, I'm not sure the point if there's no trading house available (and as far as the information for TESO, there is no trading house set up for the game); that reminds me of Tabula Rasa's launch without a trading feature until at least a month after it's launch. And don't dis picking flowers, as that's something that was shown in the TESO crafting video (well, mushrooms and flowers).
Player housing is investment for the player. It's only a reflection if what you personally want. Want cute? Put flower wallpaper and pink furniture in your house with flowers surrounding it. Want a trophy spot to display your accomplishments? Have a house filled with heads and hides of your slaughters as well as surround the outside with spears, weapons, and crazy security systems (even guard NPC's). There's no such investable system in TESO like there is in Wildstar. Sure you can be Emperor for a week or whatever, but there's no customization for that and it'll only last for a short period until the next highest grinder takes the title. A player house is a player's castle that they get to be king of.
Warplots are similar, but more guild/group related. They get customization based on your group, but it's still changeable. Complete opposite of TESO's throne in Tamrial. It's there, it's static, it's the same attack again and again and again (and take it from GW2 players who have spent time in Eternal Battlegrounds throwing faces against Stonemist Castle....it becomes repetitive after a while). Customization = freshness = more enjoyable longer (think how TF2 kept so long thanks to community maps, server rulesets, and weapons).
Eso locks you into a build by way of its energy system. If you start the game as a mage and level it as a mage (putting your points into mana) you can't just decide to be a stealth thief (lack of stamina). You could build a stealth mage, but you won't be able to decide to become a full mage later, since you have less mana which is going to make you weaker than a full mana mage.
You also can't explore the whole world without making alts (minus that level cap fake faction land crap).
Not saying that's bad, but its not a free as Rob makes out.
Although can they make a game good enough to warrent one, where there are so many, many F2P alternatives?
EvE and WoW both came to prominance during a time where p2p was the only option. I believe both continue to survive well because of how much time investment people have in these games, making it difficult to break away, not to mention that they are the most populated within their subgenre (themepark and sandbox)
Not a good analogy.
EQ, EQ2, AoC, LoTRO, Rift just to mention games with a solid veteran player base that went F2P years after their release.
Let's not even talk about games that went from Sub to F2P in less than 6 monyhs like SWTOR or TSW.
The fact is that only good games can command a subscription, the time you invest in a game is a marginal factor to the decision of quitting the game.
It's all about meeting player expectations, and if you want players to pay for a Sub, you need to meet their expectations, not doing as you please without listening to your customers concern.
I'm curious if the writers of this know something more than the rest of us about "real exploration" in WS. I've read all I can find about the explorer path and I've not found anything to indicate whether this "real exploration" is actually dynamic or just a matter of "you must get to coordinates x & y and click on the same item as the 500000 explorers".
Exploration is only fun if i don't follow my exploration quest to a hidden faraway cave only to find 10 other explorers already there (on exect same quest to find the exact same thing) saying "here, click this".
Your point on exploration and 10 other players is dead on for me. I don't like it to be another part of the xp treadmill and rather a chance to see things for myself. Game rewards are not needed for this.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I'm pretty sure Wildstar will look like an updated SWTOR/WoW. I'm pretty sure GW2 has more to offer and i'll keep playing that. Though! ESO doesn't look much the same and the combat is Elder Scrollish, the lore, the questsystem and big scale faction war. This will be my second mmorpg if they really do deliver. I will play it this weekend, so we'll see.
However i do think Wildstar will get a lot of SWTOR/WoW/Aion players. It seems like they are cousins and Wilstar is their younger brother, new and fresh and updated.
Although can they make a game good enough to warrent one, where there are so many, many F2P alternatives?
EvE and WoW both came to prominance during a time where p2p was the only option. I believe both continue to survive well because of how much time investment people have in these games, making it difficult to break away, not to mention that they are the most populated within their subgenre (themepark and sandbox)
Not a good analogy.
EQ, EQ2, AoC, LoTRO, Rift just to mention games with a solid veteran player base that went F2P years after their release.
Let's not even talk about games that went from Sub to F2P in less than 6 monyhs like SWTOR or TSW.
The fact is that only good games can command a subscription, the time you invest in a game is a marginal factor to the decision of quitting the game.
It's all about meeting player expectations, and if you want players to pay for a Sub, you need to meet their expectations, not doing as you please without listening to your customers concern.
