Developers needed an excuse to justify making the game a standard theme park.
Apparently a lot of gamers around here latched onto it.
Or maybe unrealistic community members have absolutely no clue to the development challenges involved to do a Skyrim online and how everyone's computer would be crippled with today's technology in 99.9% of homes if you tried to play a Skyrim online with hundreds around you.
the combat from skyrim could never work in a multiplayer game, especially archery and destruction spells. having almost every single NPC killable would not work in a multiplayer game.
having all the mobs throughout the world change level based on your current level would not work in a multiplayer game.
ESO could not be skyrim online without major changes, not even sure why this needs explaining.
That's why they should have just released a Xpac for Skyrim to allow multi player functions and go from there. Seems stupid and foolish on my part? We've been saying this ever since TESO was announced. Bethesda took an amazing franchise in to a territory it doesn't yet belong in to. They should of have just experimented on Skyrim and take notes. Because quite frankly, Wildstar is currently stealing TESO's spot light, and as bas as ArcheAge will end up being, TESO won't be talked about at all come Christmas 2014. Hell, FF14 : ARR might even be worth resubbing to by then!
Originally posted by artemisentr4 Skyrim is a game that is all about you the player. Your choices effect everything because you are the only real player. There can only be one story and one way it plays out. How can thousands of players in skyrim, all making different choices, all be the main character? They can't of coarse. So you make changes to allow for other players each doing their own thing. ESO tried to add meaning to questing with phasing, but it made grouping difficult. They tried to please both the skyrim fans and MMO fans. That never works.
just a comment to add to this to this paragraph. Like you said, Skyrim is all about you, one player in the entire game. Every person playing the game on his computer is the hero alone in the game.
With that said, ESO? its exactly the same thing in an mmo set up. We can see each other in the game and play together but you are the hero in your game just like i am the hero in my game. What i do in my computer to change the world does not affect you in any way. So it is the same thing as a single player game but with a multiplayer set up that allows people to hang out together.
So yeah they definitelly fell short by trying to please both TES players and MMO players. They still have a chance to fix the whole thing because mmos are supossed to be long term with long term support, but it will require massive changes and a lot of manpower, time and resources. Its their business that is on the line unless they want to go F2P and ignore everything else.
the combat from skyrim could never work in a multiplayer game, especially archery and destruction spells. having almost every single NPC killable would not work in a multiplayer game.
having all the mobs throughout the world change level based on your current level would not work in a multiplayer game.
ESO could not be skyrim online without major changes, not even sure why this needs explaining.
The Justice system is on the way.
Justice system will involve players stealing/killing NPCs and incurring a bounty if they are caught. Guards will give you a chance to pay the bounty or kill you on sight if your bounty is too high. Players could also become guards
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
The Only Thing that really really sucked about ESO is the Vet content. It would have been cool to actually meet players in other alliances in their zones. Pvp missions maybe? They could have taken this game is such a better direction, but used Vet content as a grind for subs, and craglorn as the bait... sorry not going to quest endlessessly for days, literally days of playtime in vet content alone AFTER already hitting 50. ESO after some balances and fixing the phasing would be a fantastic game. I hope they fix it.
Also make PvP worth it. I PvP for 2 hours and get 2% vet level, seriously? That was the highlight of the game and there is nobody doing it because there is no incentive, we all have to trudge along doing vet levels.
Good game, bad decisions.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Developers needed an excuse to justify making the game a standard theme park.
Apparently a lot of gamers around here latched onto it.
Or maybe unrealistic community members have absolutely no clue to the development challenges involved to do a Skyrim online and how everyone's computer would be crippled with today's technology in 99.9% of homes if you tried to play a Skyrim online with hundreds around you.
Except that mortal online exists?
ESO could have been mortal online with a real budget, ruleset servers, and pve. They were perfectly clear in the first game informer article that they chose not to make it more like the elder scrolls games because mmo players wouldn't understand it.
Developers needed an excuse to justify making the game a standard theme park.
Apparently a lot of gamers around here latched onto it.
