Elder Scrolls Online is not a generic MMORPG

Banyan said:
i like to stay conscious (awake) when i play a game. eve is a glorified interactive screensaver imo.
Click to expand...
Sure, if you're doing boring things in the game (read: mining). It's only what you make of it in the end. I guess I might be one of the few that will actively go out looking for PVP and refrain from any PVE activities.
 
GoldenTiger said:
3-way open non-instanced RVR
Click to expand...

Hey if it has PvP anything like Daoc I'll be all over this. No game has really gotten it right since. Hell Mythic didn't even get it right with their Warhammer game.

Gotta have 3 factions to balance out anyone that gets too powerful! Closest thing doing that right now is Planetside2 and yep its pretty good as a result.
 
Have they even said how they're pulling off 3 factions? In the world of ES, it makes way more sense to me to have no factions, where guilds would be your homies.
 
BiH115 said:
Optimistic. That's good, we'll need it.

There's a lot of high-chin mentality when a new game is announced, as always, especially an MMO.
Click to expand...


Sounds like a lot of hardforum users when gw2 was coming LOL. Hypocritical much? That game turned out to be horrid, too, and is already a ghost town.
 
MorgothPl said:
It uses Hero engine? If yes, then I won't touch it... ToRTanic made me hate that engine.
Click to expand...

Ya that worries me a lot. I mean Bethesda says it is a "custom engine" and that they only used the Hero Engine as a "starting point". Ok... but I kinda doubt it. For all their talk about a custom engine in Skyrim, it is still Gamebryo at the core. Now that's fine, Gamebryo is pretty solid and run some games I really like (Rift, Civ 4, the TES games of course). However Hero Engine is a complete piece of shit with some major flaws, such as being heavily single threaded.

As such if they based their work on it, I worry what the end result will be. Unless you re-wrote the whole thing, in which case why license in the first place, you are going to have some of the issues of the parent engine.

I dunno we'll see what happens. I'm not that worried about it being a "generic MMO" since ALL MMOs are "generic" to an extent and I like them. I enjoy what MMOs are, much like I enjoy what FPSes are, so that's good. I am more worried about technical issues. No matter how good the game is, if it is buggy and problematic, that can make it really unplayable. You take a bad engine and combine it with a company not known for their bug free games, and add to that it being a first MMO, which are problems even for companies good at stable software like Blizzard, and you have a recipe for an extremely bug ridden product.

For sure I'll be watching it though. I'm interested and I'd like it to be awesome, but I'm not getting my hopes up until I see some verification.
 
I saw an article with them mentioning the client is designed to show up to 200 players on-screen at once in PVP and the RVR area is designed for 2000 players on the server end as its capacity. We'll see....

http://www.3news.co.nz/Elder-Scroll...Firor/tabid/418/articleID/284162/Default.aspx

Just came out today. They say the introduction to elder scrolls online youtube video was around 115 players/side (so a few hundred total) and was actually conducted on the beta server in-game... if true, I don't think that it's going to be an issue :).
 
Last edited:
I would love for this game to be able to replicate the fun I had with RvR and relic raids in DAoC.
 
Arioch said:
I would love for this game to be able to replicate the fun I had with RvR and relic raids in DAoC.
Click to expand...

My wife would kill me if I got back into an MMO like that again. Nothing compared to my time in DAoC.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Sounds like a lot of hardforum users when gw2 was coming LOL. Hypocritical much? That game turned out to be horrid, too, and is already a ghost town.
Click to expand...

I'm not even sure how to dignify that with a response...

I still like GW2, and it's far from a "ghost town". I can be critical of something that isn't out, especially when it's a genre that's already got tons of games that aren't "amazing". Especially when it's my money being tossed in their direction.

Please.
 
The Hero engine looks good in SWTOR, but had massive issues with loading textures, and performance with large numbers of players on screen was terrible at best.

Even if it ends up being generic, 3-way RvR is the best way to do pvp combat. I've always wanted DAoC2 and if they can recreate that experience, i might give the game a try.
 
There is nothing that makes this game stand out to me. GW2 was supposed to change things but turned out to be crap. I won't get burned again.
 
dara said:
There is nothing that makes this game stand out to me. GW2 was supposed to change things but turned out to be crap. I won't get burned again.
Click to expand...

I mean we can be critical and all, but there's no reason not to at least try it, then we can fully say it sucked ass, or if it was good. That's what we do as gamers, isn't it? Buy games and play them?

Sometimes we get burned by crappy games that we thought would have been good on paper, but I suppose that's sometimes the experience of gaming, no matter how much we try to deny it or hate on something. Idk, maybe I'm just talking out my ass.
 
BiH115 said:
I'm not even sure how to dignify that with a response...

I still like GW2, and it's far from a "ghost town". I can be critical of something that isn't out, especially when it's a genre that's already got tons of games that aren't "amazing". Especially when it's my money being tossed in their direction.

Please.
Click to expand...

Dignify? I don't need your permission, thank you very much! :rolleyes:

GW2 was a let-down for the vast majority of players on forums I have been seeing, since a month or two from launch. At least some titles have mostly satisfied players (see WOW, TSW, EVE, et al's forums, etc.) months from launch. I have heard GW2 is looking at server merges and that the servers are dead mostly other than when achievement-hunters come out for the mini events. It wouldn't surprise me at all considering the utterly terrible gameplay I experienced when trying it at launch/headstart. Forum activity on fansites has slowed down to a crawl, as well as the thread on these forums with around 20 posts in the past 6 weeks.

