Straight from the Director

WalkingLegacy

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/03/the-elder-scrolls-online-interview-making-games-of-this-type-is-really-really-hard-5730186/?hootPostID=34f57f59cdb3f4770edfc2f3a7b9940e

No more arguing. ESO is not an MMO. It's an online RPG.


/Discuss the article here

Selstad

Lets see what he actually said: "Again, we’re not really a traditional MMO, we are much more of a hybrid, kind of like an ‘online RPG’. The term MMO is freighted with a lot of pre-conceived notions, most of which are outdated and obsolete."

And he's quite right; MMO seem to come with this old notion dating back from the old MUD days. "Online RPG" captures more what the game is about, being an RPG game played online with others. Most games are mostly that, take WoW per example, rarely are you out in the world, and 99% of the end-game content are confined to dungeon and raids. There's nothing "MMO" about WoW either, nor Guild wars 2, The secret world or most other RPGs that requires you to be online.

I think ESO manages to make some rather good things. per example, I love that you have zones with quests and such that you can do even at max level, with a new story going on and some new gameplay elements. It's rather irritating in per example WoW that all the "new" content mostly consist of raids when they decide to release some new content. In ESO you can actually play the game content at your own pace, without being depended on other players (except Craglorn but they new they messed up on that part so they never did that again).

remilafo

what a bunch of scripted BS..

Prepared questions, prepared answers.

Lysette

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/03/the-elder-scrolls-online-interview-making-games-of-this-type-is-really-really-hard-5730186/?hootPostID=34f57f59cdb3f4770edfc2f3a7b9940e

No more arguing. ESO is not an MMO. It's an online RPG.


/Discuss the article here

That is where the quote is from, which I posted in several threads.

Reevster

So why does it say "Best MMO of 2015" on my launcher screen? lol

WalkingLegacy

Selstad wrote: »

Lets see what he actually said: "Again, we’re not really a traditional MMO, we are much more of a hybrid, kind of like an ‘online RPG’. The term MMO is freighted with a lot of pre-conceived notions, most of which are outdated and obsolete."

And he's quite right; MMO seem to come with this old notion dating back from the old MUD days. "Online RPG" captures more what the game is about, being an RPG game played online with others. Most games are mostly that, take WoW per example, rarely are you out in the world, and 99% of the end-game content are confined to dungeon and raids. There's nothing "MMO" about WoW either, nor Guild wars 2, The secret world or most other RPGs that requires you to be online.

I think ESO manages to make some rather good things. per example, I love that you have zones with quests and such that you can do even at max level, with a new story going on and some new gameplay elements. It's rather irritating in per example WoW that all the "new" content mostly consist of raids when they decide to release some new content. In ESO you can actually play the game content at your own pace, without being depended on other players (except Craglorn but they new they messed up on that part so they never did that again).

You don't think he's saying that because ESO a bit of a step backwards in terms of development?

For instance, base game is super on the rails "traditional MMO".

There is no sandbox elements that are themed to the TES franchise and other RPGs (not all)

Choices do not matter in ESO.

Craglorn was a step in the right direction because to be online with other people, the content needs to reflect this (I am down for scalable content based on party sized)

Selstad

How was Craglorn a step in the right direction? You couldn't do the quests solo, nor the delves, and if you tried finding some group to do quests with, you ended up in a grind group that stood in the same spot all the time, killing the same monsters. 99% of Craglorn wasn't even "done" because you found your spot, grinded to max level, did trials or other dungeons. It was as completely failed as Tanaan is in WoW.

At least with Wrothgar and Hew's Bane did they realise that they should make the quests doable at your own pace and time, and have other content - such as dungeons and trials - to occupy grouping. That's not to say that you're alone in the world, I've seen more life out in the zone in ESO than I have in other MMOs, the only game that comes close is The secret world, since there are reasons to be out in the zones to do things. In that sense, ESO is a rather good online game, you meet other people in the zones, there are things to do for both group and single players and it's rewarding stepping out of the city and go explore.

The MMO specification has run its course, the only thin an MMO should be as per definition, is a massive open world where players play together, in an online environment. In that sense, ESO is just that.

WalkingLegacy

Would you mind commenting on the other points @Selstad ?