Or maybe unrealistic community members have absolutely no clue to the development challenges involved to do a Skyrim online and how everyone's computer would be crippled with today's technology in 99.9% of homes if you tried to play a Skyrim online with hundreds around you.
Except that mortal online exists?
ESO could have been mortal online with a real budget, ruleset servers, and pve. They were perfectly clear in the first game informer article that they chose not to make it more like the elder scrolls games because mmo players wouldn't understand it.
They really said that.
Really, you bring up Mortal Online? Well, we all know what a runaway hit that game turned out to be...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
A. Using a sandboxed IP and stuffing it into a more "funneled" or theme park product was going to have issues no matter how polished among much of it's fan base
B. Using an IP that had no history at all of multiplayer or pvp and then making a concerted effort to "re-vitalize" rvr with this specific title was goanna have issues among some of it's fan base
C. Making an mmo particularly one more theme park "funneled" and static focused based on an IP with a heavy and extremely diversified mod community had relatively little hope of capturing much of the fan base that were heavy mod users.
D. Expecting a popular IP + similar content/game play to every other mmo on the already crowded and virtually identical market to = a better mouse trap.
E. the "instancing/or layering" between group members was simply odd for an mmo. I'm still not sure what the goal and target audience is/was for that feature.
Basically a failure to adequately understand much of the audience it was marketing towards with this IP.
Originally posted by TangentPoint That's funny, I saw a lot of hype stating that it *was* Skyrim online in the weeks/months prior to its release. Right on these forums.
Hype is and always has been irrelevant, those who make purchase decisions based on hype deserve what they get.
Originally posted by MMOExposed People say " an MMORPG, ESO was not able to be 'Skyrim online". But why couldnt it?
Because ESO is linear progression. Skyrim is not.
I think this is where much of the disappointment comes from when thinking or playing ESO.....it just isn't Elder Scrolls.
I'm just glad this doesn't stop the devs from making the single player games........so a bit better handled than that mess SWTOR created.
It doesn't affect Bethesda, they recently released Wolfenstein after all, Zenimax Media are pretty much the investment company, and are really totally seperate to Bethesda, what happened with ESO, is Bethesda have always said that they had no interest in making an MMO, their full on making the single player games after all, not just Elder Scrolls, but other IP's also, as there was no conflict of interest, Zenimax put together another 'team' to create Elder Scrolls Online, the game is 'published' by Bethesda, but its pretty much an 'in name only' kind of thing, Bethesda's involvement in ESO is practically Zero.
So we will hopefully still be getting some great games from Bethesda, though when the next Elder Scrolls game will be released, no idea, but chances are, it will probably sell very well, as usual
But the thing is, Why cant all the appeals of Skyrim/TES be done for large scale gaming in a MMO?
I haven't been banned in a while so let's get that ball rolling...
I find it hard to believe that after all the threads you have posted and participated in that you do not already know the answer to that question. It is genuinely hard to tell whether you are trolling or just truly incapable of learning.
I have not been banned in a while either. So I will ask, what has happened to MMOExpossed? I have seen this guys posts way back, they could be insightful etc. He always liked a question, but now I am not sure it is the same poster. Now he seems to have turned into a question posing bot. What is going on?
Developers needed an excuse to justify making the game a standard theme park.
Apparently a lot of gamers around here latched onto it.
Or maybe unrealistic community members have absolutely no clue to the development challenges involved to do a Skyrim online and how everyone's computer would be crippled with today's technology in 99.9% of homes if you tried to play a Skyrim online with hundreds around you.
Except that mortal online exists?
ESO could have been mortal online with a real budget, ruleset servers, and pve. They were perfectly clear in the first game informer article that they chose not to make it more like the elder scrolls games because mmo players wouldn't understand it.
They really said that.
Really, you bring up Mortal Online? Well, we all know what a runaway hit that game turned out to be...
The quality of the game has nothing to do with the "developmental challenges" that a lot of people around here keep saying prevented ESO from being more like an ES game.
The debs never said that they were making the game the way they did because its "not possible", gamers are the ones that keep making up what is and isn't possible. As if there aren't a lot of games out there that proves it is.
