Howdy, Stranger!

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

My personal views on the viability of ESO

JoeyjojoshabaduJoeyjojoshabadu Member UncommonPosts: 162

ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

 

As an ES and MMORPG fan, and former ESO fan, I've thought a lot about this game. I feel the same way as I've seen so many other state while I was playing, that "I want to have fun" or "I want the game to succeed". But by those very sentiments the game is, simply put, not good enough, we just "want" it to be.  

 

There have been clearly multiple issues with this game that have been discussed many, many times. Most I feel seem to skirt around the core issues and point to bugs, lag, bots, VR levels and so on. To me these are just symptoms. Many MMORPGs have plenty of bugs, lag, etc but these are often forgiven in a suitably engaging game (and look, I know there will always be people who complain about these things in any MMORPG, but there is little doubt in ESO these complains have overshadowed the game to a larger degree, and there is a reason for this). I see less forgiveness for these things in ESO, which is reflected in the average/poor reception the game received in general and the rapidly falling numbers. I honestly feel if all the bugs, bots, lag, etc were completely fixed the game would still be doing poorly.

 

I think the fundamental reason for the game's problems and reception is the design team and their vision for this game. By which I mean the team they hired to develop the game came from other MMORPGs, and they've carried their 'baggage' across. It feels so much like the fundamental ES concepts such as open world exploration has been ignored in favour of "Oh, but we did it this way when I was in the development team of the xxxxxx MMORPG".

 

Don't mistake me, I am fully aware that, as an MMORPG, ESO was not able to be 'Skyrim online', but I feel that the focus leaned too far toward developing a fairly standard MMORPG, and this happened because devs who had worked on other MMORPGs were hired to not just support, but to lead the project. And thus we have ZOS. A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage.

 

To summarise: many people expected ES, at it's core, but online and were disappointed. But nevertheless, though many changes to the single player ES structure were needed to make an ES-O (including many unrealised or unexpected by ES fans), the dev team, by dint of their backgrounds, discarded an unnecessarily large component of Elder Scrolls when making the game.

 

«134

Comments

  • BetaguyBetaguy Member UncommonPosts: 2,614
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

     

    As an ES and MMORPG fan, and former ESO fan, I've thought a lot about this game. I feel the same way as I've seen so many other state while I was playing, that "I want to have fun" or "I want the game to succeed". But by those very sentiments the game is, simply put, not good enough, we just "want" it to be.  

     

    There have been clearly multiple issues with this game that have been discussed many, many times. Most I feel seem to skirt around the core issues and point to bugs, lag, bots, VR levels and so on. To me these are just symptoms. Many MMORPGs have plenty of bugs, lag, etc but these are often forgiven in a suitably engaging game (and look, I know there will always be people who complain about these things in any MMORPG, but there is little doubt in ESO these complains have overshadowed the game to a larger degree, and there is a reason for this). I see less forgiveness for these things in ESO, which is reflected in the average/poor reception the game received in general and the rapidly falling numbers. I honestly feel if all the bugs, bots, lag, etc were completely fixed the game would still be doing poorly.

     

    I think the fundamental reason for the game's problems and reception is the design team and their vision for this game. By which I mean the team they hired to develop the game came from other MMORPGs, and they've carried their 'baggage' across. It feels so much like the fundamental ES concepts such as open world exploration has been ignored in favour of "Oh, but we did it this way when I was in the development team of the xxxxxx MMORPG".

     

    Don't mistake me, I am fully aware that, as an MMORPG, ESO was not able to be 'Skyrim online', but I feel that the focus leaned too far toward developing a fairly standard MMORPG, and this happened because devs who had worked on other MMORPGs were hired to not just support, but to lead the project. And thus we have ZOS. A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage.

     

    To summarise: many people expected ES, at it's core, but online and were disappointed. But nevertheless, though many changes to the single player ES structure were needed to make an ES-O (including many unrealised or unexpected by ES fans), the dev team, by dint of their backgrounds, discarded an unnecessarily large component of Elder Scrolls when making the game.

     

    My personal view is that your personal view is inaccurate. 

    I didn't read after the first paragraph, please provide proof and then I can finish reading your other 5 paragraphs. Thanks.

    image

  • gwei1984gwei1984 Member UncommonPosts: 413

    Hm, you are the guy who started the "whats wildstar like?" troll-thread in the eso section, arent you?

