What you are saying is its not the MMORPG that you feel it SHOULD be, which is still fine and acceptable, but should not be presented as fact. (ノಥ益ಥ)ノ
PhoenixWing wrote: »Coming from FFXIV, I can assure you the situation is the same there. Although you can level up with group contents (and those were not even remotely viable until recent patches 3 months ago), you have to clear the main storyline to get to endgame contents and dungeons too.
The main difference is that the quests in FFXIV are a lot easier than in ESO, which is one of the things I liked about ESO more but some people might find quests too hard if they specced their chars for group play, though.
But yeah, I understand your feeling. Questing in this game is quite tedious because there are too many quests to do lol.
But fundamental xp re-design is needed to see that happen. This is what I'm arguing.
But fundamental xp re-design is needed to see that happen. This is what I'm arguing.
No is not. You started trolling about numerous things all pertaining to the MMO you and your illuminated brilliant mind was expecting ESO to be.
It is not. Move on or make posts that actually help to improve the game.
Btw its so funny that you wrote " for the more challenged" and then start talking about XP % . That was hilarious. Trying to sound more intelligent made you look more stupid than your entire post already is.
You want to be an Olag-hai but you come out more like a cave troll than anything.
A Bad Post.
liquid_wolf wrote: »A Bad Post.
You are going to tell us... many of whom are veteran MMORPG players for over a decade... that this is not an MMORPG?
You have to convince us your perspective is valid, and acceptable... and it isn't. Oh I'm certain you have done a great number of things solo... and it might even go faster solo than with multiple people...
But that doesn't negate the fact that you can still do it.
I leveled 12-20 in Cyrodiil.
I leveled 35-40 in Cyrodiil.
I leveled 45-VR2 in Cyrodiil.
Every time I went back to PvE Content, I was 3-5 levels above the area because of the levels I gained in PvP.
It took me a hell of a lot longer... but I enjoyed it.
Massive - Yes
Multiplayer - Yes
Online - Yes
RPG - Yes.
It is a broad category, and ESO fits in it just as well.
I'm confident I'll be able to level quite well in VR dungeons and PvP after 1.1 as well.
liquid_wolf wrote: »A Bad Post.
You are going to tell us... many of whom are veteran MMORPG players for over a decade... that this is not an MMORPG?
You have to convince us your perspective is valid, and acceptable... and it isn't. Oh I'm certain you have done a great number of things solo... and it might even go faster solo than with multiple people...
But that doesn't negate the fact that you can still do it.
I leveled 12-20 in Cyrodiil.
I leveled 35-40 in Cyrodiil.
I leveled 45-VR2 in Cyrodiil.
Every time I went back to PvE Content, I was 3-5 levels above the area because of the levels I gained in PvP.
It took me a hell of a lot longer... but I enjoyed it.
Massive - Yes
Multiplayer - Yes
Online - Yes
RPG - Yes.
It is a broad category, and ESO fits in it just as well.
I'm confident I'll be able to level quite well in VR dungeons and PvP after 1.1 as well.
I think the confusion is between Sandbox and Themepark ? It's a tough one.
If a Developer wants rich lore in a game, then they kind of have to stick to some sort of rails otherwise it would not make sense. I mean grinding to 45ish, finding a way to just go straight to Mr Bal, then kill him to me would be kind of boring for me
But there is a demand for that sort of game build on S Korea
I will admit, it bugs me when you can't go into a dungeon .. even if to just see whats in it and then die, but really how does a developer keep everyone happy these days anyhow
That being said, ESO is still an MMO (RPG if you care to roleplay),
Aside from the fact that you limit your definition by "tripple A MMOs", MMOs stand for massively multi-player online.
1) you need a LOT of players (in the hundreds/thousands).
2) they need to play together (aka: in the same space).
3) the game needs to be online (aka: not LAN).
That's it. Seeing it any differently just restricts your vision.
