Maintenance for the week of January 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – January 6
• NA megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 13:00 UTC (8:00AM EST)
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – January 6
• NA megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 13:00 UTC (8:00AM EST)
ESO needs an ingame Bestiary
-
bluebird✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Yes. We need Bestiary!
@anitajoneb17_ESO Why exactly would it be an out-of-game PoV? It isn't. There isn't anything in it that would break an ingame perspective. There's even an ingame lorebook 'Notes on the Dreugh' which is written by a professor's assistant, organizing various facts and observations about the Dreugh. The entire Dreugh entry that I posted could be written by that professor publishing a summary of his findings.anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »@bluebird : but this wiki entry is an "out-of-game" PoV !
On the other hand, Phraste & Lady Cinnabar are both ingame, subjective PoV and counterweight each other by never agreeing on anything - albeit none of them can actually be objectively proven right nor wrong.
Now if your "bestiary" has to recap all different PoV found ingame , like, for instance "according to A, dreughs are intelligent being, according to B, they''re beasts" - then no no no. It would be boring and tedious and useless. Why repeat what's in the books, especially since you can access any book anytime via eidetic memory, and there's even a full text search function ? Just read the books !! It's much more fun than reading "encyclopedic" articles that would purposedly and rightfully refuse to choose between any given option, and it allows readers to have their own interpretation of things, beings and events.
I agree that "impossible" and "unnecessary" are two different things but in this case it's both - in my opinion - and interlinked.
There is no reason to account for every interpretation - and the ones that exist are already mentioned e.g. 'tales of civilized Dreugh exist but such rumours have not been confirmed to date'. There's even direct examples of Phrastus of Elinhir writing a lorebook on Spriggans (which is basically a Beastiary entry), and it just shows that entries like that would be perfectly in-game-POV-friendly and account for all the 'different opinions' as is reasonable.
So it may be unnecessary but it isn't impossible at all. All they would have to do is expand the already existing system with some notes that somebody scribbled on the margin and some artistic sketches. All perfectly in-game-POV-friendly. Besides an ingame Beastiary wouldn't be any more 'out-of-game' than the achievements tab or the skill trees or the Alliance War menu.2 -
barney2525✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Another poll I can't vote because of limited options.
Need? Bad word to use.
Would it be cool? Yeah. Could it be helpful? depends on the info it provided. A lot of bestiaries are used to detail strengths and weaknesses of various critters.
Also, IMHO, Google is your friend. It's my friend anyway. Got no hesitation to google any issue I have in ESO.
So I don't think 'Need' is where you wanted the poll to go.
1 -
anitajoneb17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No. We do not!@bluebird : you're still confusing "subjective point of view" with "in-game / out-of-game" and "immersion".
I give up.
But whether you understand them or not, these are the reasons why ZOS will NEVER do that.1 -
DTStormfox✭✭✭✭✭Yes. We need Bestiary!This would be a great addition IF different types of damage actually did different amounts of damage to the beasts that roam the lands. But as far as I am aware, dealing shock damage to a shock atronach is practically the same as dealing poison damage or flame damage.
(solely talking about damage here, so don't start about status effects, I know they are there.)0 -
rpa✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Yeah, but actually no.Wut.. ah it was bestiary not bestiality..
It would be neat after the game performance has been fixed.
0 -
LennoxPoodle✭✭✭Yeah, but actually no.LennoxPoodle wrote: »Yes, but not as some kind of menu codex option. If implemented it should be lorebooks (in a separate category to more easily find them.
Why not as menu?
-better fits in with existing mechanics if handled as lorebooks
-uses those existing mechanics/framework
- ties into the mages guild
- is more immersive
- unreliable narrator. (we could for example get multiple conflicting entries on the same thing
If done, I wouldn't like it to contain any out of universe game data like vulnerability: fire. Such things could be expressed more creatively with lines such as "Trolls are known for their regenerative properties, which according to reports of survived encounters can be suppressed with the use of fire." So all info should be provided in-universe, but sometimes indicating gameplay functionality.0 -
rfennell_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Yeah, but actually no.ESO needs an ingame Bestiary
I don't think they need an "in game" bestiary.
But... an out of game compendium of stuff eso related that actually managed by ZOS would be helpful.
They literally do not have nearly anything official out there. These companies have been deft on relying on fan sites to do their work for them... but really... it could only help them out to have a professional site with everything on it for players and potential players.
0 -
IronWooshu✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yeah, but actually no.It's not game breaking if they dont add it, a nice treat if they do.. I'm indifferent about it. It doesnt hurt the game in anyway to add one I personally just dont care one way or another so I hope you all get it for yourself.