    /rollseyes

     

    Hodor!

  • mrBurns210mrBurns210 Member Posts: 114
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

     

    As an ES and MMORPG fan, and former ESO fan, I've thought a lot about this game. I feel the same way as I've seen so many other state while I was playing, that "I want to have fun" or "I want the game to succeed". But by those very sentiments the game is, simply put, not good enough, we just "want" it to be.  

     

    There have been clearly multiple issues with this game that have been discussed many, many times. Most I feel seem to skirt around the core issues and point to bugs, lag, bots, VR levels and so on. To me these are just symptoms. Many MMORPGs have plenty of bugs, lag, etc but these are often forgiven in a suitably engaging game (and look, I know there will always be people who complain about these things in any MMORPG, but there is little doubt in ESO these complains have overshadowed the game to a larger degree, and there is a reason for this). I see less forgiveness for these things in ESO, which is reflected in the average/poor reception the game received in general and the rapidly falling numbers. I honestly feel if all the bugs, bots, lag, etc were completely fixed the game would still be doing poorly.

     

    I think the fundamental reason for the game's problems and reception is the design team and their vision for this game. By which I mean the team they hired to develop the game came from other MMORPGs, and they've carried their 'baggage' across. It feels so much like the fundamental ES concepts such as open world exploration has been ignored in favour of "Oh, but we did it this way when I was in the development team of the xxxxxx MMORPG".

     

    Don't mistake me, I am fully aware that, as an MMORPG, ESO was not able to be 'Skyrim online', but I feel that the focus leaned too far toward developing a fairly standard MMORPG, and this happened because devs who had worked on other MMORPGs were hired to not just support, but to lead the project. And thus we have ZOS. A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage.

     

    To summarise: many people expected ES, at it's core, but online and were disappointed. But nevertheless, though many changes to the single player ES structure were needed to make an ES-O (including many unrealised or unexpected by ES fans), the dev team, by dint of their backgrounds, discarded an unnecessarily large component of Elder Scrolls when making the game.

     

    This has been my thoughts all along.

     

     

  • JoeyjojoshabaduJoeyjojoshabadu Member UncommonPosts: 162

    My personal view is that your personal view is inaccurate. 

    I didn't read after the first paragraph, please provide proof and then I can finish reading your other 5 paragraphs. Thanks.

    Well it's unlikely we ever will get actual figures from ZOS, so you could keep this argument up for ever, even if the servers are shut off, buried in peat for 30 years and used as a low-grade fuel for survivors of the apocalypse.

     

  • DemrocksDemrocks Member UncommonPosts: 136

    No proof has to be given that Zenimax delivered a sub par mmo with tons and tons of flaws and weird design choices.

    The proof comes from Zenimax themselves by keeping box sales secret and not showing how many subs they currently have.

    The game is in rapid decline.....in both pve and pvp.

     

    If you need proof to see ESO is doing bad then keep that dream up but dont act suprise when there are massive layoffs incomming this year or the next.

    Not hating not flaming not doomsaying, just using reality to gauge modern mmo's.

     

    ESO + Wildstar + Archeage + Warlords of Dreanor + FF ARR  >2014<

    When all these mmo's are live there is going to be a few mmo's that wont make it anymore as a subscription mmo.

    And looking at ESO myself when logging in i dare say this mmo is already in a realy bad spot due to its own mistakes.

     

    There are tons of mmo's out there today, if you dont make something realy special you arent rising to the top, you are deying a slow and painfull death like we have seen with most tripple A budget mmo's.

     

  • JoeyjojoshabaduJoeyjojoshabadu Member UncommonPosts: 162
    Originally posted by gwei1984

    Hm, you are the guy who started the "whats wildstar like?" troll-thread in the eso section, arent you?

    /rollseyes

     

     

    Yes I did. I had played ESO and was asking if any other current or former ESO players were also playing Wildstar, and what they thought of both. Compare and contrast, as I said in that thread.

     

    However, you're correct, I mentioned the name of a different game. It truly is an unforgivable sin. We all know games are like religions, even thinking about another is sacrilege. You should burn me at the stake.

    /spins eyes like gimbals

  • BetaguyBetaguy Member UncommonPosts: 2,614
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    My personal view is that your personal view is inaccurate. 

    I didn't read after the first paragraph, please provide proof and then I can finish reading your other 5 paragraphs. Thanks.