It's not about whether games are "good" enough. If a player honestly thinks a game is bad, he won't play even if it's free. It's about quantity of content, not quality of content. If the kind of player who is theoretically willing to sub continues to do so, it's because he thinks there is enough to do to justify fifteen dollars a month. If he doesn't continue to do so, it is generally because he has either "finished" all of the content that interested him, or decided that what is left is not worth a flat $15 fee. The primary reason for TOR and TSW going freemium so quickly is because both had limited endgame offerings relative to older, more established games, and neither take particularly long to "finish" the content with a single character.
Now if every single person who played TOR had actually bought into the idea of playing every class story to completion as an alternative to endgame with a single character, it would probably have gone a lot longer as a sub only game.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
If you want something somewhat new, with new mechanics, play ESO. If you want WoW with action combat play WS.
I said long ago that companies should think about lower sub fees. That would make more room for all of them. It's almost like they have a trust to not charge less than 15$
This hardly read as debate of comparison between two games. It was one person calling out what he thinks about one game and the other person defending it without pointing out flaws of the other game.
The whole "Telegraphs end up taking you out of the game. I’m no longer engaged with the combatant I’m engaged with the UI." in comparison to ESO because in ESO you are playing UI as well so it is not really a point of comparison.
Chris do yourself a favor and learn to attack the opposite points of view while answering the question or get don't participate in these type of debates.
Thats only true if you make it to be true because I had my UI hidden all the time and played it fine as if it was skyrim. The only thing that was showing were things like health/stamina/magicka and compass.
I'm curious if the writers of this know something more than the rest of us about "real exploration" in WS. I've read all I can find about the explorer path and I've not found anything to indicate whether this "real exploration" is actually dynamic or just a matter of "you must get to coordinates x & y and click on the same item as the 500000 explorers".
Exploration is only fun if i don't follow my exploration quest to a hidden faraway cave only to find 10 other explorers already there (on exect same quest to find the exact same thing) saying "here, click this".
Exactly and that is what developers do,they send you directly there with flashy sparkles and/or yellow markers on the map and then pretend you have just "DISCOVERED",congratulations .../clap ../clap.
Personally i feel this is suppose to be a ROLE playing game,you should be taking in all aspects of the game,not just a follow the markers or the paths around.
One day i might be in the mood to just wander around a bit and explore the land,but wait the game police say i have to enter into a different game mode lol.
It is far too early to discuss weather either game should be sub or not,but i do know this,non sub fee means misleading costs.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
A WoW clone that is at least attempting to innovate combat or a WoW/DoaC clone that isn't innovating anything (which is why not a single innovating thing about it has been talked about)......
I will go with a F2P game that isn't innovating, or one that is but will only last a few months because I have done the above two choices far too many times over the last 13 years. I don't want more of the same just in a new game, sure as hell wont pay for it ever again. EVER.
While I love Wildstar's combat... but... if copying Tera's combat and adding telegraphs to it is what we're calling innovation now then the industry is in a sadder place than I had imagined.
While I love Wildstar's combat... but... if copying Tera's combat and adding telegraphs to it is what we're calling innovation now then the industry is in a sadder place than I had imagined.
I want to know when whether something is "innovating" became such a popular standard to judge by. Shouldn't whether or not something is fun be more important than whether it is new? Obviously, if something was both innovative and fun that would be great, but if you end up having to pick between fun and familiar or new and boring (or painful) I would think fun would end up more successful.
That being said, I think both games (if delivered as promised) include some very innovative features. It would be nice if people stopped equating "not innovating in the areas I personally care about" with "not innovating."
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
I have been watching these two games for the longest time. ESO had been the winner over Wildstar due to the graphics and setting. The more I have learned about the two games the more I know I wont play ESO and would try Wildstar.
ESO: must only use key binds (i like my mouse and one or two key binds), i like my arenas/bg and eso wont have them, all areas cant be explored until unlocked and wont see other faction (weird), first person perspective as I know its an option but just gives me a headache. I get bored with keep sieging and camp take over wvw type things quickly. not a fan of the zerg.
I do like the classes and armor but I cant get over the above negatives.
Wildstar: Developed PVE that is challenging, arenas/bgs, ow pvp with guild owned bases!!!!, combat systems sound like a lot of fun, housing.
