Why ESO did not turn out to be what people wanted.

jimmulvaney

temjiu wrote: »

...scaling elite+ health based on the ## of people in the area...

This is an excellent idea! Not only will this make many dungeon bosses an epic, rewarding and fulfilling fight but this will also cause problems for bots because if they are not actively healing, blocking or dodging then they are not likely to survive. One of the +'s of dynamic combat!

rioinsigniab16_ESO

jimmulvaney wrote: »

temjiu wrote: »

...scaling elite+ health based on the ## of people in the area...

This is an excellent idea! Not only will this make many dungeon bosses an epic, rewarding and fulfilling fight but this will also cause problems for bots because if they are not actively healing, blocking or dodging then they are not likely to survive. One of the +'s of dynamic combat!

That has been tried before in Rift. Lots of people in area = very hard encounter with stats based around those players....then those people leave....and those left behind can't finish the mob because now it's too hard.

Such "dynamic content" can only work to a certain degree before things start to go arwy due to constantly changing variables such as the players in the area (hence the current situation with "public dungeons" in ESO).

The situation is not as simple as the person you quote is makes it sound.

Enteum

rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

If people came to ESO expecting a single player experience no wonder they are disappointed.

Outside of PvP i've had no reason to group up at all .... none.

But, that's just it. In the world you don't really need to group at all. You can't kill steal. You can just join in and help someone out. There has been numerous times I have seen people struggling with an elite...so I run over and pop in some heals for them, switch weapons and start throwing out fireballs to help. That, in it's own way is grouping. Without actually grouping by receiving an invite.

rioinsigniab16_ESO

Phantorang wrote: »

I dont agree, I have played MMOs with really good immersive challenging solo quests. Problem with the solo content in this game is that it is way to easy, except from the main storyline which is extremely challenging. The quests consists of talking to A, kill B, talk to C, free D and return to A.

Easy? Let me guess, you're a heavy plate wearer? Try going through a 2+ delve as a cloth wearing sorc *on your own* without anyone else in the place.

Phantorang wrote: »

You dont need to listen to the NPCs, they rarely say anything that is necessary to hear. The objectives are marked with quest signs, the texts from quest books are usually unnecessary, most MMOers want XP, and it doesnt pay to listen to the NPCs, which is a huge mistake in my opinion.

That's amusing because I'm currently in the VR1 version of the Bretton starting island, and people are doing exactly what you said and THEN wondering why the mobs are seeing through their Sea Dog disguises. Had those people actually listened to the NPC, they'd know why. So much for "you don't need to listen to npcs".

Phantorang wrote: »

It is NOT "next to impossible" to construct challenging quests that require the player to pay attention, its been done over and over.

I love this game for the stability, I dont think its so bugged as someone claims, its far better than any other MMO ive ever played from launch. So there are Pros and Cons. The solo play, which is a HUGE part of the game, are boring in the long run. It gets very repetetive, Im trying to immerse myself into the quests, but it gets difficult as it is no real value to it, it should be an important part of being able to complete a quest, but its not, and that is disappointing.

And yet, like I said above, some people even cannot be bothered to listen to the npc's. So what hope would they have in the "challenging" content you would like to see hmmm?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for complex content that is more than just "kill 10 rats". But you have to consider the fact that a balance has to be struck when designing these things. One person may absolutely love near impossible challenges, another person may be turned off by them.

Perhaps Zenimax should add more "group focused" content such as "private" dungeons, Mentoring systems, Temporary De-leveling systems, the ability to halt xp gain, etc, etc.

nerevarine1138

Enteum wrote: »

rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

If people came to ESO expecting a single player experience no wonder they are disappointed.

Outside of PvP i've had no reason to group up at all .... none.

But, that's just it. In the world you don't really need to group at all. You can't kill steal. You can just join in and help someone out. There has been numerous times I have seen people struggling with an elite...so I run over and pop in some heals for them, switch weapons and start throwing out fireballs to help. That, in it's own way is grouping. Without actually grouping by receiving an invite.