    Well it's unlikely we ever will get actual figures from ZOS, so you could keep this argument up for ever, even if the servers are shut off, buried in peat for 30 years and used as a low-grade fuel for survivors of the apocalypse.

     

     I disagree, they will release numbers at some point, I'll bookmark this thread till that day. 

    image

  • Yoda_CloneYoda_Clone Member Posts: 219
    Originally posted by Betaguy
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

     

    <--SNIP-->

     

    My personal view is that your personal view is inaccurate. 

    I didn't read after the first paragraph, please provide proof and then I can finish reading your other 5 paragraphs. Thanks.

    My personal view is that his personal view is 100% accurate.  It's an OPINION.

    The strawman argument you make that he needs to provide you proof is the usual specious counter we see in forums everywhere to suggestions that someone's favorite toy isn't all that it should be.

    He has no obligation whatsoever to provide you proof.  He is entitled to have his own OPINION.  It doesn't have to agree with yours.

    You are entitled to have your own opinion, too; your snooty comment, however, detracts from that opinion having any weight.

  • GillleanGilllean Member Posts: 169

    Idk but  from a vet 12 perspective I burned out .

    Balance issues in PVP ....   NB that spam 1 skill few times and your dead

    Unkillable DKs

    Lags

     Dungeons queue     I roll as a DPS heal and it take me a hour to get team  to be honest since I'm vet 12   I could not find a team for dungeons   veteran dungeons . Craglorn as well people do only guild raid ....

    I got full Set Legendary   

     I hoped I'll get max lvl craft full legendary gear and fun will start but not....

    Was great to do quest from 1 to 50   then  veteran quest were only for EXP only to few big great ones listened  but most ignored  until vet 8 ...then I went to Craglorn and rushed to vet 12 by dungeon farm .

    [mod edit]

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,047
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

     

    I hate when people make statements as I highlighted in Yellow as it's arrogant as all hell.

    Actually, though I have my criticisms and though it's natural for games to lose people after the first few months (some exceptions like WoW) there were quite a lot of people in Auridon last night which is the first area after the tutiorial on the High Elf side. I was very surprised at how filled it was. Alts? New players? Who knows but it felt very vibrant.

    As far as your "ignoring the things that made an Elder Scrolls game": Though I do want "skyrim/morrowind online" and would prefer it, the devs stated that they were were making an Elder Scrolls MMO not an MMO that captured/embodied the elder scrolls game.

    And that's what we have. This is an mmo, at least in the current sense of the word.

    The Bethesda devs ( not "Zenimax") have no interest in multiplayer elder scrolls as that has been said many times before.

     




  • NellusNellus Member UncommonPosts: 247
    Originally posted by Yoda_Clone
    Originally posted by Betaguy
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

     

    <--SNIP-->

     

    My personal view is that your personal view is inaccurate. 

    I didn't read after the first paragraph, please provide proof and then I can finish reading your other 5 paragraphs. Thanks.

    My personal view is that his personal view is 100% accurate.  It's an OPINION.

    The strawman argument you make that he needs to provide you proof is the usual specious counter we see in forums everywhere to suggestions that someone's favorite toy isn't all that it should be.

    He has no obligation whatsoever to provide you proof.  He is entitled to have his own OPINION.  It doesn't have to agree with yours.

    You are entitled to have your own opinion, too; your snooty comment, however, detracts from that opinion having any weight.

    The OP seemed to state it as fact, not opinion. He even refers to it as "the truth". I don't see any wording that would lead me to believe he's presenting it as an opinion - such as "seems" or "looks like" or "I don't think". I would forgive the omission of that kinda thing, but saying "the truth" is pretty undeniable.

    When presenting something as fact you really should provide proof, else your statement carries no weight. The same cannot be said about supporting opinions with facts - but it's always helpful. This board is actually the worst I visit when it comes to providing solid basis and meaningful argument. I will also say that I'm glad he didn't, I'm tired of seeing XFire, Raptr and Twitch presented as gauges for success.

    - Nellus

  • Mors.MagneMors.Magne Member UncommonPosts: 1,549

    Angry Joe made an extremely detailed review of ESO, which highlighted all the shortcomings of ESO, and he provided loads of evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov3B26h12C4

     

    If you need further convincing that ESO isn't up to par, I don't know what to say to you.