Because in the other triple-A MMOs, the total xp needed to reach max level can be gotten VIABLY from many different sources. In contrast, in ESO you are pidgeon-holed into single player content to advance your character (gain xp).
I just feel it's funny to see people so focused on defending the game no matter what. What's wrong with thinking it's a good game but point out some odd descions.
Every MMO on the market is and can be solo'd in the 1-50 bracket and requires no grouping at all. Not one game out currently requires a group to progress in the pregame, which is all the 1-50 bracket is on most games(level depending), the pregame.
Veteran zones, which is 2/3 of the game, yes 2/3 of the game if not more xp wise is vr1-vr10, is much harder and can require a group, not a party per say, but a group, IE: more than 1 person to complete. You won't breeze past anchors and public dungeons in the veteran ranks.
There is a difference between viable group leveling and the availability of group content. They aren't the same thing. Yes, group dungeons should offer more xp, but for that to happen something would need to be in place to prevent abusing it, which was the case when the game initially launched. Group dungeon xp was abused and nerfed accordingly., I would prefer less xp and being able to run the dungeon multiple times to some sort of lockout system.
It's all moot anyway, you are arguing over the route for first 30 miles of a 300 mile or longer trip.
What exactly is your argument that ESO is a traditional MMO? You have none, sir, other than bald assertion, which is worse than having none.
Yes yes, 99% is exaggerated. What, praytell, then is the exact percentage of total xp of a new level 50 that does not come from single player content? 5%?
I am also surprised at how blithely you dismiss the 1-50 content. It is probably the most important content in this new game at the moment.
Sleepwalker wrote: »
I imagine
Sleepwalker wrote: »What exactly is your argument that ESO is a traditional MMO? You have none, sir, other than bald assertion, which is worse than having none.
Yes yes, 99% is exaggerated. What, praytell, then is the exact percentage of total xp of a new level 50 that does not come from single player content? 5%?
Here's the thing about arguing with delusional people that get their hands on a dictionary and decide to validate themselves by defending their deliberately provocative threads: It gets... no one... anywhere. But, of course I'm going to indulge anyway...
The forced-solo quests make up ~3% of the total quests. That leaves literally thousands of quests that can be done in groups viably and efficiently. I could go on about the experience from dungeons, world bosses, and anchors, as well as the buying/selling of crafted gear for inspiration gains and the indirect experience gains from wearing said gear. Nail in the coffin though, as someone has said, the 1-50 journey isn't even close to being the whole game anyway, so saying that your lonely experience with that journey is a direct definition of developer failure is incredibly ridiculous.
Whatever your definition of "MMORPG" is, it's wildly incorrect if it causes you to think that ESO isn't one.
And:I am also surprised at how blithely you dismiss the 1-50 content. It is probably the most important content in this new game at the moment.
Completely dismissing its importance is wrong, this is true, but idolizing it is just as foolish.
I imagine
This right here, you have just told me you are making this up in your imagination.
Because you aren't happy doesn't mean crap about their sub numbers
Also no one even knows what their numbers are so to speculate now would be a lot of assumptions
and you know what happens when you assume..
I'm arguing that you have a skewed idea of what a traditional MMO is as it's primarily based on MMOs that follow Everquest's style (popularized/mainstreamed by World of Warcraft).Aside from the fact that you limit your definition by "tripple A MMOs", MMOs stand for massively multi-player online.
1) you need a LOT of players (in the hundreds/thousands).
2) they need to play together (aka: in the same space).
3) the game needs to be online (aka: not LAN).
That's it. Seeing it any differently just restricts your vision.
My comments are directed primarily to how the game mechanics in ESO differs significantly and unexpectedly from traditional games that use the MMO label
Where'd you get the idea that people called it a "traditional MMO" in the first place?And for the record - AGAIN - I do not say it is not an MMORPG. I said that it is just as misleading to call ESO a traditional MMO, than otherwise.