Originally posted by darkwarhamme flaws that ... were accepted in Skyrim are not acceptable in ESO (such as combat). Very strange double standard, but thus is the world we live in. Hard to be objective about things that are completely subjective.
I would say, the reason for the double-standard is this:
In a single-player RPG, combat is what you do to get through the story. Once you're done with the whole story, the game ends.
In a MMO, combat is what you are left with after the story ends. Once you're done wiht the story in an MMO, what you're left with is doing combat over and over and over again.
This is why combat matters so much more in an MMO. So it's a very valid double-standard. My opinion anyway.
(The same thing is true with balance, I couldn't care less if a my buddy played Dragon Age as a Mage and facerolled everything, while I struggled as a rogue. We both had fun experiences. But in an MMO, his mage gets invited to groups/raids and my rogue has to reroll as a mage because i don't do shit for a group.).
There are other things that make it "forgivable" as well. Actually, many people (myself included) simply think the combat in Skyrim is better than in ESO.
Combat in Skyrim was a lot more visceral. It had a far better sense of weight to it. It was also not a soft target game. Where you pointed, you shot. In ESO, that's not how it works.
Also, once you figured out how to keybind things, you could actually have more skills and things that were accessible through keybinds. Add a keybind mod to it and anything was possible and accessible at the press of a key.
In the end, I just simply think that although the combat in Skyrim was one of it's weaker points, it was a lot better and more interesting than what ESO has to offer. It just feels and works better.
Unfortunately this is kind of how conversations go on here lately. Nit picking and logical fallacies going on to prove someone is "wrong".
One thing to know, there is a VERY vocal minority of people that dislike most MMOs. I used to enjoy conversations on here, but the personal attacks and dismissive comments don't help. Strange when reddit can have more civil conversations about MMOs. I hope this changes, but it is pretty much up to the community to do so.
No one is dismissing anything. It's more that you and others won't be happy unless those who are still enjoying it despite the mixed reviews join the negative pack.
The game was doomed from day one to fail in the eyes of people like you because it was impossible to live up to the experience of the single player games even though Zenimax said time and time again they aren't trying to duplicate that experience because it just isn't possible to compare an MMO to a single player experience. What I think some of you fail to admit in the negative cult is that if you compare the experience to similar games that are story focused like Final Fantasy, Age of Conan, Rift, SWTOR, etc, to me and what I'm looking for it is head and shoulders above those games and may end up doing just fine...we shall see.
That's a whole lot of dismissing going on in your not dismissing anything.
May I try now?
It's more that you and others won't be unhappy unless those who are not enjoying it despite the cries of greatness join the happy hippy parade.
The game was going to be the best ever from day one in the eyes of people like you because it was impossible not to live up to the rose colored glassed days of DaoC even though Zenimax said time and time again they aren't remaking it, that they had to duplicate it because this is an MMO and that's how its done. What I think some of you fail to admit in the happy hippy cult is that if you compare the experience to similar games that are split into 3 parts for an end game PvP zone like Dark Age of Camelot and well, Dark Age of Camelot, to me and what I'm looking for it is head and shoulders above that of an ant because they bastardized my favorite IP to try to do it, and failed not only on that front but also trying to make a game like the IP. Theres nothing left to see.
Who said it was the greatest thing ever? Stop putting words in my mouth. I was referring to the PVE, not PVP. I haven't played that so I don't have an opinion. Even the reviewers haven't scratched the PVP yet. I could care less if you and others don't like it. I do. Should it be better, absolutely, but AGAIN if you compare it to other PVE themeparks out there, there isn't anything better in my eyes so its either play this or play nothing.
Um..how can you say there isn't anything better or it can be better if you haven't played it?
@OP, you really compared Fallen Earth as Skyrim MMO like? I don't even know how you can begin to make that comparison.
Unfortunately this is kind of how conversations go on here lately. Nit picking and logical fallacies going on to prove someone is "wrong".
One thing to know, there is a VERY vocal minority of people that dislike most MMOs. I used to enjoy conversations on here, but the personal attacks and dismissive comments don't help. Strange when reddit can have more civil conversations about MMOs. I hope this changes, but it is pretty much up to the community to do so.