I do wish wildstar had more classes entirely to few even with each class being two different specs. This design is still extremely limiting in the options.
While I love Wildstar's combat... but... if copying Tera's combat and adding telegraphs to it is what we're calling innovation now then the industry is in a sadder place than I had imagined.
I want to know when whether something is "innovating" became such a popular standard to judge by. Shouldn't whether or not something is fun be more important than whether it is new? Obviously, if something was both innovative and fun that would be great, but if you end up having to pick between fun and familiar or new and boring (or painful) I would think fun would end up more successful.
That being said, I think both games (if delivered as promised) include some very innovative features. It would be nice if people stopped equating "not innovating in the areas I personally care about" with "not innovating."
People used that fun>innovation line to try and explain why FFXIV was going to be great... only it wasn't at all.
Wildstar's combat is great, some of the best ever released by a western developer, but copying what people are doing in Asia doesn't exactly equate to innovation. Where exactly do you see Wildstar being innovative at all? Linear quest grind? 40 man raids? Instanced housing? Don't tell me the path mini-games...
I can already play WoW right now, and millions of other people do, why should they leave their characters/stories/friends they've invested years in to play almost exactly the same game with a slightly different skin. This is why WoW clones fail. The whole point of creating a new game is to offer something that isn't already out there, that is why innovation is important. Granted, I suppose offering WoW with improved combat, larger raids, and a scifi setting isn't out there.... but I can't imagine there is much demand for it.
I'll be playing ESO until I no longer feel like playing it. I have no interest in WS, but I wish the game and its followers/players well. Both games can flourish and be, if not in terms of WoW, successful. At the same time, even. WHOA!
Originally posted by SBFord the battle to restore the subscription fee
nuff said
It's a good battle.................unfortunately the games themselves are a bit meh.
So when they will both switch to F2P in 3 months, everyone will blame the Subscription model, yet again.
The problem is not the Subscription model, the problem is the average quality of the games that cannot command a Subscription.
The most succesful games, WoW and EvE have a subscription as the main model.................... so it works, but the devs need to start making better games.
People keep making this argument, but the evidence doesn't support it. WoW is a total fluke. The past decade of MMOs give zero reason to believe it's level of success can or will be repeated. And EvE is not a AAA game. Compared to big name MMOs, it's development, maintenance, and expansion budgets are all tiny, so it doesn't need to make nearly as much money to be considered a success. Any AAA title that had it's sub numbers drop to the *highest* EvE has ever had has either shut down or done a Freemium conversion.
I do agree that WoW is a fluke and cannot be replicated in the next 10 years, yet people are still playing it.
Same cannot be said for other subscription games that went F2P because they weren't good enough for a Sub, WoW kept its customer base.
Also EvE has 500k players which is more than most AAA games could achieve rin recent years (that's why they went F2P), so the fact that is an Indie is a non issue............. its numbers are better than most AAA games.
F2P model is not a more profitable model than Subscription, it's just target a different kind of players or customers (the so called Impulse buyers)
Basically F2P model rely on the short term enthusiasm of a certain type of players (Impulse buyer) which tend to spend money on impulse rather than investing it on a long term project.
Subscribers and F2P are 2 different kind of players but also 2 different kind of customers, so there is space for both models in the Industry, though the subscribers crowd is more difficult to please because they are the opposite of the Impulse buyers, they think really hard where they want to invest their money.
Subscriptions are not dead by any means, we just need better games able to please the more demanding Subscription crowd.
This hardly read as debate of comparison between two games. It was one person calling out what he thinks about one game and the other person defending it without pointing out flaws of the other game.
The whole "Telegraphs end up taking you out of the game. I’m no longer engaged with the combatant I’m engaged with the UI." in comparison to ESO because in ESO you are playing UI as well so it is not really a point of comparison.
Chris do yourself a favor and learn to attack the opposite points of view while answering the question or get don't participate in these type of debates.
Thats only true if you make it to be true because I had my UI hidden all the time and played it fine as if it was skyrim. The only thing that was showing were things like health/stamina/magicka and compass.
Good luck doing that during any type of group activity. If you are a healer you need to see who needs to be healed. If you are a tank you still need to watch your healers health. Only time you can actually afford to do that is when you are playing pure dps.
Originally posted by SBFord the battle to restore the subscription fee
nuff said
It's a good battle.................unfortunately the games themselves are a bit meh.
