The cities, all look the same and some questions.

ProfessionalNoob

1.Like really, i know that this problem has been discussed before but its or all of the cities looks the same, have the music... like there is no originality between them?
2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.
3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...
Yeah, the cities in the DLC's are good, but only those because the vanilla ones are cliche at their core...

daemonios

Since your arguments seem to boil down to "it was different in Skyrim", maybe recite the mantra "ESO is not Skyrim" until it sticks?

Grianasteri

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

1.Like really, i know that this problem has been discussed before but its or all of the cities looks the same, have the music... like there is no originality between them?
2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.
3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...
Yeah, the cities in the DLC's are good, but only those because the vanilla ones are cliche at their core...

I certainly do not agree with your first point. The cities look vastly different, even when not including dlc cities, which are in the main very impressive visually. I mean compare the 3 capitals, totally different.

Point 2, meh, I am not fussed. I think they have in general done a good job respecting lore, not perfect by any stretch, but OK.

Third point, yeah I guess so, but in reality, to me it makes little difference.

FrancisCrawford

I don't feel that Alinor, Rimmen, Daggerfall, Mournhold, Elden Root, Marbruk, Vivec City and Clockwork City look the same at all. What similarities do you think I'm overlooking?

StormeReigns

They sure do. So lazy. OP is 100% correct.

Michae

The cities inside one race's province in vanilla game do look similar. For example Ebonheart, Davon's Watch and Mournhold have the same architectural style. The other race's cities are also samey. It's understandable due to them having to make quite a few zones at the start of the game although a bit dissapointing. At leat I think that's what you're arguig about. Vanilla cities.

DLC cities on the other hand are a blast. Orsinium is really grand and unique, Abah's Landing is similar to vanilla Redguard cities but is delightfully vertical with many pathways for thieves to lurk on, Anvil and Kvatch are spot on like their Oblivion counterparts (with the exception of Kvatch not being razed ofc ), Vvardenfell also has really nice cities that capture the feel of TES III. I haven't spent much time in Summerset or Elsweyr but I've seen that their respectable cities look really unique as well.

I'd love it if they updated original cities but I don't think that's likely. The game's 5 years old and it shows in the older zones but restructuring them would take resources and it wouldn't bring any additional profit so I doubt ZOS would be interested.

zaria

Grianasteri wrote: »

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

1.Like really, i know that this problem has been discussed before but its or all of the cities looks the same, have the music... like there is no originality between them?
2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.
3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...
Yeah, the cities in the DLC's are good, but only those because the vanilla ones are cliche at their core...

I certainly do not agree with your first point. The cities look vastly different, even when not including dlc cities, which are in the main very impressive visually. I mean compare the 3 capitals, totally different.

Point 2, meh, I am not fussed. I think they have in general done a good job respecting lore, not perfect by any stretch, but OK.

Third point, yeah I guess so, but in reality, to me it makes little difference.

This, yes cities share architecture for its zones but they are hardly copy paste.
Yes you can argue they are to small but so are most cities in Skyrim.

I prefer ESO Windheim over Skyrim one myself.

ProfessionalNoob

daemonios wrote: »

Since your arguments seem to boil down to "it was different in Skyrim", maybe recite the mantra "ESO is not Skyrim" until it sticks?

I do not mean the ''this is not skyrim'', i mean that eso do not respect the lore, mountains do not appear in 1k years.

ProfessionalNoob

SkerKro wrote: »

They sure do. So lazy. OP is 100% correct.

No, the cities in the dlcs are good, i say it wrong and now it understands i like i said that dlc are bad too

ProfessionalNoob

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

1.Like really, i know that this problem has been discussed before but its or all of the cities looks the same, have the music... like there is no originality between them?
2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.
3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...
Yeah, the cities in the DLC's are good, but only those because the vanilla ones are cliche at their core...

I do not mean the dlcs, the cities in the dlcs are good, i mean the vanilla zones between the alliances, they are just the same, except valenwood i think, oh and the same music.