Exactly. Most world bosses can't be soloed, and there are plenty of larger public dungeons that just have large groups of people helping one another out. The fact that we aren't officially in a group doesn't change anything.

rioinsigniab16_ESO

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

Enteum wrote: »

rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

If people came to ESO expecting a single player experience no wonder they are disappointed.

Outside of PvP i've had no reason to group up at all .... none.

But, that's just it. In the world you don't really need to group at all. You can't kill steal. You can just join in and help someone out. There has been numerous times I have seen people struggling with an elite...so I run over and pop in some heals for them, switch weapons and start throwing out fireballs to help. That, in it's own way is grouping. Without actually grouping by receiving an invite.

Exactly. Most world bosses can't be soloed, and there are plenty of larger public dungeons that just have large groups of people helping one another out. The fact that we aren't officially in a group doesn't change anything.

In my opinion, a lot of the gripes come down to a matter of perception.

(*) People claim there's not enough encouragement to group, and yet there is. ESO has group content, just like any other MMO. However, the concept of enforced grouping throughout an MMO experience has been left in the past ages ago. ESO is no different to any other MMO released in the last 10 or so years.
(*) People claim that content is too "easy", but they neglect to tell you that they are over-leveled for the content, and loaded up with defensive gear to the point whereby they've trivilialised the encounters.
(*) People claim that there's no need to read quest text or listen to the npcs. And yet, even in VR zones there is evidence that HAD the players listened to the npcs then they wouldn't be wondering what to do or why things aren't working out for them. These are players who by the time of getting to VR status, should *know* better.

rioinsigniab16_ESO

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

My problem is the elder scroll name.


Elder scrolls is not just about combat.

Want a house? Sure!

Want to hire a body guard to protect you? Go right ahead.

Want to focus on trade skills, and buy your way to power with gold? why not!

Want to go around leveling up, not killing things...but just pick pocketing npcs and doing your trade? We got that also!

Want to murder a random NPC, and have guards chase you around? Sure!

Want to destory a town!? Got that also, and with the power of phasing it could have worked for players as well!

The freedom...All of this could have been a core design of the game. They spent too much money on voice acting and telling a great story. Mind you some of the quests story are amazing, others are hit and miss.


The very, Essence of a game is lack luster.

Housing, pick pocketing, etc, etc are all things that have been mentioned as suggestions. Technically speaking there is no reason why they can't STILL be implemented post-launch. It's a matter of time and money.

jimmulvaney

rioinsigniab16_ESO wrote: »

...That has been tried before in Rift. Lots of people in area = very hard encounter with stats based around those players....then those people leave....and those left behind can't finish the mob because now it's too hard... The situation is not as simple as the person you quote is makes it sound.

I know it is not as simple as it sounds but an effort has to be made and there is nothing wrong with brainstorming. We may not have all of the answers but we could have a couple of the pieces... Anyways, groups could be capped to a reasonable amount of players so bosses do not become too hard and there could be a mechanic that asks you if you want to opt out if a member leaves so you are not fubar'd from being left all by yourself. This is what they should be focused on instead of litho prints of Molag Bal.

rawne1980b16_ESO

jimmulvaney wrote: »

This is what they should be focused on instead of litho prints of Molag Bal.

Developers don't make things like that .... or the statue that came with the retail Imperial Edition.

They either have an in house department specifically for merchandise or they outsource to another company.

SadisticSavior

Gohlar wrote: »

ESO is a linear, restricted theme park.

Other elder scrolls games aren't.

Yes they were. You could not change the course of history in the single player games. You could not build armies or cities.

People have very black and white ideas of what Theme Parks and Sand Boxes are. There are no games right now that are true sandboxes...Mortal Online probably comes closest, but even it has rules that are not realistic but have to be followed for the game to work. Eve has Empire Space, which is heavily controlled and has NPCs that give quests.

This game lets you travel to any zone, at any level. Crafting is decoupled from levelling, allowing you to make items you yourself cannot actually use. The class system is extremely flexible compared to other MMOs. It has a gigantic zone devoted entirely to large scale PvP and you can still go there even if you do not engage in PvP, because it is integrated into the PvE game. This is a theme park in a very loose sense. It is far more flexible than EQ or WoW ever was and I love it because of that.