How many times are people going top post that its not possible to do ES combat in an MMO, even though mortal online, face of mankind, darkfall, planets idle, defiance all exist.
They Said themselves that the reason they didn't make it like sky rim or oblivion is because mmo players wouldn't understand how to play it.
Yesterday, at the Northern coasts of Skyrim, I was standing in front of a cave which, as I had found out earlier, was a bandit hideout. On my journey to this cave I had to fight some wolves and had contracted rocky joints. I was tired and cold, so I decided to make a fire and put up a tent to rest for a while. The next morning, after stilling my thirst and hunger, I did not really feel well rested. Yet, I decided to enter the cave quickly and dispatch the bandits. I could cure myself afterwards.
I did not realize, though, that my rocky joints had progressed, and after a while I contracted another disease, it might have been brain rot. Still, how hard can a couple of bandits in a cave really be? Unfortunately, the cave was much larger than I thought. Fighting the bandits was challenging but not too hard. Fighting my diseases was impossible. I had neither fish soup nor curing potions with me. So, in the middle of the cave, my armor bore me down as if I was carrying the mountain I was crawling through and I felt tired and exhausted again. I had to admit that I needed to cure myself first, before I could continue to fight the bandits. So, I crawled out of the cave, got on my horse, tried not to freeze to death until I made it to the first settlement with a shop and a tavern. I got rid of the diseases, ate and drank and slept in a nice warm cosy bed. Then the next day, i made it the last day for some cave dwelling bandits.
This is why ESO is not Skyrim Online. Every little action I did, I actually had to do. I had to eat and drink, otherwise I would have to suffer the consequences, I had to rest, I had to take care of the freezing temperatures outside. On top of that I had to fight my enemy. For a roleplayer, Skyrim is heaven.
First of all, you didn't do anything other than move your mouse pointer around the screen and pressed a couple of keys. But more importantly everyone has a different level of tolerance for non-essential minutiae: too little of it and immersion suffers... too much of it and it becomes its own little meta game that isn't everyone's cup of tea.
There is a reason why most games, no matter how detailed they try to be, do not try to simulate brushing your teeth, dressing one sock at a time, peeing or crapping: most people are perfectly fine leaving those more mundane things as abstractions.
But most important of all is the fact that the "skyrimness" of Skyrim is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt that any 2 players would agree on which features are essential and which you can do without.
However, I think that one thing we can all agree on is that in Skyrim and all other ES games there was a considerable degree of freedom about what you could do next, and in what order you wanted to do it. To a large extent that degree of freedom can be available in MMOs. Even within the themepark subcategory there are examples of more choice or less choice. Even something as simple as having 2 or 3 different level-gated zones to choose from to quest in (as in WOW's early levels) can give you the impression that you have more choice.
This, I believe is where ESO could have been more "skyrimmy." Making PVP, dungeon running, grinding, crafting and questing equally viable as a leveling method from level 1 to VR12 should have been a priority and it obviously wasn't. If it had been. that would have gone a long way toward satisfying most players' desire to play like they want to play... not exactly like in Skyrim, but more satisfying in a similar way.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
First of all, you didn't do anything other than move your mouse pointer around the screen and pressed a couple of keys. But more importantly everyone has a different level of tolerance for non-essential minutiae: too little of it and immersion suffers... too much of it and it becomes its own little meta game that isn't everyone's cup of tea.
There is a reason why most games, no matter how detailed they try to be, do not try to simulate brushing your teeth, dressing one sock at a time, peeing or crapping: most people are perfectly fine leaving those more mundane things as abstractions.
But most important of all is the fact that the "skyrimness" of Skyrim is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt that any 2 players would agree on which features are essential and which you can do without.
However, I think that one thing we can all agree on is that in Skyrim and all other ES games there was a considerable degree of freedom about what you could do next, and in what order you wanted to do it. To a large extent that degree of freedom can be available in MMOs. Even within the themepark subcategory there are examples of more choice or less choice. Even something as simple as having 2 or 3 different level-gated zones to choose from to quest in (as in WOW's early levels) can give you the impression that you have more choice.