However they need to fix and focus attention on other things.Edited by IronWooshu on July 22, 2019 1:42PM0 -
bluebird✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Yes. We need Bestiary!@anitajoneb17_ESO Thanks, but I'm confusing nothing, you're just wrong to say that it would be impossible to implement. It's fine to find it unnecessary, and fine to think that ZOS won't actually implement it (I agree). But repeating that it's 'impossible because of POVs' without any evidence whatsoever is just wrong.
You were the one who claimed that 'A bestiary would require an objective, out-of-game POV' so it would be impossible to do. That's why I keep pointint out that no, a beastiary wouldn't require an 'objective out-of-game POV' when the already existing lorebooks which I specifically brought up as evidence show that it's perfectly possible for an in-game subjective POV to write down information about creatures.
1) Here's an already existing lorebook example: 'Notes on the Dreugh' proves that there is an ingame point of view NPC professor that actually is writing about the Dreugh - so no, the beastiary entries wouldn't be 'against ESO philosophy' because NPCs are perfectly capable of writing Beastiary entries from an ingame POV that is still factual.Sorry if these notes are a little disorganized, professor. I didn't want to trim anything out that you might find useful.
—Two distinct species: land dreugh and water dreugh.
—Both were once common throughout Vvardenfell, Ebonheart, and the surrounding waters. They've been driven out over the last few centuries and only exist now in isolated pockets.
—Some accounts assert there are two varieties of land dreugh, while others maintain these are but the male and female versions of one kind of creature.
—Legends tell of "civilized" land dreugh colonies which supposedly raised herds of mudcrabs as food stock.
—These colonies were also purported to have built stone cairn houses and structures.
—No evidence of such advanced dreugh behavior exists today.
—Dreugh are omnivores and have been witnessed consuming mer flesh.
—Dreugh are capable of channeling some form of shock energy through their bodies. Most scholars agree this is a natural adaptation and not magical in nature.
—The land dreugh carapace is naturally sturdy and can deflect most attacks from common weapons.
—No known language or communication abilities.
—Nesting habits are not well-documented, but we do know the land dreugh encase their egg broods in mud. Nothing is known about water dreugh nesting or egg-laying behavior.
—Some fisherfolk are known to gather land dreugh eggs from the creatures' mud-nests, though it is obviously a rather dangerous occupation.
If this is enough information, I'll begin the netch research tomorrow. - Anonymous
2) Below is a proposed Beastiary entry for the Dreugh just as an example. Most of the information that exists about Tamrielic creatures is perfectly suitable to an in-game POV. I already showed that the Wiki information on Dreugh doesn't contain any facts that would be 'out-of-game-POV'-like at all. It gives details about the creatures physiology, their habitats, their observed behaviors, their noted history (which even references ingame sources) and useful products that they are hunted for (like their Wax) - all of this is information that is absolutely possible to write from an ingame point of view by an NPC, such as the professor that wrote the factual notes in the earlier lorebook example.The Dreugh are a Tamrielic race of powerful aquatic creatures observed primarily in Morrowind (especially the Inner Sea), the Illiac Bay, the Abecean Sea, Black Marsh and Cyrodiil. They are often hunted for their wax and hide.
Once common throughout Vvardenfell, Ebonheart, and the surrounding waters, they have been driven into isolated pockets in more recent times. There is some doubt on whether they shouldn't be classified along with Argonians, for their semi-aquatic nature and "troglophiliac" humanoid form.
According to legend, the Dreugh devolved from a much more intelligent and civilized race due to conflict with the Dunmer (who used their hides and wax), and powerful, tyrannic Dreugh kingdoms are reported by Mankar Camoran in his Mythic Dawn Commentaries, even going as far as to state they once ruled the world. That notion is explored in Vivec's lessons, where it is stated that, "when the dreughs ruled the world, the Daedroth Prince Molag Bal had been their chief." The sermon gives details of the form Bal took at the time, describing it as "spiny and armored and made for the sea."
Additionally, tales of civilized Land Dreugh colonies (purported to have built stone cairn houses and structures) exist, which affirm that the species raised mudcrabs for sustenance, but no evidence of such behavior exists today.
3) Regarding your 'omg you just don't get it it's not subjective so it can't be done' complaint, I already pointed out that ingame lorebooks written by subjective NPCs already point to objective facts (e.g. the Dreugh are often hunted for their wax, they are aquatic creatures, they can be found here-and-there all of this is objective) and in case of competing theories they even include alternative interpretations. But just to reiterate, a Beastiary entry (such as written by a professor) can absolutely refer to a lack of consensus on the matter. This is regularly done in academic journals today. There would be nothing impossible about it.There is some doubt on whether they shouldn't be classified along with Argonians, for their semi-aquatic nature and "troglophiliac" humanoid form. [...] Additionally, tales of civilized Land Dreugh colonies (purported to have built stone cairn houses and structures) exist, which affirm that the species raised mudcrabs for sustenance, but no evidence of such behavior exists today.