So when they will both switch to F2P in 3 months, everyone will blame the Subscription model, yet again.
The problem is not the Subscription model, the problem is the average quality of the games that cannot command a Subscription.
The most succesful games, WoW and EvE have a subscription as the main model.................... so it works, but the devs need to start making better games.
People keep making this argument, but the evidence doesn't support it. WoW is a total fluke. The past decade of MMOs give zero reason to believe it's level of success can or will be repeated. And EvE is not a AAA game. Compared to big name MMOs, it's development, maintenance, and expansion budgets are all tiny, so it doesn't need to make nearly as much money to be considered a success. Any AAA title that had it's sub numbers drop to the *highest* EvE has ever had has either shut down or done a Freemium conversion.
I do agree that WoW is a fluke and cannot be replicated in the next 10 years, yet people are still playing it.
Same cannot be said for other subscription games that went F2P because they weren't good enough for a Sub, WoW kept its customer base.
Also EvE has 500k players which is more than most AAA games could achieve rin recent years (that's why they went F2P), so the fact that is an Indie is a non issue............. its numbers are better than most AAA games.
F2P model is not a more profitable model than Subscription, it's just target a different kind of players or customers (the so called Impulse buyers)
Basically F2P model rely on the short term enthusiasm of a certain type of players (Impulse buyer) which tend to spend money on impulse rather than investing it on a long term project.
Subscribers and F2P are 2 different kind of players but also 2 different kind of customers, so there is space for both models in the Industry, though the subscribers crowd is more difficult to please because they are the opposite of the Impulse buyers, they think really hard where they want to invest their money.
Subscriptions are not dead by any means, we just need better games able to please the more demanding Subscription crowd.
To be fair, in the last SWTOR cantina Q&A (where it was announced that they have a million players a month), they also mentioned the majority of "cash shop" money spent was done by subscribers.
A WoW clone that is at least attempting to innovate combat or a WoW/DoaC clone that isn't innovating anything (which is why not a single innovating thing about it has been talked about)......
I will go with a F2P game that isn't innovating, or one that is but will only last a few months because I have done the above two choices far too many times over the last 13 years. I don't want more of the same just in a new game, sure as hell wont pay for it ever again. EVER.
While I love Wildstar's combat... but... if copying Tera's combat and adding telegraphs to it is what we're calling innovation now then the industry is in a sadder place than I had imagined.
Innovation is like a snowball, you innovate based on what has already been made before you. Tera was not the first game to do twitch combat in an MMO setting either. A lot of comes down to how do you define innovation. Based on your comparison unless you invented the wheel - you are not innovating.
I view innovation is ability to take something and do with it what no one did before, and most importantly it has to work! Just because you combined milk and vinegar it doesn't make it good. Ability to find these combinations of things that actually work well is the tricky part.
I dont understand how you can even begin to compare these two. ESO has a very limited content offering, where WildStar strives to give "something for everyone"
ESO offers small group (4/5 man) dungeons and 3 faction world PVP. Thats it. lol
WildStar on the other hand has small group dungeons (4/5 man), large group raids (10/20/40 man), player housing, Arena PVP (2v2, 3v3, 5v5), Battleground PVP (10/20+ man), and Warplots, (40 man). Sure its only 2 factions instead of 3.
But seriosuly, one game offers a ton of content, and the other is very limited. How can you even compare those offerings?
Can you at least please pretend to be informed? Here is info from Tamriel Foundry disputing everything you wrote.
TES:O will feature both public and instanced dungeons. Public dungeons are not separated from the regular world via instancing, and allow for organic cooperation, grouping, and even competition between players. Instanced dungeons also exist, which will deliver a more contained, story driven experience to a group of players. Public dungeons are excellent at providing "drive-by" social experiences with new players by facilitating spontaneous group formation with fellow gamers.
Most small public dungeons located throughout the world are balanced to be challenging for 1.5 players, where they will provide a significant challenge for a solo player, but be comfortably clearable for a small group.
ESO will feature 16 four-man instanced dungeons at launch in addition to it's public dungeons throughout the world. On the first run through an instanced dungeon, you will experience it's full story experience. On subsequent runs, you will be able to bypass the story content if desired.