Please show me the study done that proves this "vocal minority" exists. Otherwise, you base it on your own personal opinion which makes it a logical fallacy, and very very uncivil since you are basically marginalizing everyone that disagrees with you.
I point you sir, to my sig and the one of the best MMORPG designers in this industry, and what he has to say about people like you.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
The UI is similar to Skyrim, but that's not the default ES UI. Every ES game has had a different UI, so that has absolutely nothing to do with creating an ES experience. As for the gameplay, we shall see, having semi ES combat and voiced quests does not an ES game make.
It's completely possible to recreate that 'go anywhere, do anything' ES feel in an MMO, it's been done before. UO did it, SWG somewhat did it, Darkfall, Mortal Online and so on. The problem is that none of those games did it very well, they either didn't have the money or the know how, which has lead to the idea that it can't be done. ZOS was the one company that had a chance, they had the IP and the bankroll to do it right. Instead, they decided to not even try and stick with what they knew.
Damn this NDA.
Though...If you aren't exploring in ESO, then you are missing so much of the game (just like any Elder Scrolls game.)
A comment I enjoyed said something along the lines of "Stop looking for a reason to do something and just go out and try and do it!"
Originally posted by darkwarhamme flaws that ... were accepted in Skyrim are not acceptable in ESO (such as combat). Very strange double standard, but thus is the world we live in. Hard to be objective about things that are completely subjective.
I would say, the reason for the double-standard is this:
In a single-player RPG, combat is what you do to get through the story. Once you're done with the whole story, the game ends.
In a MMO, combat is what you are left with after the story ends. Once you're done wiht the story in an MMO, what you're left with is doing combat over and over and over again.
This is why combat matters so much more in an MMO. So it's a very valid double-standard. My opinion anyway.
(The same thing is true with balance, I couldn't care less if a my buddy played Dragon Age as a Mage and facerolled everything, while I struggled as a rogue. We both had fun experiences. But in an MMO, his mage gets invited to groups/raids and my rogue has to reroll as a mage because i don't do shit for a group.).
There are other things that make it "forgivable" as well. Actually, many people (myself included) simply think the combat in Skyrim is better than in ESO.
Combat in Skyrim was a lot more visceral. It had a far better sense of weight to it. It was also not a soft target game. Where you pointed, you shot. In ESO, that's not how it works.
Also, once you figured out how to keybind things, you could actually have more skills and things that were accessible through keybinds. Add a keybind mod to it and anything was possible and accessible at the press of a key.
In the end, I just simply think that although the combat in Skyrim was one of it's weaker points, it was a lot better and more interesting than what ESO has to offer. It just feels and works better.
I have played both and i have no idea where people are getting the "visceral" combat idea. The only problem with melee combat seems to be the clipping.
And the soft lock was always gonna be there. The alternative isn't that good as well. Do you realise how hopeless ranged attacks would be without it? They would have to make all attacks instantaneous and at high velocity to have the user have any hope of not missing it which they still would.
All Tab based MMOs have soft locks. Even GW2 with its action based combat had a soft lock. Wildstar works around the soft lock by showing the telegraph to the hitting point while having a huge AoE to prevent misses. Tera also circumvented around this by giving tons of AoE abilities to mages while archers having high velocity instant projectiles.
There are other things that make it "forgivable" as well. Actually, many people (myself included) simply think the combat in Skyrim is better than in ESO.
Combat in Skyrim was a lot more visceral. It had a far better sense of weight to it. It was also not a soft target game. Where you pointed, you shot. In ESO, that's not how it works.
Also, once you figured out how to keybind things, you could actually have more skills and things that were accessible through keybinds. Add a keybind mod to it and anything was possible and accessible at the press of a key.
In the end, I just simply think that although the combat in Skyrim was one of it's weaker points, it was a lot better and more interesting than what ESO has to offer. It just feels and works better.
I have played both and i have no idea where people are getting the "visceral" combat idea. The only problem with melee combat seems to be the clipping.