ProfessionalNoob

Michae wrote: »

The cities inside one race's province in vanilla game do look similar. For example Ebonheart, Davon's Watch and Mournhold have the same architectural style. The other race's cities are also samey. It's understandable due to them having to make quite a few zones at the start of the game although a bit dissapointing. At leat I think that's what you're arguig about. Vanilla cities.

DLC cities on the other hand are a blast. Orsinium is really grand and unique, Abah's Landing is similar to vanilla Redguard cities but is delightfully vertical with many pathways for thieves to lurk on, Anvil and Kvatch are spot on like their Oblivion counterparts (with the exception of Kvatch not being razed ofc ), Vvardenfell also has really nice cities that capture the feel of TES III. I haven't spent much time in Summerset or Elsweyr but I've seen that their respectable cities look really unique as well.

I'd love it if they updated original cities but I don't think that's likely. The game's 5 years old and it shows in the older zones but restructuring them would take resources and it wouldn't bring any additional profit so I doubt ZOS would be interested.

Yeah agreed, they should show more love to the vanilla zones, to feel more original.

Elsonso

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

1.Like really, i know that this problem has been discussed before but its or all of the cities looks the same, have the music... like there is no originality between them?
2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.
3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...
Yeah, the cities in the DLC's are good, but only those because the vanilla ones are cliche at their core...

1. ESO cities differentiate on architecture. Yes, they tend to be mainly flat, until engine upgrades allowed them to do Orsinium. No one can claim the main city in Murkmire looks like Daggerfall.

2. Honestly, the Skyrim provinces of ESO don't look like TES 5 because i don't think TES 5 was finished when they did Skyrim for ESO. I think ZOS worked off early concept art, or something. I do wish they would re-do the existing Skyrim zones and bring them up to TES V, but I doubt that will happen.

3. ESO Cyrodiil forts are named after... ruined Cyrodiil forts in the 3rd Era, at least as much as they can be. Locations are off, and geography is messed up. We had this discussion in the forum, in detail, early in the life of the game. You can search for it.

ThePlayer

You right about the quests, all the same, but the surrounding architecture and environment are different.
Now they can not do anything about it but with the new dlc, finally, they are trying to exploit the verticality in the environments and increase the number of puzzle games.

martygod12

The cities look good And are acutally big in Space, but what makes them small and weird Are those ridiculously huge buildings i mean if you Stand next to a house in wayrest the freakin doors ale like four times larger then you if they put some more smaller buildings together instead of one huge in the cities, they would definitely look much more big and alive.

craybest

vanilla cities of the same zone are in fact quite similar and could use some more personality, but i think that ship's sailed a good while ago. those were all done like 5 years ago.
dlc cities are doing a better job, so lt's hope they keep giving them more things that make them different.

Ye_Olde_Crowe

Look at how the cities and villages all looked the same pre Redguard (basically the next game in the time line after ESO) . Those situated in similar terrain were pretty interchangeable, so you could say that the base game cities revert to their interchangeable ESO look many years later, with Skyrim being the different one out of the bunch of games

WeerW3ir

I always said they should change the cities with the new assets from the dlc's.

Auridon - Summerset chapter assets.
Khenarthi's Roost, Reaper's March - Elsweyr chapter assets.
Grahtwood, Greenshade, Malabal Tor - Murkmire dlc assets.

Glenumbra, Rivenspire, Stormhaven - Future chapter and/or Golden Coast assets.
Betnikh, Stros M'Kai, Alik'r Desert, Bangkorai - Hew's Bane assets.

Deshaan, Bal Foyen, Stonefalls - Morrowind chapter assets.
Bleakrock Isle, Eastmarch, The Rift - Falkreath dungeon dlc assets.
Shadowfen - Murkmire dlc assets.

daemonios

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

daemonios wrote: »

Since your arguments seem to boil down to "it was different in Skyrim", maybe recite the mantra "ESO is not Skyrim" until it sticks?

I do not mean the ''this is not skyrim'', i mean that eso do not respect the lore, mountains do not appear in 1k years.

Lore is whatever you want it to be. It's an incredibly vague concept. I can live with even large changes as long as each game is internally consistent. I don't need every rock to be in the same place as in other games. In fact, I would find it a bit boring.