Endgame PvE will feature heroic modes of each of the game's instanced dungeons, which are more than simply more difficult versions of the same content. These heroic dungeons extend the story of normal mode dungeons by adding a climactic and challenging endgame experience. In addition the game has large raids that pit multiple groups of players against powerful and iconic bosses.
There are a large number of public dungeons within Cyrodiil as well, which will combine exciting PvE storylines with the challenge and danger of encountering hostile player opposition within. In addition, ZeniMax are working to develop a mega-dungeon, reminiscent of Darkness Falls in Dark Age of Camelot, where access to this dungeon will depend on your faction's success in the realm war.
In addition, Zenimax has stated they are looking to provide content updates every 4-6 weeks. That is pretty agressive IMO and shows their commitment and understanding of the need to keep people happy who rush through things with new and fresh things to do. Now to what extend they actually do this is another story. Time will tell.
Seems like Rob had trouble coming up with positives in the ESO column, and had to fall back on trying to tear down Wildstar. To be fair there isn't a ton of information on ESO, something that is frequently remarked upon in the ESO podcasts. Less than 3 months from launch it is rather alarming how little ESO information there actually is.
With Wildstar at least we have enough information to make an educated guess as to whether or not the game is for each of us.
This hardly read as debate of comparison between two games. It was one person calling out what he thinks about one game and the other person defending it without pointing out flaws of the other game.
The whole "Telegraphs end up taking you out of the game. I’m no longer engaged with the combatant I’m engaged with the UI." in comparison to ESO because in ESO you are playing UI as well so it is not really a point of comparison.
Chris do yourself a favor and learn to attack the opposite points of view while answering the question or get don't participate in these type of debates.
Thats only true if you make it to be true because I had my UI hidden all the time and played it fine as if it was skyrim. The only thing that was showing were things like health/stamina/magicka and compass.
Good luck doing that during any type of group activity. If you are a healer you need to see who needs to be healed. If you are a tank you still need to watch your healers health. Only time you can actually afford to do that is when you are playing pure dps.
As a tank you need to watch your enemy movements more often so you'll know when to block and dodge. Even as a healer you can still hide your hotbar and just memorize which key is what skill, theres not that many active skills as older mmos. I never said anything about hiding the health bars, i even stated that the only things that were showing were health/stamina/magicka bars.
lol, at some posters in this thread saying these games will go f2p within 3 months 8P
Not that I'm defending either game but for people to actually be delusional enough to think there gonna go f2p within 3 months is just ludicrous.......
When has any AAA title with a sub went f2p within 3 months not counting ffxiv which was horrible in it's first incarnation?
Usually within a year sure, but never 3 months lol........
People used that fun>innovation line to try and explain why FFXIV was going to be great... only it wasn't at all.
Wildstar's combat is great, some of the best ever released by a western developer, but copying what people are doing in Asia doesn't exactly equate to innovation. Where exactly do you see Wildstar being innovative at all? Linear quest grind? 40 man raids? Instanced housing? Don't tell me the path mini-games...
I can already play WoW right now, and millions of other people do, why should they leave their characters/stories/friends they've invested years in to play almost exactly the same game with a slightly different skin. This is why WoW clones fail. The whole point of creating a new game is to offer something that isn't already out there, that is why innovation is important. Granted, I suppose offering WoW with improved combat, larger raids, and a scifi setting isn't out there.... but I can't imagine there is much demand for it.
I haven't played yet, so I can only judge based on released information. On that count, yes, the path stuff does look innovative. Whether it will work out well, and be fun, I have no idea. But an idea doesn't have to work to be innovative, it just has to be new.
Honestly, the people who constantly parrot that things are "WoW clones" just confuse me. If all you can see when you look at a game are the mechanics, I feel sorry for you, because you are ignoring most of the experience. Most games that end up being remembered as great have good enough mechanics that they aren't frustrating to play, but they get remembered for the totality of the experience, not just the exact method by which you push buttons to kill stuff.
I have had more fun in almost every "WoW clone" I have played than I ever did in WoW, because outside of the mechanics, I never found the rest of the game very compelling.
Originally posted by ste2000
Originally posted by CazNeerg
I do agree that WoW is a fluke and cannot be replicated in the next 10 years, yet people are still playing it.
Same cannot be said for other subscription games that went F2P because they weren't good enough for a Sub, WoW kept its customer base.