To further your last remarks:
I believe Craglorn is in the right direction right now because of how easy the rest of the game is. I feel like I'm forced to be online to play a game I'm able to easily do solo. Craglorn forces you to be in a group.

I personally do not want to be forced online to play a game I can do solo.

Selstad

What other points? That there's no choice in ESO? What choice do you want then, if so?

As for Craglorn; it forces you to be in a group, and the group only does a grind loop, bypassing 99% of the content. Which makes it pointless to have an entire zone of quests if most of the players don't bother doing them.

The good thing about having the quests and such from a solo perspective is that you're not limited to play only when there's people online. You can play at your own time and pace when you feel like it. There is also group related content, so you do in fact have a choice what you want to do.

Nestor

MMO now refers to a technology, not to a genre, and will probably keep moving in that direction.

That was my biggest take away from the interview. The traditional MMO Cliches just don't apply anymore, because they don't have to.

This games biggest challenge is creating a world that different types of gamers can have fun in. They miss the mark in some areas, and hit dead center on others. There needs to be more end game content that is challenging (trials, group dungeons) but without creating content that is more than what some people want to handle. If they could add more trials and vet instances of dungeons (maybe even a raid instance of a dungeon), get the PvP lag figured out, then this game would be what everyone wants.

Liukke

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Lysette

And there is a social aspect to the game just like here in the forum - everyone could solo post - and we are all solo-posting, but we can interact with each other - just like in the game - we might not have the same opinion in the forum, just like we might not want to join the same group in game, but we are interacting with each other - in both, forum and game.

This is to me the most important part in an online game - interaction with others, but not necessarily to achieve goals together with them. The younger people are, they more they tend to group up - guess that is because they are still insecure and get their fix from what others say and think about them - but when you are grown up, this changes, you know who you are and do not need others to tell you that. Your need to group up with others is decreasing - there is enough grouping going on in RL, I do not need it in a game as well. But I need other people to talk to or interact with in a social way. in RL and in game.

bedlom

That has been said from day one.

Lysette

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Poor DLCs is your opinion - I think they are quite good - once the bugs will be fixed.

WalkingLegacy

Selstad wrote: »

What other points? That there's no choice in ESO? What choice do you want then, if so?

As for Craglorn; it forces you to be in a group, and the group only does a grind loop, bypassing 99% of the content. Which makes it pointless to have an entire zone of quests if most of the players don't bother doing them.

The good thing about having the quests and such from a solo perspective is that you're not limited to play only when there's people online. You can play at your own time and pace when you feel like it. There is also group related content, so you do in fact have a choice what you want to do.

ESO is forgoing the traditional MMO route yet the base game is follows traditional MMO on the rails design.

WalkingLegacy

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

Lysette

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

That is like saying a car has all the qualities of an aircraft, with it's biggest difference, it does not fly well - it could though, just drive it over a cliff.

WalkingLegacy

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

That is like saying a car has all the qualities of an aircraft, with it's biggest difference, it does not fly well - it could so, just drive it over a cliff.

Car and airplane being used to synonymously compare ESO to traditional MMO. I see what you're trying to accomplish but that's just not right.

MikeB

That's a bunch of BS. MMO literally means Massively Multiplayer Online and by that meaning ESO is literally an MMORPG, just like WoW and Guild Wars. Well I guess it's not massively as not a lot of people play it.

Just shows Wrobels not the only one without a clue, even the director of ESO doesn't know what he's talking about (imo).

Lysette

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

That is like saying a car has all the qualities of an aircraft, with it's biggest difference, it does not fly well - it could though, just drive it over a cliff.

I mean with it - if you ignore the PvP part (which is well ghettoed in Cyrrodil), it has like nothing of a traditional MMO, but is just what Mr. Firor said - an expansive online Elder Scrolls RPG.

WalkingLegacy

Lysette wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

That is like saying a car has all the qualities of an aircraft, with it's biggest difference, it does not fly well - it could though, just drive it over a cliff.

I mean with it - if you ignore the PvP part (which is well ghettoed in Cyrrodil), it has like nothing of a traditional MMO, but is just what Mr. Firor said - an expansive online Elder Scrolls RPG.

But I can list all the features and qualities it has with the so called "traditional MMO" and have already listed some.