  • JoeyjojoshabaduJoeyjojoshabadu Member UncommonPosts: 162

    OK, I'll admit that I could be wrong about relatively poor numbers and sub retention (relative to other AAA MMORPGs). But I bet I'm not. Anyone want to take me up on that? Falling hard copy sales, emptying PvP zones, declining guilds, poor reviews and so on may not absolutely prove a lacklustre performance, but as a whole the cumulative supportive evidence is very hard to deny (though I accept many will, this is part of the human condition).   

    BTW, with megaserver tech seeing a local pop'n is also meaningless in terns of proof of overall subs, as the numbers of active servers may have dropped 100 fold and you'd never know.

     

  • rounnerrounner Member UncommonPosts: 697
    With a single mega server and a single large battle ground and single large end game raid area, you don't need insider knowledge to comment on participation. If there's little pvp action theres little pvp action and you can talk all the official numbers and proof bull you want the fact is if theres little pvp action then theres little pvp action.
  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Member RarePosts: 5,361
    There are probably doomsday threads exactly like this buried somewhere for AoC, The Secret World, Everquest 2, Final Fantasy XIV, SWTOR and who knows how many mmos in the past 10 years.  The only ones I could think of that actually came true was Vanguard and Star Wars Galaxies but even those sustained its self for many years before SoE decided to drop it.  But ESO is no where near their level of FUBAR.
  • rodingorodingo Member RarePosts: 2,867
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    OK, I'll admit that I could be wrong about relatively poor numbers and sub retention (relative to other AAA MMORPGs). But bet I'm not. Anyone want to take me up on that? I'll be bookmarking this thread too, and with confidence.

    BTW, with megaserver tech seeing a local pop'n is also meaningless in terns of proof of overall subs, as the numbers of active servers may have dropped 100 fold and you'd never know.

     

    I think there is probably more people that agree than disagree  with you OP,  however some of these guys are heavily invested in the game or with their reputations on these boards for defending ESO.  Besides, no one likes to hear "I told you so".  I think this game has probably seen it's biggest bulk of people who have left the game already.  The question is, which number is currently more now?  The people that are still leaving due to canceling subs or new people coming in?  Of course these are questions we will probably never have the answer to.  However sometimes you can just tell when a game is not doing well by looking at all of the reviews about it and the forums activity and behavior from both fans and people with critiques and concerns.  There are also other ways to observe trends in the game's popularity with gamers, which equals money for the game studio and publisher.  Take each one of those elements individually and it's not really a good measure.  However, when you combine all of those elements you can get a pretty detailed sense of the bigger picture.  Some can see it easily, others will just refuse to see it at all.

    "If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,174
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

     

    A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage

     

    No - just no.

    This is a common mistake made by folks who don't know how game dev studios operate.

    Existing Game dev studios are closed communities - they have established teams and more importantly eatabliahed DNA of what they do well.

    Simply put there are teams who excel at single player adventure games, teams that excel at PvP arena games, teams that do PvE MMORPG etc...

    Once a new Dev joins one of those teams they get indoctrinated into that teams DNA - and they learn how to do whatever that team is good at doing.

    You cannot take a new top guy and tell him to change the DNA of an account established team - it does not work.

    What works - especially when you have a 200 million dollar project to make a MMORPG- is hiring an entire team of devs whose experience is to make MMORPGs.

     

    thats how it works in reality.

  • JoeyjojoshabaduJoeyjojoshabadu Member UncommonPosts: 162

    Lacking actual sub numbers from ZOS (which may be suggestive in itself) we can only rely on various other gauges. For example hard copy sales. Here's a comparison in vgachartz.com between retail sales for ESO and SWTOR. Very similar patterns between the two, although overall sales were much higher with SWTOR, there was a proportionately greater sales decline in that game in the latter weeks (though in absolute figures SWTOR still sold more copies in those weeks).