I have played many many MMOs over the years, and this one has definitely had the smoothest launch of the ones I have played. It also has the highest volume of undeserved complaining.

rawne1980b16_ESO

SadisticSavior wrote: »

Gohlar wrote: »

ESO is a linear, restricted theme park.

Other elder scrolls games aren't.

Yes they were. You could not change the course of history in the single player games. You could not build armies or cities.

You haven't played with mods.

I've rebuilt towns, cities and outposts and, with unlimited followers, i've delved dungeons with an army.

Well, it was an army of 10....

Sylveria_Relden

I've found that most of the perceived "flaws" in ESO are mainly related in trying to make a TES game into an MMO, rather than TES itself. The only mechanic I've found in particular that doesn't make this game feel like a TES game is the skill system- which is a minor annoying, but it's worthy to point out. It's also "semi-linear" but I've found this to be the case only because of the previous point of MMO-ing the game.

The skill system for TES has historically been "open" so that you can truly customize your characters- it's the one factor that truly stood out amongst contemporary games as an RPG. Ever since the first one you had a loosely-based class system in which the only thing that really mattered for choice are which attributes you based your skills from, and how quickly they levelled depended on this choice. If you picked Magicka as your primary attribute, you likely wouldn't be levelling Sneak very quickly, etc.

As much as I loathe the current skill system- as it feels my character is pidgeon-holed into a "semi-trinity" style class system, it's basically acceptable, however I do wish it was a little more open. I get the idea, and why they did it- mainly to incentivize players to group with each other, and not give any particular "class" an advantage over another, and give them all some sort of inherent flaw so that others had to rely on one another.

The world system being semi-linear is somewhat necessary for "progression" in any MMO- you can't just skip to the "end game content" from level 1- so I can understand why they guide you from the beginning with "bumper rails" in a sense. The higher in level you go, however, the gloves come off somewhat.

I play this game because I love it. If at any point, I feel I'm not enjoying it- then I'll simply quit- I won't post a bunch of random, spiteful and hateful messages in an online forum hoping that someone, somewhere in the corporate ladder is (or has the time to) reading and reviewing every post amongst thousands so they can take pity on me and change something to my liking.

PBpsy

rawne1980b16_ESO wrote: »

jimmulvaney wrote: »

This is what they should be focused on instead of litho prints of Molag Bal.

Developers don't make things like that .... or the statue that came with the retail Imperial Edition.

They either have an in house department specifically for merchandise or they outsource to another company.

No I tell you they were hand made by the engine programmers. I am sure just like these forums.

AnUndeadPlayer

Thunder wrote: »

DanteYoda wrote: »

What i didn't expect was...

• bugs
• broken gameplay
• dungeons being finished by other players
• Quests being finished by other players
• gold farmers and bots ruining the game
• Chest rewards not being segregated
• no bag space
• no bank space
• hardly any loot
• terrible community
• horrible service
• horrible forums
• maintenance twice a week forcing me to play other games while i'm paying a subscription...

You didn't expect bugs? Really? You must be new to video games.

Broken gameplay? Ah, an ambiguously subjective assertion that could mean anything.

Dungeons being finished by others? It's open world PVE, you seriously expect everyone else to wait outside while you go in and solo it?

Quests being finished by others? I don't even know how someone can finish a quest for you, that's a neat trick, don't let the gold farmers hear about it.

Gold farmers ruining the game? How? Again, you must be new to video games, every major MMO is plagued with gold farmers.

Chest rewards... bleh... such a petty complaint it's not worthy of consideration.

Bag space? Heh. Earn some gold, upgrade your bags, or better yet, quit trying to hoard everything. Somewhere between one bag space and infinite a line has to be drawn. I'm quite comfortable with where they drew the line.

Bank space... same.

Hardly any loot? Oh my.

Terrible community. Welcome to video gaming 101. However, this is one of the more pleasant communities I've been in, aside from all the cry babies that will soon be gone.

Service? Baseless accusation.

Forums? Well you were able to share your mixed up ideas with the community so you might have a point there.