This, I believe is where ESO could have been more "skyrimmy." Making PVP, dungeon running, grinding, crafting and questing equally viable as a leveling method from level 1 to VR12 should have been a priority and it obviously wasn't. If it had been. that would have gone a long way toward satisfying most players' desire to play like they want to play... not exactly like in Skyrim, but more satisfying in a similar way.
+1.
Then again maybe TESO should be mundane .... The Sims is hugely successful after all and it has ze brushing of the teeth ... nah .....
First of all, you didn't do anything other than move your mouse pointer around the screen and pressed a couple of keys. But more importantly everyone has a different level of tolerance for non-essential minutiae: too little of it and immersion suffers... too much of it and it becomes its own little meta game that isn't everyone's cup of tea.
There is a reason why most games, no matter how detailed they try to be, do not try to simulate brushing your teeth, dressing one sock at a time, peeing or crapping: most people are perfectly fine leaving those more mundane things as abstractions.
But most important of all is the fact that the "skyrimness" of Skyrim is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt that any 2 players would agree on which features are essential and which you can do without.
However, I think that one thing we can all agree on is that in Skyrim and all other ES games there was a considerable degree of freedom about what you could do next, and in what order you wanted to do it. To a large extent that degree of freedom can be available in MMOs. Even within the themepark subcategory there are examples of more choice or less choice. Even something as simple as having 2 or 3 different level-gated zones to choose from to quest in (as in WOW's early levels) can give you the impression that you have more choice.
This, I believe is where ESO could have been more "skyrimmy." Making PVP, dungeon running, grinding, crafting and questing equally viable as a leveling method from level 1 to VR12 should have been a priority and it obviously wasn't. If it had been. that would have gone a long way toward satisfying most players' desire to play like they want to play... not exactly like in Skyrim, but more satisfying in a similar way.
+1.
Then again maybe TESO should be mundane .... The Sims is hugely successful after all and it has ze brushing of the teeth ... nah .....
+1 from me, too.
Gervaise1, it is interesting that you should bring up The Sims, as their game was wildly successful but the MMO version, The Sims Online, did very poorly despite it being rather faithful to the original game.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Duh, no it's not a single player game... so what? Real life is pretty much sandbox last time I checked, with 7+ billion concurrent players on the same server.
Meh... they deserve to crash and burn. Damn shame what could have been done with it.
So, would ESO have been better if ZOS had implemented it the way Guild Wars 1 is?
That is, MMO-like cities, to find main quests and party members, but once you step out you are in your own instance. That way you could actually have made the story according to each person, the part y lead, and they rest tag along.
Originally posted by Phry I think the problem really is that they were not really trying to create an Elder Scrolls game, but 'remake' DAoC using the IP, they failed at it miserably, though that might be due to the combination of game engines they used, and possibly the poor implementation of the server technology. But also, even as a remake of DAoC it failed to utilise the features that actually made DAoC popular in its time, perhaps its a poor understanding of either IP that caused the game to fail as badly as it did, the various bugs and glitches however certainly didn't help things.
I see a lot of people relating their experiences of Skyrim and I find it amusing that you leave out some crucial facts.
The game on release with no mods was nowhere near as impressive as the picture you are painting for everyone who hasn't played it.
Please if you are going to complain about ESO, use the same level of understanding that sometimes things are not as good when they first come out.
Not to say that my Skyrim experience was shit when I played it as vanilla, but you cant do half of the things some of you are describing without modding heavily.
In closing, I think people forgot how much hatred ES fans had for Skyrim when it was first released since it changed almost every facet of game-play outside of melee combat.
I see a lot of people relating their experiences of Skyrim and I find it amusing that you leave out some crucial facts.
The game on release with no mods was nowhere near as impressive as the picture you are painting for everyone who hasn't played it.
Please if you are going to complain about ESO, use the same level of understanding that sometimes things are not as good when they first come out.
Not to say that my Skyrim experience was shit when I played it as vanilla, but you cant do half of the things some of you are describing without modding heavily.