And the soft lock was always gonna be there. The alternative isn't that good as well. Do you realise how hopeless ranged attacks would be without it? They would have to make all attacks instantaneous and at high velocity to have the user have any hope of not missing it which they still would.
All Tab based MMOs have soft locks. Even GW2 with its action based combat had a soft lock. Wildstar works around the soft lock by showing the telegraph to the hitting point while having a huge AoE to prevent misses. Tera also circumvented around this by giving tons of AoE abilities to mages while archers having high velocity instant projectiles.
It's fine with me that you have no idea what I'm talking about concerning the weighted feel of combat in Skyrim compared to the ESO combat. For me, there is an obvious difference and it's one of the disappointing parts of ESO.
Like you said, something like TERAs combat is the alternative to soft lock action combat and I think it would work a lot better in ESO. I don't have any issues with arrows being high velocity. I also don't have any problems with archers and mages being difficult to play well. A high risk/high reward type of gameplay style is perfectly ok with me.
the question is this: why should eso be forgiven for having the same flaws as skyrim?
its only now coming out, it had plenty of time to fix those issues.
Also, please stop reffering to angry joes first impressions as a review. He will review the game
when its released.
I feel those flaws are just the Elder Scrolls combat system in general. Elder Scrolls has always felt more like a hack-n-slash game. I do like that ESO added the interrupt feature though.
To me combat was always the weakest part of Elder Scrolls. I felt the strongest aspects were story, immersion, and just being able to explore and find hidden gems. The main quests (Skyrim/Oblivion) were kinda weak to me, and thus would have hurt my enjoyment of the game if that was all there was.
If ESO can capture the exploration perks and hidden gems of the other Elder Scrolls games, then I feel it can be a success.
I feel those flaws are just the Elder Scrolls combat system in general. Elder Scrolls has always felt more like a hack-n-slash game. I do like that ESO added the interrupt feature though.
To me combat was always the weakest part of Elder Scrolls. I felt the strongest aspects were story, immersion, and just being able to explore and find hidden gems. The main quests (Skyrim/Oblivion) were kinda weak to me, and thus would have hurt my enjoyment of the game if that was all there was.
If ESO can capture the exploration perks and hidden gems of the other Elder Scrolls games, then I feel it can be a success.
i agree, the only saving grace of this game would be elders like freedom and exploration. Lets see if zenimax can deliver on that.
TESO has fundamental gameplay problems that surfaced in all reviews so far that have nothing to do with it living up to ES single player games.
Like inability to exit zones without completing quest objectives in early parts of the game.
Or in Angry Joes review, one of his guildies flat out said "this is so boring", he was talking about the game in general, again it had nothing to do with lore or failure to live up to Skyrim.
Sure it did. He found it boring because he's comparing it to Skyrim, which he views as the standard by which all other RPGs should be judged. He stated this himself. Comparing this game to other MMOs if its ilk, and the game holds up quite well.
Like I said, there are some issues with the game, some of which have been addressed (needing to complete main story content to leave a zone is one example), but the game suffers from its own hype more than anything else.
The UI is similar to Skyrim, but that's not the default ES UI. Every ES game has had a different UI, so that has absolutely nothing to do with creating an ES experience. As for the gameplay, we shall see, having semi ES combat and voiced quests does not an ES game make.
It's completely possible to recreate that 'go anywhere, do anything' ES feel in an MMO, it's been done before. UO did it, SWG somewhat did it, Darkfall, Mortal Online and so on. The problem is that none of those games did it very well, they either didn't have the money or the know how, which has lead to the idea that it can't be done. ZOS was the one company that had a chance, they had the IP and the bankroll to do it right. Instead, they decided to not even try and stick with what they knew.
Damn this NDA.
Though...If you aren't exploring in ESO, then you are missing so much of the game (just like any Elder Scrolls game.)
A comment I enjoyed said something along the lines of "Stop looking for a reason to do something and just go out and try and do it!"
According to the previews I have seen, mainly Angry Joe's, there isn't much to explore as they said it is, between quests, a pretty empty world. Pretty much like a ThemePark in other word, where the only content worth doing is the quest hubs.