Lysette

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

That is like saying a car has all the qualities of an aircraft, with it's biggest difference, it does not fly well - it could though, just drive it over a cliff.

I mean with it - if you ignore the PvP part (which is well ghettoed in Cyrrodil), it has like nothing of a traditional MMO, but is just what Mr. Firor said - an expansive online Elder Scrolls RPG.

But I can list all the features and qualities it has with the so called "traditional MMO" and have already listed some.

It feels like an online Elder Scrolls RPG to me - if I ignore the PvP part. Massively Multiplayer does not mean it would have to have PvP, it just means a lot of people online in the same game. I guess, ZOS already regrets to have ever brought PvP into existence in ESO - it was a bad choice, IMO - they could have had less trouble and more income if it would be PvE only and with more role play elements - like actually usable furniture, better emotes and better ingame communication. This si what is actually traditional still - lack of positive social interaction and better and more role play elements.

Elsonso

Firor is right in that "MMO" comes with baggage, what I call MMO Tropes. These things that other games do that everyone thinks has to be done in order to be the "right and proper" game. ESO, very clearly, is doing something else.

Craglorn is certainly a direction, although which direction is obviously up for debate. Groups and parties, with the Looking for Group tools, Tank-DPS-Healer roles, and all of the quotas and requirements that go along with it, are a formalization that came about to mimic the traditional "D&D" party, implemented by game designers that had nothing better to bring to the table. I think that Craglorn is much more along those lines than the rest of ESO.

While I don't claim that ZOS is going to get "online RPG" completely right with ESO, I am certainly more happy to see them taking the "hybrid" path to an "online RPG" than the path that leads to "MMO".

hrothbern

lordrichter wrote: »

Firor is right in that "MMO" comes with baggage, what I call MMO Tropes. These things that other games do that everyone thinks has to be done in order to be the "right and proper" game. ESO, very clearly, is doing something else.

Craglorn is certainly a direction, although which direction is obviously up for debate. Groups and parties, with the Looking for Group tools, Tank-DPS-Healer roles, and all of the quotas and requirements that go along with it, are a formalization that came about to mimic the traditional "D&D" party, implemented by game designers that had nothing better to bring to the table. I think that Craglorn is much more along those lines than the rest of ESO.

While I don't claim that ZOS is going to get "online RPG" completely right with ESO, I am certainly more happy to see them taking the "hybrid" path to an "online RPG" than the path that leads to "MMO".

"I am certainly more happy to see them taking the "hybrid" path....."

yeah... going in the right direction.
Perhaps we find some more love for hybrid builds as well on the way forward

failkiwib16_ESO

One of the problems with this game is, that it is still in a beta stage. They seem to not have any vision for how ESO should turn out, so they overhaul the whole system over and over again.

• They improve a lot of things with each new patch, and they break a lot of other things.
• Whenever they introduce new content, we get a small list of extremely convenient exploits. Common glitches of bosses in dungeons. Some of them have been fixed, but others haven't even been touched.
• Tooltips are showing wrong and misleading information on some sets from early days of release, and it is still not fixed. They can "manage" to correct typos, but not tooltips?
• Looted sets that have extra buffs and bonuses in them, that does not show on the tooltip - these sets have existed since release.
• There is a list of exploits and bugs we've had in this game since release that have never been fixed. For example: Multiple mundus stone and in-combat mode when getting healed or healing outside of combat in Cyrodiil.
• With every major patch we get problems with lag, long loading screens - and the promise that it gets better. They make a quick fix to make it better, but with each patch over time it actually just gets worse

I don't know wether it is a good thing or a bad thing, that the developers play this game ...it just sometimes feels like they base some of their decisions, by using a full baby diper as an oracle with rainbow colored candy sprinkles on top.

WalkingLegacy

lordrichter wrote: »

Firor is right in that "MMO" comes with baggage, what I call MMO Tropes. These things that other games do that everyone thinks has to be done in order to be the "right and proper" game. ESO, very clearly, is doing something else.

Craglorn is certainly a direction, although which direction is obviously up for debate. Groups and parties, with the Looking for Group tools, Tank-DPS-Healer roles, and all of the quotas and requirements that go along with it, are a formalization that came about to mimic the traditional "D&D" party, implemented by game designers that had nothing better to bring to the table. I think that Craglorn is much more along those lines than the rest of ESO.