Also, I only responded to part of your post because I feel the Skyrim nostalgia underlies it all. As others have pointed out, each race has its own architecture, and within each one it can start to feel a bit repetitive. But travel from one zone to the next with a different dominant race and you can find brilliant world building.

I understand you may feel differently, and my comment was just a friendly reminder to appreciate what we do have instead of pining for something else. As far as priorities go, I think performance and balance are way higher on the list.

starkerealm

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...

Back in Oblivion, most of those forts were there as ruins. If there is something weird, it's that the Cyrodiil forts don't have towns built up around them. (Same goes for Oblivion.)

Tensar

In general the map in TESO is bad, the example of windhelm is good, because how a mountain can disappear/appear..?

Look at Winterhold on the map, where do you want to place it exactly? Same for Skuldafn, the place don't make sense.

The map is really bad, and cities are a lot similars. High rock = all the same.

In DLC it's better.

Katahdin

Right...


Windhelm looks the same as Stormhold, which looks the same as Rawl'ka, which looks the same as Vulkhul Guard which looks the same as Elden Root


Yup all the same.....


/s

kargen27

"''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence'"

and that is where I stopped reading.

CMDR_Un1k0rn

I recommend OP never play Arena or Daggerfall.

Royaji

It's not Friday yet but this might take the crown of the most bizzare thread on the forum this week.

Are the towns small and mostly just give you a representation of a major settlement? Sure. But a claim that they are the same just does not make much sense.

RebornV3x

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

1.Like really, i know that this problem has been discussed before but its or all of the cities looks the same, have the music... like there is no originality between them?
2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.
3. Why the cyrodil forts are not named after cities? Like you know, Cyrodil is an actual nation not an arena, yeah i understand they make it empty because of the lag but really, they could named the forts after cities to be some kind of immersion there...
Yeah, the cities in the DLC's are good, but only those because the vanilla ones are cliche at their core...

1.other than the overland music in this game being boring each race has distinct looking buildings and variety. don't know why you would think they all looked the same....
2. they really messed up with Windhelm and Eastmarch no excuse on the devs parts really wish they would give Windhelm a makeover.
3. Who cares what the forts are named? Most of the cities in the base game except for Mournhold look pretty good especially the AD and DC zones. Mournhold other than the Tribunal Temple looks like the city dump than a capital city really looks lazily done the starter EP zones could use some touch ups there some of the roughest looking zones.

ArchangelIsraphel

WeerW3ir wrote: »

I always said they should change the cities with the new assets from the dlc's.

Auridon - Summerset chapter assets.
Khenarthi's Roost, Reaper's March - Elsweyr chapter assets.
Grahtwood, Greenshade, Malabal Tor - Murkmire dlc assets.

Glenumbra, Rivenspire, Stormhaven - Future chapter and/or Golden Coast assets.
Betnikh, Stros M'Kai, Alik'r Desert, Bangkorai - Hew's Bane assets.

Deshaan, Bal Foyen, Stonefalls - Morrowind chapter assets.
Bleakrock Isle, Eastmarch, The Rift - Falkreath dungeon dlc assets.
Shadowfen - Murkmire dlc assets.

God no. Keep murkmire out of Grahtwood, Greenshade, Malabal Tor...they look unique and beautiful. Each was quite different to me. Murkmire was dismal and boring to look at. And it doesn't make sense to use argonian assets for a largely wood-elf area.

I honestly don't want any changes to any of the other zones either, I like the fact that they don't look like the DLC zones. About the only thing I agree with here is to add a few Hew's Bane assets to the desert zones, but otherwise they look good as they are.

Sticking DLC assets in basegame areas would truly make everything look the same.

Disagreeing with the OP as well. Always noticed differences in each area. The only exceptions being the whole Stonefalls/Glenumbra area, but even they have their differences

FrancisCrawford

Obviously, there is SOME architectural sameness. In particular:

• Within each of the many architectural styles, there are only a few building models, which keep getting reused.
• The Breton, Nord, and Imperial architectural styles are in some cases fairly similar to each other.