Maintenance... well, that's my weak spot. I wish there weren't any either, but you'll be hard pressed to find an MMO without it.

I can't wait for this free month to be over.

Thats a wrap

nez

i've got very complicated thoughts about this game, i do like it as a echo of ES series, but the THING IS: in like few months, if nothing drastically changed, we will get a holla lot vampires running in constant smoke mode spamming either bats or pulsar (or some originals may come up with that two handed aoe lol) and thats it, the end. And just maybe, some another percent will stick to PVE - which is SO BORING THAT I FEEL LIKE SLEEP in about half an hour being out of Cyrodiil - which is boring too, but there is some kind of competition. Oh jee, i already see zone chat filled with nothing but motifs and "bites" sell offers and LFG LFG LFG LFG LFG guys, i just hope that they know what it means. To add more to twistedness TESO has shown me: totally confusing class system. I recall post on this forums, there've been said ~"why take away freedom to make your own skill build and implement classes?", and i dont understand it too, BUT OBVIOSLY some fuckshit who so buttaddicted to dragon and knights just had to make DRAGONKNIGHT class, which is, well, TA TA TAAAAAH, you know how DK's are now, like *** every second player is DK. And i agree with author, so badly agree.

AnUndeadPlayer

MercyKilling wrote: »

Greyhaven wrote: »

groups like Angry Joe's Army coordinate on how they are going to flood forums and news sites with hate...while promoting Archage.

Yeah, the EASY way to discredit them promoting Archage is to point out that TRION is making it, and that company made DEFIANCE. There literally IS no worse MMO than that game.

Eh, I wouldn't judge based on a game made for a TV show/movie. Those types of games regardless of the genre end up bad (aside from Goldeneye). They also made Rift which was a good game

fredarbonab14_ESO

Now a mighty contest has risen to define what an exactly an MMO is and whether ESO is one or not, to see if it matches someone's expectations are of what their definition of what a MMO is. I mean really people, nothing else to do?

fredarbonab14_ESO

^^^ Some absurdities are very difficult to put into words. LoL

Gohlar

fredarbonab14_ESO wrote: »

Now a mighty contest has risen to define what an exactly an MMO is and whether ESO is one or not, to see if it matches someone's expectations are of what their definition of what a MMO is. I mean really people, nothing else to do?

Irony. You have it.

cubansyrusb16_ESO

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

My problem is the elder scroll name.


Elder scrolls is not just about combat.

Want a house? Sure!

Want to hire a body guard to protect you? Go right ahead.

Want to focus on trade skills, and buy your way to power with gold? why not!

Want to go around leveling up, not killing things...but just pick pocketing npcs and doing your trade? We got that also!

Want to murder a random NPC, and have guards chase you around? Sure!

Want to destory a town!? Got that also, and with the power of phasing it could have worked for players as well!

The freedom...All of this could have been a core design of the game. They spent too much money on voice acting and telling a great story. Mind you some of the quests story are amazing, others are hit and miss.


The very, Essence of a game is lack luster.

Ohhhhh how did you survive in the series before oblivion ......

Thats right you played Skyrim, possibly Oblivion and now your a huge Elder Scrolls fan and your opinion is fact .... right ?

Gohlar

cubansyrusb16_ESO wrote: »

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

My problem is the elder scroll name.


Elder scrolls is not just about combat.

Want a house? Sure!

Want to hire a body guard to protect you? Go right ahead.

Want to focus on trade skills, and buy your way to power with gold? why not!

Want to go around leveling up, not killing things...but just pick pocketing npcs and doing your trade? We got that also!

Want to murder a random NPC, and have guards chase you around? Sure!

Want to destory a town!? Got that also, and with the power of phasing it could have worked for players as well!

The freedom...All of this could have been a core design of the game. They spent too much money on voice acting and telling a great story. Mind you some of the quests story are amazing, others are hit and miss.


The very, Essence of a game is lack luster.

Ohhhhh how did you survive in the series before oblivion ......

Thats right you played Skyrim, possibly Oblivion and now your a huge Elder Scrolls fan and your opinion is fact .... right ?

