so excited for this been waiting for this for years since they canceled the first attempt, i know alot of you preffer solo but also alot of us been looking fwd to this
Welcome to the boards and not all of us prefer solo. But I do worry that we are seeing the start of the end of solo gaming in AAA and AA.
It's a lot closer to survival games than an MMORPG but it does sound very cool with traditional Fallout story quests built in.
What Tod Howard said in the presentation tonight that "you can carry your progress to other servers" and "you won't even notice you're in a different server" sounds to me like they'll be using something like a heavily instanced megaserver tech to handle different servers more seamlessly than what is normal in survival games.
I get what you're saying @BillMurphy, l in that this will be the closest a survival game has ever gotten to a full fledged mmoprg with respect to game play elements, size, quests and scope but I also agree with @blueturtle13 that "dozens" instead of hundreds or thousands is still a key and relevant difference between this and say the Elder Scrolls Online.
Yep, I agree with Blue too. It's just I also don't think, outside of big sieges or cities, I've ever seen more than a few dozen players in one space in an MMO. For all intents and purposes, FO76 is going to look and feel like a Fallout sandbox MMO shooter.
Clesrly you haven't, dont play EVE then.
Or DAOC, or L2, or.....others...
Not a MMORPG, but this one I'm going to play, FFA PVP or not.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You might not lose gear when you get ganked but it’s still a pain in the arse providing griefers with their entertainment. And this will attract the griefers. And if your base is vulnerable to players then you can definitely count me out.
It's a lot closer to survival games than an MMORPG but it does sound very cool with traditional Fallout story quests built in.
What Tod Howard said in the presentation tonight that "you can carry your progress to other servers" and "you won't even notice you're in a different server" sounds to me like they'll be using something like a heavily instanced megaserver tech to handle different servers more seamlessly than what is normal in survival games.
I get what you're saying @BillMurphy, l in that this will be the closest a survival game has ever gotten to a full fledged mmoprg with respect to game play elements, size, quests and scope but I also agree with @blueturtle13 that "dozens" instead of hundreds or thousands is still a key and relevant difference between this and say the Elder Scrolls Online.
Yep, I agree with Blue too. It's just I also don't think, outside of big sieges or cities, I've ever seen more than a few dozen players in one space in an MMO. For all intents and purposes, FO76 is going to look and feel like a Fallout sandbox MMO shooter.
Clesrly you haven't, dont play EVE then.
Or DAOC, or L2, or.....others...
Not a MMORPG, but this one I'm going to play, FFA PVP or not.
I do get Bill's point. Over time mmorpgs have been getting progressively more and more managed with respect to the max number of players that are permitted to be all in one place at a time.
If the graphics and other systems were still the same as the original MMOs from the late '90s and early 2000s, present day connectivity and PC power could have been used to have even more players in the same space than we did back then, before you have to start counting seconds per frame instead of frames per second. And Eve has always been a special case because there's not a whole lot that needs to be rendered in space. I know what graphics Eve has are not bad but it's nevertheless a good example of what could be done with current PC power and low graphics processing demands.
Instead of freezing the graphics at 2000 levels, game developers (thankfully) chose to use the increased specs to give us more and more detailed graphics for environments characters and effects while at the same time focusing on game play that does not require huge number of players on screen to enjoy.
When you put things like that together you do have to start questioning whether the potential to have large number of players on screen means all that much with respect to the players experiencing a world full of other players when the zoning, phasing and channeling tricks that are now common do a good enough job of simulating the experience.
I personally do enjoy large scale PVP and want large crowds for that, but if I'm being honest, that is the only thing I do in MMOs where having those large crowds makes my gaming experience better. With a lot of other things I do in MMOs, large crowds are not needed and sometimes they just get in the way.
So a game like ESO that is heavily instanced and phased and spawns local instances on the fly if a location is getting too crowded for all PVE, but at the same time allows several hundred players to be in one PVP zone at the same time for large scale RvR, suits me fine. I think of it as an MMO and so do most of us with the possible exception of one or two extremists here.
I still can't bring myself to call a game like FO76 an MMO because it never allows more than "dozens" anywhere at any time for any reason. But I do see why some question whether there is any practical difference worth fretting about and I especially see it for people that never participate in large scale PVP - and there has always been quite a few of those players in MMOs.
"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
You might not lose gear when you get ganked but it’s still a pain in the arse providing griefers with their entertainment. And this will attract the griefers. And if your base is vulnerable to players then you can definitely count me out.