    Date - week - sales no's - %variance from prev week - total sales

     

    ESO        
    05th April 2014 1 253,316 N/A 253,316
    12th April 2014 2 50,824 -79.90% 304,140
    19th April 2014 3 27,175 -46.50% 331,315
    26th April 2014 4 16,087 -40.80% 347,402
    03rd May 2014 5 12,672 -21.20% 360,074
    10th May 2014 6 11,922 -5.90% 371,996
    17th May 2014 7 10,562 -11.40% 382,558
    24th May 2014 8 9,027 -14.50% 391,585

     

    SWTOR        
    24th December 2011 1 1,431,586 N/A 1,431,586
    31st December 2011 2 298,088 -79.20% 1,729,674
    07th January 2012 3 106,497 -64.30% 1,836,171
    14th January 2012 4 60,926 -42.80% 1,897,097
    21st January 2012 5 53,080 -12.90% 1,950,177
    28th January 2012 6 44,013 -17.10% 1,994,190
    04th February 2012 7 31,080 -29.40% 2,025,270
    11th February 2012 8 24,761 -20.30% 2,050,031
     
  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Member RarePosts: 5,361
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

     

    A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage

     

    No - just no.

    This is a common mistake made by folks who don't know how game dev studios operate.

    Except you of course

  • JoeyjojoshabaduJoeyjojoshabadu Member UncommonPosts: 162
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

     

    A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage

     

    No - just no.

    This is a common mistake made by folks who don't know how game dev studios operate.

    Existing Game dev studios are closed communities - they have established teams and more importantly eatabliahed DNA of what they do well.

    Simply put there are teams who excel at single player adventure games, teams that excel at PvP arena games, teams that do PvE MMORPG etc...

    Once a new Dev joins one of those teams they get indoctrinated into that teams DNA - and they learn how to do whatever that team is good at doing.

    You cannot take a new top guy and tell him to change the DNA of an account established team - it does not work.

    What works - especially when you have a 200 million dollar project to make a MMORPG- is hiring an entire team of devs whose experience is to make MMORPGs.

     

    thats how it works in reality.

    You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I believe you. However, with regards to that highlighted sentence, it appears that this approach hasn't actually worked out very well. Kind of my point.

     

     

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,174
    Originally posted by ElRenmazuo
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

     

    A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage

     

    No - just no.

    This is a common mistake made by folks who don't know how game dev studios operate.

    Except you of course

    /facepalm

    Do you have anything to refute my post or do you just have a problem with people actually talking to game developers?

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

     

    A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage

     

    No - just no.

    This is a common mistake made by folks who don't know how game dev studios operate.

    Existing Game dev studios are closed communities - they have established teams and more importantly eatabliahed DNA of what they do well.

    Simply put there are teams who excel at single player adventure games, teams that excel at PvP arena games, teams that do PvE MMORPG etc...

    Once a new Dev joins one of those teams they get indoctrinated into that teams DNA - and they learn how to do whatever that team is good at doing.

    You cannot take a new top guy and tell him to change the DNA of an account established team - it does not work.

    What works - especially when you have a 200 million dollar project to make a MMORPG- is hiring an entire team of devs whose experience is to make MMORPGs.

     

    thats how it works in reality.

    You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I believe you. However, with regards to that highlighted sentence, it appears that this approach hasn't actually worked out very well. Kind of my point.

    Why? Your data is seriously flawed, btw. You use data from vgchartz? Really? Remember that vgchartz calculates retail sales. SWTOR had a VERY good retail push. In fact! SWTOR actually shows as outselling Mists of Pandaria by over 1 million copies! So, all things being equal, you are basically saying that based on these sales numbers, you're effectively saying that SWTOR has 12 million subscribers. Good data. 

     

    Fact is that ESO had a very good digital push. Actually 4 version of ESO were in the top 10 of Amazon games for quite some time leading up to the release, meaning it was getting good pre-orders. I don't know how that works out financially, though. Only time will tell, but I think you might be misled by the numbers you're treating as gospel.

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,174
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu
    Originally posted by DMKano

    What works - especially when you have a 200 million dollar project to make a MMORPG- is hiring an entire team of devs whose experience is to make MMORPGs.

     

    thats how it works in reality.

    You sound like you know what you're talking about, so I believe you. However, with regards to that highlighted sentence, it appears that this approach hasn't actually worked out very well. Kind of my point.

    Ah well making a hugely successful MMORPG is an entire thing completely - if any Dev studio figured out a sure fire way of doing that - ha!

    But ZOS did make a MMORPG - no arguing that.

    The biggest issues with AAA MMORPGs are the massive complexity and the fact that it takes 5+ years from conception to launch.

    Can you imagine making a game for market in FIVE years from now? 

    The technology is moving rapidly and players likes/dislikes are changing rapidly as well.

    It is an extremely difficult task to build a MMORPG period - now to make a hugely successful one - its like winning the lotto, very very slim chance.