Can ingame NPCs observe factual information about creatures? Yes. Can a subjective NPC compile observations into a Beastiary entry? Yes (the dreugh researcher professor in the lorebooks is already evidence for that). Can a factual article about dreugh wrtten by an NPC still refer to contested facts or competing theories? Yes (it's done all the time in academic journals). None of this is impossible to do. So please, feel free to oppose the beastiary because it's useless in your opinion, but don't try to shoot down the idea by pretending that it's impossible and anybody who proves otherwise is just slow on the uptake, because all evidence points to the fact that a Beastiary could absolutely be implemented.
2 -
Zalicius✭✭✭I don't think we "need" one, but it would definitely be handy to have and they could even add it as game play. Make a quest for it and have the pages scattered across Tamriel as collectible additions to our own personal bestiary. Something we could constantly be adding to.0 -
Stebarnz✭✭✭✭✭
✭Please don't distract these clowns with pointless crap, they need to fix stuff first!Edited by Stebarnz on July 22, 2019 9:19PM1 -
Stebarnz✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Yes, it would be cool to look at … once … then waste of time. = pointless.
If you want a bestiary go look around and compile your own and post, id give you an awesome!0 -
WeerW3ir✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yes. We need Bestiary!
Yes, it would be cool to look at … once … then waste of time. = pointless.
If you want a bestiary go look around and compile your own and post, id give you an awesome!
You do not know what you talking about ;(1 -
jainiadral✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Yes. We need Bestiary!
Yes, it would be cool to look at … once … then waste of time. = pointless.
If you want a bestiary go look around and compile your own and post, id give you an awesome!
That's a lot of work for a single awesome
2 -
Stebarnz✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Yes, it would be cool to look at … once … then waste of time. = pointless.
If you want a bestiary go look around and compile your own and post, id give you an awesome!
You do not know what you talking about ;(
Thing is I do, the people at ZOS cannot handle the current work load as you can see with the state of the game, for them to expend resources they don't have creating something that's not needed something else would have to give, what would you suggest?
Also while the bestiary would be cool for about 5 mins it would ultimately be a waste of time as nobody buys or pays or plays this game to sit there and read the bestiary for hours on end, this isn't a library simulator.
If you disagree with me that's cool but to say I don't know what I'm talking about is the dribbling of a potato as everything ive said makes sense.
Honestly though ZOS would take your side as they could make money from it and put it in the crown store for 10k crowns as they introduce more bugs.0 -
Slimebrow✭✭✭No. We do not!Why do you want a bestiary when the AI for in game creatures is more A than I anyways. Maybe if they had interesting AI in and out of combat, as well as , creature hunters quest/guild thing, then this would be a yes.
As of right now we don't need pointless single player stuff that serves no function. I would recommend you buy some of the TES lorebooks instead if your really into TES creatures.Edited by Slimebrow on July 24, 2019 9:37AM0 -
Edziu✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yeah, but actually no.actually ZOS is to lazy and ignorant to even care, think about things like this unless it would be in crown store for 5k crowns atleast as how much they would need to copy-paste to this :v1 -
Reistr_the_Unbroken✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yes. We need Bestiary!Smasherx74 wrote: »No stop proposing things that belong in single player games. You're going to make ZOS waste their time on this crap instead of fixing the existing server performance problems.
You really believe they’re going to actually fix server performance?1 -
WeerW3ir✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yes. We need Bestiary!Reistr_the_Unbroken wrote: »Smasherx74 wrote: »No stop proposing things that belong in single player games. You're going to make ZOS waste their time on this crap instead of fixing the existing server performance problems.
You really believe they’re going to actually fix server performance?
sometimes i dream about cheese...0 -
Jayman1000✭✭✭✭✭
✭I could not agree more, it's weird it's not already a part of the game. I guess zos are just pressed for ressources when in comes to development. for example they'd have to ditch other development, like releasing fewer crown crates and fewer vanity items, to make something like this.0 -
WeerW3ir✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yes. We need Bestiary!rsantijw13 wrote: »Just ends up as furry ***, no thanks.
a bestarium/bestiary is a whole different thing than what you thinking about. 💩
imagine it like in Witcher...
or in the game called Dungeons Siege 2. where the first picture from.
Edited by WeerW3ir on July 28, 2019 12:32AM0 -
Jagdkommando✭✭✭✭Yes. We need Bestiary!@ZOS_GinaBruno Gina, this is an excellent idea, take a look pls0