TESO has fundamental gameplay problems that surfaced in all reviews so far that have nothing to do with it living up to ES single player games.
Like inability to exit zones without completing quest objectives in early parts of the game.
Or in Angry Joes review, one of his guildies flat out said "this is so boring", he was talking about the game in general, again it had nothing to do with lore or failure to live up to Skyrim.
Sure it did. He found it boring because he's comparing it to Skyrim, which he views as the standard by which all other RPGs should be judged. He stated this himself. Comparing this game to other MMOs if its ilk, and the game holds up quite well.
Like I said, there are some issues with the game, some of which have been addressed (needing to complete main story content to leave a zone is one example), but the game suffers from its own hype more than anything else.
Well fantasy RPGs are compared to either sandbox Skyrim or linear story-driven Dragon Age/Witcher type gameplay. So the question is, which one of these will ESO live up to. My guess is neither, since it is an MMO and seems to be playing it safe, it will probably be more like linear quest hub MMOs rather than trying to be sandbox, like all Elder Scrolls game have been like.
And that is the reason I think it will be yet another generic big budget, ThemPark MMO.
According to the previews I have seen, mainly Angry Joe's, there isn't much to explore as they said it is, between quests, a pretty empty world. Pretty much like a ThemePark in other word, where the only content worth doing is the quest hubs.
Angry Joe played 9 levels. I'll repeat: Angry. Joe. Played. 9. Levels.
Obviously, it would be nice if more games let you just go off and do your own thing as soon as you got out of the tutorial zone, and ESO definitely suffers from this as well.
But Angry Joe, as good as a reviewer as he generally is, isn't really equipped to comment on what you can and can't do in this game if he didn't get past level 9.
According to the previews I have seen, mainly Angry Joe's, there isn't much to explore as they said it is, between quests, a pretty empty world. Pretty much like a ThemePark in other word, where the only content worth doing is the quest hubs.
Angry Joe played 9 levels. I'll repeat: Angry. Joe. Played. 9. Levels.
Obviously, it would be nice if more games let you just go off and do your own thing as soon as you got out of the tutorial zone, and ESO definitely suffers from this as well.
But Angry Joe, as good as a reviewer as he generally is, isn't really equipped to comment on what you can and can't do in this game if he didn't get past level 9.
He got past level 9, but the NDA stated media couldn't show more than 15 minutes of video or levels at a time - whichever came first.
TESO has fundamental gameplay problems that surfaced in all reviews so far that have nothing to do with it living up to ES single player games.
Like inability to exit zones without completing quest objectives in early parts of the game.
Or in Angry Joes review, one of his guildies flat out said "this is so boring", he was talking about the game in general, again it had nothing to do with lore or failure to live up to Skyrim.
Sure it did. He found it boring because he's comparing it to Skyrim, which he views as the standard by which all other RPGs should be judged. He stated this himself. Comparing this game to other MMOs if its ilk, and the game holds up quite well.
Like I said, there are some issues with the game, some of which have been addressed (needing to complete main story content to leave a zone is one example), but the game suffers from its own hype more than anything else.
Well fantasy RPGs are compared to either sandbox Skyrim or linear story-driven Dragon Age/Witcher type gameplay. So the question is, which one of these will ESO live up to. My guess is neither, since it is an MMO and seems to be playing it safe, it will probably be more like linear quest hub MMOs rather than trying to be sandbox, like all Elder Scrolls game have been like.
And that is the reason I think it will be yet another generic big budget, ThemPark MMO.
You just proved my point. Fantasy RPGs are compared to other fantasy RPGs. This particular MMO is STILL being compared to other fantasy RPGs, as you just did. Instead of comparing it to other MMOs.
and theres nothing wrong with comparing it to skyrim or other elders titles. The game wouldve been a decent fantasy mmorpg under a different title and art direction. But they explicitly went for the Elders-IP knowing that it already had a massive fan following. they didnt try to establish a new fanbase, they tried to win over the existing one and thus its only natural to get compared to what already exists in the IP, singleplayer or not.