     

  • tharkthark Member UncommonPosts: 1,188
    Originally posted by Joeyjojoshabadu

    ESO is not doing as well as hoped/expected. I hate to make a categorical statement like that, particularly given (as has frequently been pointed out) we have no actual figures for this. But really, even those denying this must feel the truth behind it.

     

    As an ES and MMORPG fan, and former ESO fan, I've thought a lot about this game. I feel the same way as I've seen so many other state while I was playing, that "I want to have fun" or "I want the game to succeed". But by those very sentiments the game is, simply put, not good enough, we just "want" it to be.  

     

    There have been clearly multiple issues with this game that have been discussed many, many times. Most I feel seem to skirt around the core issues and point to bugs, lag, bots, VR levels and so on. To me these are just symptoms. Many MMORPGs have plenty of bugs, lag, etc but these are often forgiven in a suitably engaging game (and look, I know there will always be people who complain about these things in any MMORPG, but there is little doubt in ESO these complains have overshadowed the game to a larger degree, and there is a reason for this). I see less forgiveness for these things in ESO, which is reflected in the average/poor reception the game received in general and the rapidly falling numbers. I honestly feel if all the bugs, bots, lag, etc were completely fixed the game would still be doing poorly.

     

    I think the fundamental reason for the game's problems and reception is the design team and their vision for this game. By which I mean the team they hired to develop the game came from other MMORPGs, and they've carried their 'baggage' across. It feels so much like the fundamental ES concepts such as open world exploration has been ignored in favour of "Oh, but we did it this way when I was in the development team of the xxxxxx MMORPG".

     

    Don't mistake me, I am fully aware that, as an MMORPG, ESO was not able to be 'Skyrim online', but I feel that the focus leaned too far toward developing a fairly standard MMORPG, and this happened because devs who had worked on other MMORPGs were hired to not just support, but to lead the project. And thus we have ZOS. A better way, I feel, would have been to let Bethesda to develop and lead, while utilising the MMORPG knowledge of people such as Matt Frior, Paul Sage, et al on a consultatory basis. We'd have a game driven by the wonderful vision of Bethesda devs, but backed up by the technical MMORPG skills of Frior/Sage.

     

    To summarise: many people expected ES, at it's core, but online and were disappointed. But nevertheless, though many changes to the single player ES structure were needed to make an ES-O (including many unrealised or unexpected by ES fans), the dev team, by dint of their backgrounds, discarded an unnecessarily large component of Elder Scrolls when making the game.

     

    PLease provide some more examples on how you think ESO would become a better game part from the one thing you provide, an open World.:)

    The game is a fairly open ended IMO , you can run around at your leisure in each zone and discover new places if that is what you like. It's "almost" Skyrim online if you like , even if you claim it not to be, IMO atleast :)

    When I played Skyrim I played it very much on rails, even thou I know I could run around at random, so not everyone cares or bothers about this "core" feature of yours.

    ESO online is a VERY VERY unique experience and there is NOT one game that is like this one, part from maybe some simmularities to TSW. So the teory about to much features from previous MMO developers does not hold ground at all, ESO is NOT like any other MMO.

     

  • GillleanGilllean Member Posts: 169

    I forgot to mention I played all MMO on the market right now and ESO hooked me most than any other

    Wield star ... don't even want to talk about this over hyped terrible game

    Arch age same Face palm

    EQL  I enjoy it but I  need unlimited space for MAX power creativeness

    EQN considering players buildings well ......Might be a epic game but Sony must keep in a right direction

    most Asian MMO that are in development and hyped around here same   .... cheap lazy trash

    Black Desert Well this might be interesting  didn't play my self yet so no loud words

     

    ESO great questing  no doubt but lose all is purpose after veteran lvl and start of New quests .  other fraction should have been there for alts lvling not for veteran ranks.

    graphics  With SweetSFX much better than ArchAge

    Style  GREAT at this ZOS bitch slap all mmos

    enviroment details as well great work

    Skill progresion very good but a lot of balance issues .....

    Craft SO SO never loved it very much hmm but in ESO I leveled all of them HMMM from my action si smean is GOOD?

    Cyrodil big epic but no  Epic Purpose in  it yet also balance issues lags

     

    over all ESO is a good game Much better than the Hate it got  still lucks longevity

Sign In or Register to comment.