BiH115 said:
I mean we can be critical and all, but there's no reason not to at least try it, then we can fully say it sucked ass, or if it was good. That's what we do as gamers, isn't it? Buy games and play them?

Sometimes we get burned by crappy games that we thought would have been good on paper, but I suppose that's sometimes the experience of gaming, no matter how much we try to deny it or hate on something. Idk, maybe I'm just talking out my ass.
Click to expand...

We do, and a lot of people did that with GW2. That said, no one here has played ESO, so we can't really criticize it too much yet.
 
GW2 had a chance to be something different but they dropped the ball with combat that was far from "player skill/real time" and it's far more in common with the usual mmo combat then they let on, Tera and Vindicitus have better "action" combat imo. Plus the fact that you unlocked every combat move so early on, it felt like there was no real "progress" in terms of your characters advancement, no new moves, etc really sapped that feeling away.

the "storylines" were horrible for the most part for the characters. Cliche, bad dialogue, voice acting, etc then the whole presentation left a lot to be desired, SW:TOR did it far better in terms of that (and imo The Secret World did far more interesting storylines).

The "heart" system got super fucking repetitive, to the point you basically did the same thing over nad over. At least with traditional mmorpgs they actually bothered to have dialogue/quest lines, GW2 ditched those for the heart system which didn't even seem to take that much time to do. It was mostly your basic "go kill x of these, go find x of these" quests over and over and over.

The event system was nice, but I enjoyed it in Warhammer more. GW2 (and Warhammer both) suffered from reptitive events and in GW2 the events largely ended up like they didn't matter, you'd fight off a huge boss dragon, only to see it reappear later on, which made everything feel "useless" that you did in the events.

GW2 promised a lot, to be "revolutionary" but in the end, it was mostly just talk, with the normal "quests" of rpgs masked with the heart system, and combat that got stale quickly with the lack of any progress past weapon upgrades.

I hope TES online can be different, but I've been jaded so many times by the "next big mmo" and every single one has been a disappointment for anyone looking for something "new/different." The Secret World came the closest for a PVE experience but dropped the ball with it's combat.
 
BiH115 said:
I mean we can be critical and all, but there's no reason not to at least try it, then we can fully say it sucked ass, or if it was good. That's what we do as gamers, isn't it? Buy games and play them?

Sometimes we get burned by crappy games that we thought would have been good on paper, but I suppose that's sometimes the experience of gaming, no matter how much we try to deny it or hate on something. Idk, maybe I'm just talking out my ass.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this, and that's how I got hooked to Path of Exile. Tried it out during one of its open stress test weekend.

Of course that's only possible if we can access the game for free. If they made it subscription base, then I don't think I'll be giving it a shot (not unless my beta application went through by some miracle :p ). To be honest, I don't think it would survive if its subscription based.
 
This is going to be just as much of a flop as SW:TOR. People are getting pretty delusional in this industry..
 
I've liked most Elder Scrolls games since Daggerfall so I'm sure I'll try the game at some point.
 
Of course it will be a generic MMO, the combat system is the same (doesn't matter that you can be in heavy armor wielding a wand, that's just cosmetic really).

The quest system is the same.

The leveling/rewards/etc. is the same, it's just more of the same. Only difference is that there will be ES lore so if you are a lore fan you'll love it. If you just want an MMO there will literally be nothing new.
 
The problem with interesting feature lists is the end implementation. I think anyone can come up with interesting large concept features, you see this with forum commentary about what people want out of a game all the time, but it is always the finer details that make or break them.

For instance something like 200 player mass PVP with action combat may sound good on paper but what are the odds it just ends up being massive zerg fests with button mashing? Isn't this what GW2 RvR ended up being?

Same with a very open skill system. While it provides the option for interesting customization what are the odds that if you want to play the game at anything above a complete casual level that you don't end up with one of the builds that happens to work better that everyone else is using?
 
Thuleman said:
Of course it will be a generic MMO, the combat system is the same (doesn't matter that you can be in heavy armor wielding a wand, that's just cosmetic really).

The quest system is the same.

The leveling/rewards/etc. is the same, it's just more of the same. Only difference is that there will be ES lore so if you are a lore fan you'll love it. If you just want an MMO there will literally be nothing new.
Click to expand...

Wow, you've played it and know this already? Impressive... first guy I've heard of on a forum who claims to have!

limitedaccess said:
For instance something like 200 player mass PVP with action combat may sound good on paper but what are the odds it just ends up being massive zerg fests with button mashing? Isn't this what GW2 RvR ended up being?

Same with a very open skill system. While it provides the option for interesting customization what are the odds that if you want to play the game at anything above a complete casual level that you don't end up with one of the builds that happens to work better that everyone else is using?
Click to expand...

DAOC managed it. GW2 was a botched implementation of it.

Regarding builds, it's hard to say in an open skill system that past a certain point of synergizing well, X build is better than Y build as so much of it becomes situational and depends on team dynamics, playstyle, gear equipped, etc., for PVP.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Wow, you've played it and know this already? Impressive... first guy I've heard of on a forum who claims to have!
Click to expand...

Actually there were playdemos at E3 etc., so yes, people have played it and written about it. I'd google it for you but meh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top