True I will not want my hard work demolished by some idiots.
I am not really concerned about the number of people on my screen either and frankly I never cared for hundreds of people just lagging me out. I do prefer high quality graphics and resolutions and would sacrifice the number of people on my screen to that as long as I can group up and play.
However I will not play a game where it is easy for people to destroy what I spent time building that is a big no for me. Unless it only take 30 minutes to collect and rebuild otherwise it is simply a terrible waste of my time.
"To be fair, Todd also said that while you won't see a list of servers, presumably because it's using the megaserver tech of ESO, but there'll only be dozens of people in the 6 regions, not hundreds as in ESO."
NO its not .............
Stop pushing your agenda it wont work , the Dev even knows its not MMORPG, and yet here we are again
Not sure what I thought of that last night. In one sense it is what I have always wanted. Seamless partial online integration. Real unpredictability etc.
It seems like there isn't much of an overarching story though. . .I certainly don't consider it an MMO just because the interaction is limited and completely optional. . . might leave a pretty shallow single player game unless the survival element is there.
I was getting tired of "new" stories in the wasteland and wanted them to do something different. Maybe Starfield will be my thing. Won't pre-order - that I know for certain. This will be a love or hate for me.
Come on guys.. this was obvious. Look at ESO. They want to do the same with Fallout.
Milking the game as much as they can.. and don't think that Skyrim 6 is coming anything time soon . They have to milk Fallout first and then, when they're done with Fallout, we'll get Skyrim, not before.
This is purely business. Bethesda is there for one reason and only one. $$$$$$$
Their presentation was really lackluster for me. At least for the 2 franchises I care about, Fallout and Elder Scrolls. Fallout 76 looks like a Fortnite clone. (The base game, not Battle Royale) Fallout was never known for its tight and responsive gunplay and a mode like this is really gonna put a focus on that. Plus, V.A.T.S. will be gone since it's multiplayer. Oh yeah, they added the ability for random people to randomly drop nukes in your game. Now take a company known for bugs and make a game in a mode (online multiplayer) notorious for bugs and it's going to be a mess.
Elder Scrolls Blades felt like a personal attack. I kept thinking "This is a joke, right?" Not much more I can say about that. Then we essentially got nothing on Starfield. Which would be fine except they made a point to say Elder Scrolls 6 would be developed AFTER Starfield. So, Elder Scrolls will get to work AFTER a game that is a year or two out still? Sorry, that 30sec clip with just the words "The Elder Scrolls VI" and the knowledge the game is looking at a 2020+ (I would put it closer to 2022+) wasn't enough for me. They did that just so people wouldn't riot.
The key question for me is: How does this shared world setup work with base building etc... How can I even have enemies to nuke if they change every time I login? I suppose if they have clans they can use that to lock-in our bases, but it’s going to suck to just have random worlds every time I login...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
What about mods, bethesda games without mods tend to not be worth playing at all. Also wonder how stable its gonna be, bugs and crashes tend to be standard in their games.
I am not really in the mood to discuss whether F76 can now be labeled mmorpg, mog, conan/rust like or whatever. I don't care. The most important fact I take from that conference is that F76 is a muliplayer game. Yes, you might be able to play solo, but it's focus is multiplayer. As someone who would have a liked a single player game (with story, meaningful and lasting consequences etc.) I have to say I am disappointed.
And in the mean time should we expect a another cash grab in the form of enhanced FO4 edition to truly keep the cash rolling till FO5, a question a lot will ask.
Depends how well FO76 does I guess, but I would not complain if there was a enhanced FO4 got 100,s of hours in a heavy modded version and 1/2 the mods are to do with looks, so makes sense to me.
I am more stoked for a FO5 than this FO76 as with ESO being in Australia when I hear megaserver I just hear really really shithouse lag all the time, I get it really huge distance and low population, so I am not entitled to bugger all gaming wise, you deal with what you got, it is what it is.
But I do find Megaservers a tad biased to country of base. with some exceptions (Nods to Eve).
Where as region based servers tend serve the rest of the world a little bit better...
I am not really in the mood to discuss whether F76 can now be labeled mmorpg, mog, conan/rust like or whatever. I don't care. The most important fact I take from that conference is that F76 is a muliplayer game. Yes, you might be able to play solo, but it's focus is multiplayer. As someone who would have a liked a single player game (with story, meaningful and lasting consequences etc.) I have to say I am disappointed.