While I don't claim that ZOS is going to get "online RPG" completely right with ESO, I am certainly more happy to see them taking the "hybrid" path to an "online RPG" than the path that leads to "MMO".

I agree with a lot of this but Matt Firor cannot hide from these " tropes".

I welcome the hybrid path but not the contradictory statements about his game and the "traditional mmo"

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Liukke wrote: »

But I don't see anything bad about it, who cares?
The problem with this game is the constant bugs, the constant unbalance between magicka and stamina users (sorcerer's admin mode hurray!) the lack of new ideas and really poor dlcs so...nothing related to being mmo or rpg.
Without all this game breaking stuff the game would be tons of times better, regardless it being mmo or rpg...it's really stupid crying over this discussion :P

Did you slip on some tears?

I'm curious how everyone feels about the constant backpedaling for labeling

ESO isn't a "traditional MMO" but has almost all the qualities of a traditional MMO with its biggest difference being it is almost completely soloable.

That is like saying a car has all the qualities of an aircraft, with it's biggest difference, it does not fly well - it could though, just drive it over a cliff.

I mean with it - if you ignore the PvP part (which is well ghettoed in Cyrrodil), it has like nothing of a traditional MMO, but is just what Mr. Firor said - an expansive online Elder Scrolls RPG.

But I can list all the features and qualities it has with the so called "traditional MMO" and have already listed some.

It feels like an online Elder Scrolls RPG to me - if I ignore the PvP part. Massively Multiplayer does not mean it would have to have PvP, it just means a lot of people online in the same game. I guess, ZOS already regrets to have ever brought PvP into existence in ESO - it was a bad choice, IMO - they could have had less trouble and more income if it would be PvE only and with more role play elements - like actually usable furniture, better emotes and better ingame communication. This si what is actually traditional still - lack of positive social interaction and better and more role play elements.

This isn't about PvP. Your failed thinking is that MMO = PvP but somehow online does not equal PvP. The terminology is synonymous yet you equate one to being PvE or PvP only.

Also, ESO has a hint of TES, but it is far off the path to being a real TES game. Traditional Classes, traditional theme park, traditional MMO quests, traditional MMO bugs, etc contradict the whole this is authentic Elders Scroll Online RPG.

Selstad

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Selstad wrote: »

What other points? That there's no choice in ESO? What choice do you want then, if so?

As for Craglorn; it forces you to be in a group, and the group only does a grind loop, bypassing 99% of the content. Which makes it pointless to have an entire zone of quests if most of the players don't bother doing them.

The good thing about having the quests and such from a solo perspective is that you're not limited to play only when there's people online. You can play at your own time and pace when you feel like it. There is also group related content, so you do in fact have a choice what you want to do.

ESO is forgoing the traditional MMO route yet the base game is follows traditional MMO on the rails design.

The thing is; MMOs haven't been "defined" in what actually makes out an MMO, and the definition of an MMO has been all over the place ever since the MUD times.

The most popular definition of an MMORPG is "A role-playing games where thousands of gamers play online in a virtual and persistent environment on the Internet.". I'm not even sure Richard Garriott - the man who first coined the term MMORPG back in the 80s - would exactly pinpoint what a "traditional MMO" is, mostly because it changes so much over time.

You can argue which ever way you want in terms of what makes an MMO and what doesn't. In short, I think an MMORPG is an online RPG in a persistent world, shared with a wast amount of other avatars controlled by a human player. And I don't think it's in any way a bad direction that ESO is going, it certainly has its moments despite its problem. There are no such thing as a "perfect" MMO, and I'm glad that we have variations and no "traditions" in terms of the MMO genre. Look per example on these 3 games; The secret world, Guild wars 2 and World of Warcraft. They are completely different games in terms of style and execution, yet are all loosely defined as "MMORPG". Now add ESO to that mix, again, very different from the other 3 mentioned games, but also an MMORPG.

With the increase of "MMORPG", we should perhaps have a bit better definition on what constitutes an MMORPG from a genre perspective, but I think that wouldn't solve anything, game developers seem to make it up as they go along in terms of defining the genre of their game, per example Guild wars defining itself as an CORPG (Competitive Online Roll Playing Game).