In closing, I think people forgot how much hatred ES fans had for Skyrim when it was first released since it changed almost every facet of game-play outside of melee combat.
I only partially agree with this. Yes Skyrim was vastly improved with mods. But it still had much better reviews 'out of the box' and was generally received better than ESO was.
Comments
Or maybe unrealistic community members have absolutely no clue to the development challenges involved to do a Skyrim online and how everyone's computer would be crippled with today's technology in 99.9% of homes if you tried to play a Skyrim online with hundreds around you.
There Is Always Hope!
Because ESO is linear progression. Skyrim is not.
I think this is where much of the disappointment comes from when thinking or playing ESO.....it just isn't Elder Scrolls.
I'm just glad this doesn't stop the devs from making the single player games........so a bit better handled than that mess SWTOR created.
the combat from skyrim could never work in a multiplayer game, especially archery and destruction spells. having almost every single NPC killable would not work in a multiplayer game.
having all the mobs throughout the world change level based on your current level would not work in a multiplayer game.
ESO could not be skyrim online without major changes, not even sure why this needs explaining.
just a comment to add to this to this paragraph. Like you said, Skyrim is all about you, one player in the entire game. Every person playing the game on his computer is the hero alone in the game.
With that said, ESO? its exactly the same thing in an mmo set up. We can see each other in the game and play together but you are the hero in your game just like i am the hero in my game. What i do in my computer to change the world does not affect you in any way. So it is the same thing as a single player game but with a multiplayer set up that allows people to hang out together.
So yeah they definitelly fell short by trying to please both TES players and MMO players. They still have a chance to fix the whole thing because mmos are supossed to be long term with long term support, but it will require massive changes and a lot of manpower, time and resources. Its their business that is on the line unless they want to go F2P and ignore everything else.
The Justice system is on the way.
Skyrim Online has already been made
They named it Asherons Call
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
The Only Thing that really really sucked about ESO is the Vet content. It would have been cool to actually meet players in other alliances in their zones. Pvp missions maybe? They could have taken this game is such a better direction, but used Vet content as a grind for subs, and craglorn as the bait... sorry not going to quest endlessessly for days, literally days of playtime in vet content alone AFTER already hitting 50. ESO after some balances and fixing the phasing would be a fantastic game. I hope they fix it.
Also make PvP worth it. I PvP for 2 hours and get 2% vet level, seriously? That was the highlight of the game and there is nobody doing it because there is no incentive, we all have to trudge along doing vet levels.
Good game, bad decisions.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Except that mortal online exists?
ESO could have been mortal online with a real budget, ruleset servers, and pve. They were perfectly clear in the first game informer article that they chose not to make it more like the elder scrolls games because mmo players wouldn't understand it.
They really said that.
Really, you bring up Mortal Online? Well, we all know what a runaway hit that game turned out to be...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
to the OP, several reasons for the "pushback" imo
A. Using a sandboxed IP and stuffing it into a more "funneled" or theme park product was going to have issues no matter how polished among much of it's fan base
B. Using an IP that had no history at all of multiplayer or pvp and then making a concerted effort to "re-vitalize" rvr with this specific title was goanna have issues among some of it's fan base
C. Making an mmo particularly one more theme park "funneled" and static focused based on an IP with a heavy and extremely diversified mod community had relatively little hope of capturing much of the fan base that were heavy mod users.
D. Expecting a popular IP + similar content/game play to every other mmo on the already crowded and virtually identical market to = a better mouse trap.
E. the "instancing/or layering" between group members was simply odd for an mmo. I'm still not sure what the goal and target audience is/was for that feature.
Basically a failure to adequately understand much of the audience it was marketing towards with this IP.
That's funny, I saw a lot of hype stating that it *was* Skyrim online in the weeks/months prior to its release. Right on these forums.
It doesn't affect Bethesda, they recently released Wolfenstein after all, Zenimax Media are pretty much the investment company, and are really totally seperate to Bethesda, what happened with ESO, is Bethesda have always said that they had no interest in making an MMO, their full on making the single player games after all, not just Elder Scrolls, but other IP's also, as there was no conflict of interest, Zenimax put together another 'team' to create Elder Scrolls Online, the game is 'published' by Bethesda, but its pretty much an 'in name only' kind of thing, Bethesda's involvement in ESO is practically Zero.