Also EvE has 500k players which is more than most AAA games could achieve rin recent years (that's why they went F2P), so the fact that is an Indie is a non issue............. its numbers are better than most AAA games.
F2P model is not a more profitable model than Subscription, it's just target a different kind of players or customers (the so called Impulse buyers)
Basically F2P model rely on the short term enthusiasm of a certain type of players (Impulse buyer) which tend to spend money on impulse rather than investing it on a long term project.
Subscribers and F2P are 2 different kind of players but also 2 different kind of customers, so there is space for both models in the Industry, though the subscribers crowd is more difficult to please because they are the opposite of the Impulse buyers, they think really hard where they want to invest their money.
Subscriptions are not dead by any means, we just need better games able to please the more demanding Subscription crowd.
There is no evidence supporting the theory that willingness to pay for a sub has anything to do with quality. It is a lot more likely, from what we can see and measure, that it has to do with quantity. People who think a game lacks quality tend to stop playing well before they run out of content to experience, even if they have paid time remaining, and they don't come back if the game goes free. Most people don't waste time playing a game they think is "bad." How many people do you actually know who are willing to subscribe to games, and then spend any substantial amount of time playing a restricted version of a game for free instead of subscribing to get the full experience?
What appears to actually happen, is that people who do enjoy the game reach the point where they have basically "finished" it, and while they were willing to pay a monthly fee to get the total experience, they aren't willing to pay monthly for access to endgame and chat channels, especially when the more recently a game launched, the more limited the range of available endgame activities. This isn't a "quality" problem, as the people were perfectly content to pay monthly before the content ran out.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Comments
Wrong....It's not the new wow, it is wow...
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before.
Edgar Allan Poe
You're basically asking for Age of Conan with an Elder Scrolls skin. "Blood, guts, and war" are all things that Age of Conan touted as it proudly displayed it's Mature rating in style. The game pre-praised it's siege warefare in it's borderlands, only to completely disappoint with an engine that chugged and crashed at more than 20 players in an area.
As for crafting, I'm not sure the point if there's no trading house available (and as far as the information for TESO, there is no trading house set up for the game); that reminds me of Tabula Rasa's launch without a trading feature until at least a month after it's launch. And don't dis picking flowers, as that's something that was shown in the TESO crafting video (well, mushrooms and flowers).
Player housing is investment for the player. It's only a reflection if what you personally want. Want cute? Put flower wallpaper and pink furniture in your house with flowers surrounding it. Want a trophy spot to display your accomplishments? Have a house filled with heads and hides of your slaughters as well as surround the outside with spears, weapons, and crazy security systems (even guard NPC's). There's no such investable system in TESO like there is in Wildstar. Sure you can be Emperor for a week or whatever, but there's no customization for that and it'll only last for a short period until the next highest grinder takes the title. A player house is a player's castle that they get to be king of.
Warplots are similar, but more guild/group related. They get customization based on your group, but it's still changeable. Complete opposite of TESO's throne in Tamrial. It's there, it's static, it's the same attack again and again and again (and take it from GW2 players who have spent time in Eternal Battlegrounds throwing faces against Stonemist Castle....it becomes repetitive after a while). Customization = freshness = more enjoyable longer (think how TF2 kept so long thanks to community maps, server rulesets, and weapons).
Eso locks you into a build by way of its energy system. If you start the game as a mage and level it as a mage (putting your points into mana) you can't just decide to be a stealth thief (lack of stamina). You could build a stealth mage, but you won't be able to decide to become a full mage later, since you have less mana which is going to make you weaker than a full mana mage.
You also can't explore the whole world without making alts (minus that level cap fake faction land crap).
Not saying that's bad, but its not a free as Rob makes out.
Not a good analogy.
EQ, EQ2, AoC, LoTRO, Rift just to mention games with a solid veteran player base that went F2P years after their release.
Let's not even talk about games that went from Sub to F2P in less than 6 monyhs like SWTOR or TSW.
The fact is that only good games can command a subscription, the time you invest in a game is a marginal factor to the decision of quitting the game.
It's all about meeting player expectations, and if you want players to pay for a Sub, you need to meet their expectations, not doing as you please without listening to your customers concern.