I understand this - but after fallout 3, fallout 4 - you really want to play fallout 5 which would be the same damn thing just new map, higher textures, better graphics - but same old single-player experience?
For me multiplayer is what is breathing fresh air into a stagnating gameplay over the years - heck even Fallout76 looks like a Fallout4 mod IMO - I think that multiplayer is the biggest and most exciting feature
I will answer your question for him. Yes we wanted a single player game, with those things you listed. I got the feeling this will go the way mass effect did and they will stop single player all together in the long run. Some people like myself play these IP's to get away from playing with other people, when we want to be alone and have fun without others distracting us. That is what I have WoW, LOTRO, SWTOR, Tera, any of the survival games already out, ect... for. So basically this is like some other games has been a slap in the face to those of us that wanted a single player game like this IP has been the entire time.
Now if they come back and say they are going to allow the people that choose solo play to have their own instances with no others in them, which I truly doubt, then I will take back what I have said. Until I hear that from the devs, just nope.
I wonder about your settlements. How does that work? Is it limited space? Like Landmark? Is it instanced? Is it a hosted server that can only hold like a 100 people total like Ark/Conan Exiles/Dark and Light? Or is the system like Destiny model?
I don't understand why people get worked up over how many people you see. If there were a million people on your screen you would still only talk to those in your guild or friends list. You would end up closing chat cause of how toxic it got, it would take you longer to complete quest because you will need to get in line and wait for an npc or flower to spawn.
Call it an mmo a survival game make up your own title.
Getting worked up because your definition of an mmo is different from another persons really that's where we are heading here?
Wonder if it will have an economy or not, my kind of pvp. If it doesn't have an economy, don't think it will hold my interest for long.
Also would like to know how bases are going to work with logging on and off, and whether other players can destroy your sh*t or not. If that is the case, then I will probably pass, definitely for launch prices. With my limited play time, last thing I want to do is spend it rebuilding for some asshat to come knock it down again.
So, what's the subscription model going to be for this so-called "MMORPG"?
I personally want to see nukes in the cash shop
"My clan finally got nuke launch codes after 3 months of grinding"
oh yeah - just bought 5 nukes from the shop for $100 - kekekeke
Who do you nuke? Those guys that raided you last night are now in a different random instance...
I was clearly joking
I know you were, but sadly I wasn't. Persistence is a huge part of the game for me and I fear this is the Achilles heel of the game.
When you play Fortnite or Overwatch, the enemy is different every match.
I think it will be the same in F76 - the map will have enemy players, I personally dont mind if its a different group of players every time.
That's what makes Overwatch different from an MMORPG. Well, one of the things. I believe trying to push it as an MMORPG (see title) will set the wrong expectations and result in un-needed drama.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The key question for me is: How does this shared world setup work with base building etc... How can I even have enemies to nuke if they change every time I login? I suppose if they have clans they can use that to lock-in our bases, but it’s going to suck to just have random worlds every time I login...
Phasing or some spin on instancing - there is no other way to do it on a megaserver.
The beauty of a private/standalone server is that the changes done by players to the world as far as building etc.. - are seen by all.
Can't do that with a megaserver - so phasing is the answer - to what extent and how they do it remains to be seen.
This is one of the reasons phasing/instancing is a detriment to the idea of massively multiplayer that has nothing to do with players on the screen at the same time.
As Kano mentioned, phasing means any effect you have on the world isn't really an effect on the world, but in your tiny little instance of the world.
I think Bill is completely missing a lot to kind of shrug off what phasing and instancing does.
There's a lot more to massively multiplayer than merely getting a shit ton of player models on the screen.
Comments
Welcome to the boards and not all of us prefer solo. But I do worry that we are seeing the start of the end of solo gaming in AAA and AA.
Clesrly you haven't, dont play EVE then.
Or DAOC, or L2, or.....others...
Not a MMORPG, but this one I'm going to play, FFA PVP or not.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
If the graphics and other systems were still the same as the original MMOs from the late '90s and early 2000s, present day connectivity and PC power could have been used to have even more players in the same space than we did back then, before you have to start counting seconds per frame instead of frames per second. And Eve has always been a special case because there's not a whole lot that needs to be rendered in space. I know what graphics Eve has are not bad but it's nevertheless a good example of what could be done with current PC power and low graphics processing demands.