So what defines an MMO? If you're to argue that ESO is forgoing a traditional MMO route yet have a base game that follows the traditional MMO on the rails design, then you also have to pre-define what an MMO is. And that is easier said than done.

hrothbern

fantasy games, virtual reality games will always re-invent themselves.

ESO is moving ahead doing that

Forget the labels of the past

SeptimusDova

If these people whom I will list decide that we are all going to have to roll Argonian Stam Sorc Tanks and be locked in VMA to win our freedom then it will be so

Board of Directors

Robert A. Altman
Chairman & CEO

Ernest Del
President

Jerry Bruckheimer
Jerry Bruckheimer Films

Michael Dominguez
Managing Director, Providence Equity Partners Inc.

Leslie Moonves
President & CEO, CBS Corporation

Cal Ripken, Jr.
President & CEO, Ripken Baseball, Inc.

Harry E. Sloan
Chairman and CEO, Global Eagle Holdings, LLC

Robert S. Trump
President, Trump Management, Inc.

This game is what the above decide.

P.S I cannot get past stage 4 with my Level 20 Argonian Stam Sorc Tank. HALP

For myself it makes no matter what it is called. It only matters how well it Plays.

WalkingLegacy

Selstad wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Selstad wrote: »

What other points? That there's no choice in ESO? What choice do you want then, if so?

As for Craglorn; it forces you to be in a group, and the group only does a grind loop, bypassing 99% of the content. Which makes it pointless to have an entire zone of quests if most of the players don't bother doing them.

The good thing about having the quests and such from a solo perspective is that you're not limited to play only when there's people online. You can play at your own time and pace when you feel like it. There is also group related content, so you do in fact have a choice what you want to do.

ESO is forgoing the traditional MMO route yet the base game is follows traditional MMO on the rails design.

The thing is; MMOs haven't been "defined" in what actually makes out an MMO, and the definition of an MMO has been all over the place ever since the MUD times.

The most popular definition of an MMORPG is "A role-playing games where thousands of gamers play online in a virtual and persistent environment on the Internet.". I'm not even sure Richard Garriott - the man who first coined the term MMORPG back in the 80s - would exactly pinpoint what a "traditional MMO" is, mostly because it changes so much over time.

You can argue which ever way you want in terms of what makes an MMO and what doesn't. In short, I think an MMORPG is an online RPG in a persistent world, shared with a wast amount of other avatars controlled by a human player. And I don't think it's in any way a bad direction that ESO is going, it certainly has its moments despite its problem. There are no such thing as a "perfect" MMO, and I'm glad that we have variations and no "traditions" in terms of the MMO genre. Look per example on these 3 games; The secret world, Guild wars 2 and World of Warcraft. They are completely different games in terms of style and execution, yet are all loosely defined as "MMORPG". Now add ESO to that mix, again, very different from the other 3 mentioned games, but also an MMORPG.

With the increase of "MMORPG", we should perhaps have a bit better definition on what constitutes an MMORPG from a genre perspective, but I think that wouldn't solve anything, game developers seem to make it up as they go along in terms of defining the genre of their game, per example Guild wars defining itself as an CORPG (Competitive Online Roll Playing Game).

So what defines an MMO? If you're to argue that ESO is forgoing a traditional MMO route yet have a base game that follows the traditional MMO on the rails design, then you also have to pre-define what an MMO is. And that is easier said than done.

I am only referring to what others and Matt Firor are saying is a " traditional mmo". Him and others are very adamant that this isn't "traditional" and cite their reasons but those reasons contradict themselves in the product we are playing.

MMO = massively multiplayer online. If you can handle thousands of people on the same server, and those players can play together. You're an MMO.

My point is he's claming ESO isn't something very passionately in this article - but at the same time ESO has a confused identity.

Selstad

Have to be honest; I really don't see what points you're trying to make here. Are you strung up that the director doesn't refer to it as an MMO while others are referring to it as an MMO?

I don't see that ESO has a "confused identity", it's doing what it's doing rather decently. Be it an MMO or an Online RPG, it's more or less the same thing. So I'm having a problem understanding what point you're trying to get across.