Your point on exploration and 10 other players is dead on for me. I don't like it to be another part of the xp treadmill and rather a chance to see things for myself. Game rewards are not needed for this.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I'm pretty sure Wildstar will look like an updated SWTOR/WoW. I'm pretty sure GW2 has more to offer and i'll keep playing that. Though! ESO doesn't look much the same and the combat is Elder Scrollish, the lore, the questsystem and big scale faction war. This will be my second mmorpg if they really do deliver. I will play it this weekend, so we'll see.
However i do think Wildstar will get a lot of SWTOR/WoW/Aion players. It seems like they are cousins and Wilstar is their younger brother, new and fresh and updated.
It's not about whether games are "good" enough. If a player honestly thinks a game is bad, he won't play even if it's free. It's about quantity of content, not quality of content. If the kind of player who is theoretically willing to sub continues to do so, it's because he thinks there is enough to do to justify fifteen dollars a month. If he doesn't continue to do so, it is generally because he has either "finished" all of the content that interested him, or decided that what is left is not worth a flat $15 fee. The primary reason for TOR and TSW going freemium so quickly is because both had limited endgame offerings relative to older, more established games, and neither take particularly long to "finish" the content with a single character.
Now if every single person who played TOR had actually bought into the idea of playing every class story to completion as an alternative to endgame with a single character, it would probably have gone a lot longer as a sub only game.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
If you want something somewhat new, with new mechanics, play ESO. If you want WoW with action combat play WS.
I said long ago that companies should think about lower sub fees. That would make more room for all of them. It's almost like they have a trust to not charge less than 15$
Thats only true if you make it to be true because I had my UI hidden all the time and played it fine as if it was skyrim. The only thing that was showing were things like health/stamina/magicka and compass.
Exactly and that is what developers do,they send you directly there with flashy sparkles and/or yellow markers on the map and then pretend you have just "DISCOVERED",congratulations .../clap ../clap.
Personally i feel this is suppose to be a ROLE playing game,you should be taking in all aspects of the game,not just a follow the markers or the paths around.
One day i might be in the mood to just wander around a bit and explore the land,but wait the game police say i have to enter into a different game mode lol.
It is far too early to discuss weather either game should be sub or not,but i do know this,non sub fee means misleading costs.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
While I love Wildstar's combat... but... if copying Tera's combat and adding telegraphs to it is what we're calling innovation now then the industry is in a sadder place than I had imagined.
I want to know when whether something is "innovating" became such a popular standard to judge by. Shouldn't whether or not something is fun be more important than whether it is new? Obviously, if something was both innovative and fun that would be great, but if you end up having to pick between fun and familiar or new and boring (or painful) I would think fun would end up more successful.
That being said, I think both games (if delivered as promised) include some very innovative features. It would be nice if people stopped equating "not innovating in the areas I personally care about" with "not innovating."
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
I have been watching these two games for the longest time. ESO had been the winner over Wildstar due to the graphics and setting. The more I have learned about the two games the more I know I wont play ESO and would try Wildstar.
ESO: must only use key binds (i like my mouse and one or two key binds), i like my arenas/bg and eso wont have them, all areas cant be explored until unlocked and wont see other faction (weird), first person perspective as I know its an option but just gives me a headache. I get bored with keep sieging and camp take over wvw type things quickly. not a fan of the zerg.
I do like the classes and armor but I cant get over the above negatives.
Wildstar: Developed PVE that is challenging, arenas/bgs, ow pvp with guild owned bases!!!!, combat systems sound like a lot of fun, housing.
I do wish wildstar had more classes entirely to few even with each class being two different specs. This design is still extremely limiting in the options.
I may try wildstar, but wont even look at ESO
People used that fun>innovation line to try and explain why FFXIV was going to be great... only it wasn't at all.
Wildstar's combat is great, some of the best ever released by a western developer, but copying what people are doing in Asia doesn't exactly equate to innovation. Where exactly do you see Wildstar being innovative at all? Linear quest grind? 40 man raids? Instanced housing? Don't tell me the path mini-games...
I can already play WoW right now, and millions of other people do, why should they leave their characters/stories/friends they've invested years in to play almost exactly the same game with a slightly different skin. This is why WoW clones fail. The whole point of creating a new game is to offer something that isn't already out there, that is why innovation is important. Granted, I suppose offering WoW with improved combat, larger raids, and a scifi setting isn't out there.... but I can't imagine there is much demand for it.
I do agree that WoW is a fluke and cannot be replicated in the next 10 years, yet people are still playing it.