According to the previews I have seen, mainly Angry Joe's, there isn't much to explore as they said it is, between quests, a pretty empty world. Pretty much like a ThemePark in other word, where the only content worth doing is the quest hubs.
Angry Joe played 9 levels. I'll repeat: Angry. Joe. Played. 9. Levels.
Obviously, it would be nice if more games let you just go off and do your own thing as soon as you got out of the tutorial zone, and ESO definitely suffers from this as well.
But Angry Joe, as good as a reviewer as he generally is, isn't really equipped to comment on what you can and can't do in this game if he didn't get past level 9.
He got past level 9, but the NDA stated media couldn't show more than 15 minutes of video or levels at a time - whichever came first.
He said he only made it 9 levels in the video. Maybe he played more beyond that.
This game will ultimately be judged on its PvP content, to be sure. But I don't think I've seen any videos or reviews of that particular aspect of the game. I could be wrong though. However, if that's the case, and Zenimax hasn't opened that up to folks yet, then it doesn't bode well for the game. A little too similar to the Ilium fiasco in SWTOR. None of us realized how horrible an experience that would be up until the point we reached level 50 and found out for ourselves.
Idk, but I don't think you should review this game until you have pvp'd, which is level 10 minimum.
It doesn't look like many have made it that far (Angry Joe). That's 8-10 hours into the game.
A game must give you something gripping before level 10 or else most won't bother to slog through. Besides if someone doesn't like the core gameplay PVP isn't going to naturally fix that. I was planning to get up to level 10 this weekend and try the PVP but I'm pretty fed up with the game right now and just don't feel like playing. (NDA prevents me from going into the reasons).
Comments
There are other things that make it "forgivable" as well. Actually, many people (myself included) simply think the combat in Skyrim is better than in ESO.
Combat in Skyrim was a lot more visceral. It had a far better sense of weight to it. It was also not a soft target game. Where you pointed, you shot. In ESO, that's not how it works.
Also, once you figured out how to keybind things, you could actually have more skills and things that were accessible through keybinds. Add a keybind mod to it and anything was possible and accessible at the press of a key.
In the end, I just simply think that although the combat in Skyrim was one of it's weaker points, it was a lot better and more interesting than what ESO has to offer. It just feels and works better.
Unfortunately this is kind of how conversations go on here lately. Nit picking and logical fallacies going on to prove someone is "wrong".
One thing to know, there is a VERY vocal minority of people that dislike most MMOs. I used to enjoy conversations on here, but the personal attacks and dismissive comments don't help. Strange when reddit can have more civil conversations about MMOs. I hope this changes, but it is pretty much up to the community to do so.
Um..how can you say there isn't anything better or it can be better if you haven't played it?
@OP, you really compared Fallen Earth as Skyrim MMO like? I don't even know how you can begin to make that comparison.
Please show me the study done that proves this "vocal minority" exists. Otherwise, you base it on your own personal opinion which makes it a logical fallacy, and very very uncivil since you are basically marginalizing everyone that disagrees with you.
I point you sir, to my sig and the one of the best MMORPG designers in this industry, and what he has to say about people like you.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Damn this NDA.
Though...If you aren't exploring in ESO, then you are missing so much of the game (just like any Elder Scrolls game.)
A comment I enjoyed said something along the lines of "Stop looking for a reason to do something and just go out and try and do it!"
I have played both and i have no idea where people are getting the "visceral" combat idea. The only problem with melee combat seems to be the clipping.
And the soft lock was always gonna be there. The alternative isn't that good as well. Do you realise how hopeless ranged attacks would be without it? They would have to make all attacks instantaneous and at high velocity to have the user have any hope of not missing it which they still would.
All Tab based MMOs have soft locks. Even GW2 with its action based combat had a soft lock. Wildstar works around the soft lock by showing the telegraph to the hitting point while having a huge AoE to prevent misses. Tera also circumvented around this by giving tons of AoE abilities to mages while archers having high velocity instant projectiles.
It's fine with me that you have no idea what I'm talking about concerning the weighted feel of combat in Skyrim compared to the ESO combat. For me, there is an obvious difference and it's one of the disappointing parts of ESO.