But overall, ESO has far more architectural creativity than any other game I've ever played, although that's admittedly a short list (mainly LOTRO, GW2, Guild Wars, Morrowind, Kotor, and Kotor 2).

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.

a) This is Skyrim Windhelm




b) This is ESO Windhelm from the corner near the castle. Unfortunately cannot get a birds view.




So my questions are
1) Which mountains are missing? (have mountains to the left of the castle and if you wish can pick some screenshots from the port side).

2) You complain that the castle of the king should be the same. Why? First of all the castle in ESO is made of wood and stone. It only takes a fire to be taken down and collapse.

3) ESO is set on 2E 583, Windhelm is just 10 years after the complete destruction by the Akaviri in 2E 572. Yet still the town is more vibrant, with more buildings looking like a proper capital. Not a nord backwater village with 12 houses like in Skyrim.

4) After the death of Jarl Jorrun (ESO timeline) there was a revolt in the city which lead to partial destruction of it because his successor was tyrannical. (so again the castle could be demolished on fire)

5) Skyrim is set 4E 201, 973 to the future. ESO is the "Lore" and "history" in Skyrim and the other Elder Scrolls games not the other way round.

6) FYI 973 years is a big distance to the future.
That's the distance in history between Hadrian been the Roman Emperor visiting Britain and the First Crusade.
That's the distance from today to the year 1046 where Saxons still ruled Britain, Franks in France and the Byzantine Empire was still supreme.

ProfessionalNoob

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

ProfessionalNoob wrote: »

2. And not that but look at Windhelm, they transformed a city which should represent the cold nord into some cliche fantasy snow town and dont take me ''iT's tHe 1k YeArS dIfFerence' because the palace of the king should be the same as in skyrim and the mountains which should be there are not there, like the one near the port. They use the 1k years excuse to ignore the lore of the game, and no, here i am not a triggered skyrim fanboy, i just want to know your opinions.

a) This is Skyrim Windhelm




b) This is ESO Windhelm from the corner near the castle. Unfortunately cannot get a birds view.




So my questions are
1) Which mountains are missing? (have mountains to the left of the castle and if you wish can pick some screenshots from the port side).

2) You complain that the castle of the king should be the same. Why? First of all the castle in ESO is made of wood and stone. It only takes a fire to be taken down and collapse.

3) ESO is set on 2E 583, Windhelm is just 10 years after the complete destruction by the Akaviri in 2E 572. Yet still the town is more vibrant, with more buildings looking like a proper capital. Not a nord backwater village with 12 houses like in Skyrim.

4) After the death of Jarl Jorrun (ESO timeline) there was a revolt in the city which lead to partial destruction of it because his successor was tyrannical. (so again the castle could be demolished on fire)

5) Skyrim is set 4E 201, 973 to the future. ESO is the "Lore" and "history" in Skyrim and the other Elder Scrolls games not the other way round.

6) FYI 973 years is a big distance to the future.
That's the distance in history between Hadrian been the Roman Emperor visiting Britain and the First Crusade.
That's the distance from today to the year 1046 where Saxons still ruled Britain, Franks in France and the Byzantine Empire was still supreme.

1. The mountains from the port, in skyrim are huge mountains after the ports but in eso, eh, for the ones who played skyrim it broke immersion a bit.
2. I know that Windhelm was built and destroyed many times but in skyrim as i know it its know that the Palace Of The King is the only building that remained as in the beginning.

Jhalin

While I certainly would find the game more interesting if cities, and the map in general, were on a more realistic scale than the miniature versions we have in ESO (and in the other TES titles to a lesser degree), ESO certainly isn’t lacking in different architectural styles.

In the EP cities you go from snowy village of Bleakrock, to marshy Bal Foyen, to bleaker and smokier Davon’s Watch, all very distinct.

In DC you go from coastal desert city with colorful design, to monotone and earthy orcish stronghold with tents and blocky buildings, to Standard Medieval Town(tm).

In AD you go from island eastern style buildings with crops and farms, to Standard Fantasy Town(tm), to a massive forest where homes are made out of still-living trees.

Yuffie91

Cities are fine. Mount and mob variety however..