So we will hopefully still be getting some great games from Bethesda, though when the next Elder Scrolls game will be released, no idea, but chances are, it will probably sell very well, as usual
I have not been banned in a while either. So I will ask, what has happened to MMOExpossed? I have seen this guys posts way back, they could be insightful etc. He always liked a question, but now I am not sure it is the same poster. Now he seems to have turned into a question posing bot. What is going on?
The quality of the game has nothing to do with the "developmental challenges" that a lot of people around here keep saying prevented ESO from being more like an ES game.
The debs never said that they were making the game the way they did because its "not possible", gamers are the ones that keep making up what is and isn't possible. As if there aren't a lot of games out there that proves it is.
How many times are people going top post that its not possible to do ES combat in an MMO, even though mortal online, face of mankind, darkfall, planets idle, defiance all exist.
They Said themselves that the reason they didn't make it like sky rim or oblivion is because mmo players wouldn't understand how to play it.
First of all, you didn't do anything other than move your mouse pointer around the screen and pressed a couple of keys. But more importantly everyone has a different level of tolerance for non-essential minutiae: too little of it and immersion suffers... too much of it and it becomes its own little meta game that isn't everyone's cup of tea.
There is a reason why most games, no matter how detailed they try to be, do not try to simulate brushing your teeth, dressing one sock at a time, peeing or crapping: most people are perfectly fine leaving those more mundane things as abstractions.
But most important of all is the fact that the "skyrimness" of Skyrim is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt that any 2 players would agree on which features are essential and which you can do without.
However, I think that one thing we can all agree on is that in Skyrim and all other ES games there was a considerable degree of freedom about what you could do next, and in what order you wanted to do it. To a large extent that degree of freedom can be available in MMOs. Even within the themepark subcategory there are examples of more choice or less choice. Even something as simple as having 2 or 3 different level-gated zones to choose from to quest in (as in WOW's early levels) can give you the impression that you have more choice.
This, I believe is where ESO could have been more "skyrimmy." Making PVP, dungeon running, grinding, crafting and questing equally viable as a leveling method from level 1 to VR12 should have been a priority and it obviously wasn't. If it had been. that would have gone a long way toward satisfying most players' desire to play like they want to play... not exactly like in Skyrim, but more satisfying in a similar way.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
+1.
Then again maybe TESO should be mundane .... The Sims is hugely successful after all and it has ze brushing of the teeth ... nah .....
+1 from me, too.
Gervaise1, it is interesting that you should bring up The Sims, as their game was wildly successful but the MMO version, The Sims Online, did very poorly despite it being rather faithful to the original game.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Lack of courage and imagination?
Duh, no it's not a single player game... so what? Real life is pretty much sandbox last time I checked, with 7+ billion concurrent players on the same server.
Meh... they deserve to crash and burn. Damn shame what could have been done with it.
So, would ESO have been better if ZOS had implemented it the way Guild Wars 1 is?
That is, MMO-like cities, to find main quests and party members, but once you step out you are in your own instance. That way you could actually have made the story according to each person, the part y lead, and they rest tag along.
/This
http://www.entropiapartners.com/?r=22415
I see a lot of people relating their experiences of Skyrim and I find it amusing that you leave out some crucial facts.
The game on release with no mods was nowhere near as impressive as the picture you are painting for everyone who hasn't played it.
Please if you are going to complain about ESO, use the same level of understanding that sometimes things are not as good when they first come out.
Not to say that my Skyrim experience was shit when I played it as vanilla, but you cant do half of the things some of you are describing without modding heavily.
In closing, I think people forgot how much hatred ES fans had for Skyrim when it was first released since it changed almost every facet of game-play outside of melee combat.
I only partially agree with this. Yes Skyrim was vastly improved with mods. But it still had much better reviews 'out of the box' and was generally received better than ESO was.