Instead of freezing the graphics at 2000 levels, game developers (thankfully) chose to use the increased specs to give us more and more detailed graphics for environments characters and effects while at the same time focusing on game play that does not require huge number of players on screen to enjoy.
When you put things like that together you do have to start questioning whether the potential to have large number of players on screen means all that much with respect to the players experiencing a world full of other players when the zoning, phasing and channeling tricks that are now common do a good enough job of simulating the experience.
I personally do enjoy large scale PVP and want large crowds for that, but if I'm being honest, that is the only thing I do in MMOs where having those large crowds makes my gaming experience better. With a lot of other things I do in MMOs, large crowds are not needed and sometimes they just get in the way.
So a game like ESO that is heavily instanced and phased and spawns local instances on the fly if a location is getting too crowded for all PVE, but at the same time allows several hundred players to be in one PVP zone at the same time for large scale RvR, suits me fine. I think of it as an MMO and so do most of us with the possible exception of one or two extremists here.
I still can't bring myself to call a game like FO76 an MMO because it never allows more than "dozens" anywhere at any time for any reason. But I do see why some question whether there is any practical difference worth fretting about and I especially see it for people that never participate in large scale PVP - and there has always been quite a few of those players in MMOs.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I am not really concerned about the number of people on my screen either and frankly I never cared for hundreds of people just lagging me out. I do prefer high quality graphics and resolutions and would sacrifice the number of people on my screen to that as long as I can group up and play.
However I will not play a game where it is easy for people to destroy what I spent time building that is a big no for me. Unless it only take 30 minutes to collect and rebuild otherwise it is simply a terrible waste of my time.
NO its not .............
Stop pushing your agenda it wont work , the Dev even knows its not MMORPG, and yet here we are again
It seems like there isn't much of an overarching story though. . .I certainly don't consider it an MMO just because the interaction is limited and completely optional. . . might leave a pretty shallow single player game unless the survival element is there.
I was getting tired of "new" stories in the wasteland and wanted them to do something different. Maybe Starfield will be my thing. Won't pre-order - that I know for certain. This will be a love or hate for me.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
Milking the game as much as they can.. and don't think that Skyrim 6 is coming anything time soon . They have to milk Fallout first and then, when they're done with Fallout, we'll get Skyrim, not before.
This is purely business. Bethesda is there for one reason and only one. $$$$$$$
Elder Scrolls Blades felt like a personal attack. I kept thinking "This is a joke, right?" Not much more I can say about that. Then we essentially got nothing on Starfield. Which would be fine except they made a point to say Elder Scrolls 6 would be developed AFTER Starfield. So, Elder Scrolls will get to work AFTER a game that is a year or two out still? Sorry, that 30sec clip with just the words "The Elder Scrolls VI" and the knowledge the game is looking at a 2020+ (I would put it closer to 2022+) wasn't enough for me. They did that just so people wouldn't riot.
Hardest of passes on these.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The most important fact I take from that conference is that F76 is a muliplayer game. Yes, you might be able to play solo, but it's focus is multiplayer.
As someone who would have a liked a single player game (with story, meaningful and lasting consequences etc.) I have to say I am disappointed.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Depends how well FO76 does I guess, but I would not complain if there was a enhanced FO4 got 100,s of hours in a heavy modded version and 1/2 the mods are to do with looks, so makes sense to me.
I am more stoked for a FO5 than this FO76 as with ESO being in Australia when I hear megaserver I just hear really really shithouse lag all the time, I get it really huge distance and low population, so I am not entitled to bugger all gaming wise, you deal with what you got, it is what it is.
But I do find Megaservers a tad biased to country of base. with some exceptions (Nods to Eve).
Where as region based servers tend serve the rest of the world a little bit better...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Call it an mmo a survival game make up your own title.
Getting worked up because your definition of an mmo is different from another persons really that's where we are heading here?
We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
Also would like to know how bases are going to work with logging on and off, and whether other players can destroy your sh*t or not. If that is the case, then I will probably pass, definitely for launch prices. With my limited play time, last thing I want to do is spend it rebuilding for some asshat to come knock it down again.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
As Kano mentioned, phasing means any effect you have on the world isn't really an effect on the world, but in your tiny little instance of the world.
I think Bill is completely missing a lot to kind of shrug off what phasing and instancing does.
There's a lot more to massively multiplayer than merely getting a shit ton of player models on the screen.