Like you said, something like TERAs combat is the alternative to soft lock action combat and I think it would work a lot better in ESO. I don't have any issues with arrows being high velocity. I also don't have any problems with archers and mages being difficult to play well. A high risk/high reward type of gameplay style is perfectly ok with me.
the question is this: why should eso be forgiven for having the same flaws as skyrim?
its only now coming out, it had plenty of time to fix those issues.
Also, please stop reffering to angry joes first impressions as a review. He will review the game
when its released.
I feel those flaws are just the Elder Scrolls combat system in general. Elder Scrolls has always felt more like a hack-n-slash game. I do like that ESO added the interrupt feature though.
To me combat was always the weakest part of Elder Scrolls. I felt the strongest aspects were story, immersion, and just being able to explore and find hidden gems. The main quests (Skyrim/Oblivion) were kinda weak to me, and thus would have hurt my enjoyment of the game if that was all there was.
If ESO can capture the exploration perks and hidden gems of the other Elder Scrolls games, then I feel it can be a success.
Angry Joe was 100% right with his review.
Nuff said about this game...
Step in the arena and break the wall down
i agree, the only saving grace of this game would be elders like freedom and exploration. Lets see if zenimax can deliver on that.
Sure it did. He found it boring because he's comparing it to Skyrim, which he views as the standard by which all other RPGs should be judged. He stated this himself. Comparing this game to other MMOs if its ilk, and the game holds up quite well.
Like I said, there are some issues with the game, some of which have been addressed (needing to complete main story content to leave a zone is one example), but the game suffers from its own hype more than anything else.
According to the previews I have seen, mainly Angry Joe's, there isn't much to explore as they said it is, between quests, a pretty empty world. Pretty much like a ThemePark in other word, where the only content worth doing is the quest hubs.
My gaming blog
What? Horrible comparison. Those two games have nothing in common aside from very large worlds.
Well fantasy RPGs are compared to either sandbox Skyrim or linear story-driven Dragon Age/Witcher type gameplay. So the question is, which one of these will ESO live up to. My guess is neither, since it is an MMO and seems to be playing it safe, it will probably be more like linear quest hub MMOs rather than trying to be sandbox, like all Elder Scrolls game have been like.
And that is the reason I think it will be yet another generic big budget, ThemPark MMO.
My gaming blog
Angry Joe played 9 levels. I'll repeat: Angry. Joe. Played. 9. Levels.
Obviously, it would be nice if more games let you just go off and do your own thing as soon as you got out of the tutorial zone, and ESO definitely suffers from this as well.
But Angry Joe, as good as a reviewer as he generally is, isn't really equipped to comment on what you can and can't do in this game if he didn't get past level 9.
He got past level 9, but the NDA stated media couldn't show more than 15 minutes of video or levels at a time - whichever came first.
-Computer specs no one cares about: check.
-MMOs played no one cares about: check.
-Xfire stats no one cares about: check.
-Signature no one cares about: check.
------------------------------------------------------------
-Narcissism: check.
You just proved my point. Fantasy RPGs are compared to other fantasy RPGs. This particular MMO is STILL being compared to other fantasy RPGs, as you just did. Instead of comparing it to other MMOs.
He said he only made it 9 levels in the video. Maybe he played more beyond that.
Idk, but I don't think you should review this game until you have pvp'd, which is level 10 minimum.
It doesn't look like many have made it that far (Angry Joe). That's 8-10 hours into the game.
This game will ultimately be judged on its PvP content, to be sure. But I don't think I've seen any videos or reviews of that particular aspect of the game. I could be wrong though. However, if that's the case, and Zenimax hasn't opened that up to folks yet, then it doesn't bode well for the game. A little too similar to the Ilium fiasco in SWTOR. None of us realized how horrible an experience that would be up until the point we reached level 50 and found out for ourselves.
A game must give you something gripping before level 10 or else most won't bother to slog through. Besides if someone doesn't like the core gameplay PVP isn't going to naturally fix that. I was planning to get up to level 10 this weekend and try the PVP but I'm pretty fed up with the game right now and just don't feel like playing. (NDA prevents me from going into the reasons).