Same cannot be said for other subscription games that went F2P because they weren't good enough for a Sub, WoW kept its customer base.
Also EvE has 500k players which is more than most AAA games could achieve rin recent years (that's why they went F2P), so the fact that is an Indie is a non issue............. its numbers are better than most AAA games.
F2P model is not a more profitable model than Subscription, it's just target a different kind of players or customers (the so called Impulse buyers)
Basically F2P model rely on the short term enthusiasm of a certain type of players (Impulse buyer) which tend to spend money on impulse rather than investing it on a long term project.
Subscribers and F2P are 2 different kind of players but also 2 different kind of customers, so there is space for both models in the Industry, though the subscribers crowd is more difficult to please because they are the opposite of the Impulse buyers, they think really hard where they want to invest their money.
Subscriptions are not dead by any means, we just need better games able to please the more demanding Subscription crowd.
Good luck doing that during any type of group activity. If you are a healer you need to see who needs to be healed. If you are a tank you still need to watch your healers health. Only time you can actually afford to do that is when you are playing pure dps.
To be fair, in the last SWTOR cantina Q&A (where it was announced that they have a million players a month), they also mentioned the majority of "cash shop" money spent was done by subscribers.
Innovation is like a snowball, you innovate based on what has already been made before you. Tera was not the first game to do twitch combat in an MMO setting either. A lot of comes down to how do you define innovation. Based on your comparison unless you invented the wheel - you are not innovating.
I view innovation is ability to take something and do with it what no one did before, and most importantly it has to work! Just because you combined milk and vinegar it doesn't make it good. Ability to find these combinations of things that actually work well is the tricky part.
Can you at least please pretend to be informed? Here is info from Tamriel Foundry disputing everything you wrote.
There Is Always Hope!
Seems like Rob had trouble coming up with positives in the ESO column, and had to fall back on trying to tear down Wildstar. To be fair there isn't a ton of information on ESO, something that is frequently remarked upon in the ESO podcasts. Less than 3 months from launch it is rather alarming how little ESO information there actually is.
With Wildstar at least we have enough information to make an educated guess as to whether or not the game is for each of us.
As a tank you need to watch your enemy movements more often so you'll know when to block and dodge. Even as a healer you can still hide your hotbar and just memorize which key is what skill, theres not that many active skills as older mmos. I never said anything about hiding the health bars, i even stated that the only things that were showing were health/stamina/magicka bars.
lol, at some posters in this thread saying these games will go f2p within 3 months 8P
Not that I'm defending either game but for people to actually be delusional enough to think there gonna go f2p within 3 months is just ludicrous.......
When has any AAA title with a sub went f2p within 3 months not counting ffxiv which was horrible in it's first incarnation?
Usually within a year sure, but never 3 months lol........
I haven't played yet, so I can only judge based on released information. On that count, yes, the path stuff does look innovative. Whether it will work out well, and be fun, I have no idea. But an idea doesn't have to work to be innovative, it just has to be new.
Honestly, the people who constantly parrot that things are "WoW clones" just confuse me. If all you can see when you look at a game are the mechanics, I feel sorry for you, because you are ignoring most of the experience. Most games that end up being remembered as great have good enough mechanics that they aren't frustrating to play, but they get remembered for the totality of the experience, not just the exact method by which you push buttons to kill stuff.
I have had more fun in almost every "WoW clone" I have played than I ever did in WoW, because outside of the mechanics, I never found the rest of the game very compelling.
There is no evidence supporting the theory that willingness to pay for a sub has anything to do with quality. It is a lot more likely, from what we can see and measure, that it has to do with quantity. People who think a game lacks quality tend to stop playing well before they run out of content to experience, even if they have paid time remaining, and they don't come back if the game goes free. Most people don't waste time playing a game they think is "bad." How many people do you actually know who are willing to subscribe to games, and then spend any substantial amount of time playing a restricted version of a game for free instead of subscribing to get the full experience?
What appears to actually happen, is that people who do enjoy the game reach the point where they have basically "finished" it, and while they were willing to pay a monthly fee to get the total experience, they aren't willing to pay monthly for access to endgame and chat channels, especially when the more recently a game launched, the more limited the range of available endgame activities. This isn't a "quality" problem, as the people were perfectly content to pay monthly before the content ran out.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.