I've played every game since Arena. I think ESO is a rather lame theme park and the quests are more boring than previous Elder Scrolls games, which were certainly more open ended. ESO is also an mmo that removed exp from group content. They finally made a multiplayer elder scrolls and they want everyone to solo quest. It's lame.

cubansyrusb16_ESO

Gohlar wrote: »

cubansyrusb16_ESO wrote: »

rager82b14_ESO wrote: »

My problem is the elder scroll name.


Elder scrolls is not just about combat.

Want a house? Sure!

Want to hire a body guard to protect you? Go right ahead.

Want to focus on trade skills, and buy your way to power with gold? why not!

Want to go around leveling up, not killing things...but just pick pocketing npcs and doing your trade? We got that also!

Want to murder a random NPC, and have guards chase you around? Sure!

Want to destory a town!? Got that also, and with the power of phasing it could have worked for players as well!

The freedom...All of this could have been a core design of the game. They spent too much money on voice acting and telling a great story. Mind you some of the quests story are amazing, others are hit and miss.


The very, Essence of a game is lack luster.

Ohhhhh how did you survive in the series before oblivion ......

Thats right you played Skyrim, possibly Oblivion and now your a huge Elder Scrolls fan and your opinion is fact .... right ?

I've played every game since Arena. I think ESO is a rather lame theme park and the quests are more boring than previous Elder Scrolls games, which were certainly more open ended. ESO is also an mmo that removed exp from group content. They finally made a multiplayer elder scrolls and they want everyone to solo quest. It's lame.

More boring than previous TES games ? Did you even play Skyrim ?

It was as engaging as watching paint dry, the only thing not recycled in it was dragons and that was the only thing they added, the game was so basic i pulled my eyes out when i completed the main storyline in 6 hours without realizing it.

It was a bare striped down version of the Elder Scroll with /insert dragons.

That was the worst TES in the whole series .... don't bring up sales because it played like it was made to bring the CoD crowd to the series, ofcourse it will sell 20million copies in a time when almost ever household has an xbox 360 or 2.

d0e1ow

I think my issue with the game isn't that it's an Elder Scrolls MMO. It's not because the game is an MMO, and that seems to be such a big complaint of people. My issue is that the game feels very stuck in 2009.

It feels stuck in that era between Warhammer and Rift, where MMO developers knew they had to shake up the theme park questing with a few interesting things, but those things were still in their infancy. The Anchors feel like very basic rifts from Rift or like the public quests from Warhammer, as do the public dungeons. Neither feels particularly fleshed out.

The dialogue questing is nice, but falls into the same trap. SW:TOR has dialogue that is more engaging and involves the player much more, and it also did this while still retaining a constant group element to the game is the player so wishes. The dialogue options in ESO, again, feels like something they only half finished or half developed, like it was an earlier version of what we see in SW:TOR.

The combat is a nice change from the tab target and feels alright, but I feel it lacks the polish of GW2. Again, it feels "almost there but not quite."

The graphics fall into this category as well. They lack the brilliance and character of games like GW2, and they also lack the sharpness of games like Final Fantasy ARR. They feel stuck in the middle. Though, to their credit, the game runs extremely smoothly.

As for the quests themselves, I really enjoyed the starting areas for each faction, because it didn't feel overly linear. I did a lot of exploring and running about and finding chests, and that was really cool. It was an extremely positive first impression despite the game feeling like a prototype from the get go. Once I got out of the starting areas though, I really started to see just how locked into one path I was. One zone choice per level range, one path, and very little room to wiggle. I felt choked and restricted in a way that I don't think any MMO should ever do, and this felt like a huge step back.

As far back as 2004 Blizzard understood with World of Warcraft that having several options per level range is good. You can do this starter zone, or that one, you can quest here or there, or you can pvp, or you can grind dungeons. ESO failed to implement this, and I'm frankly shocked. In recent times, GW2 really knocked the "freedom theme park" design out of the stadium.

I was hoping that this game would take what is great about theme parks and sandboxes and mash them together, similarly to what Arena-Net has been trying to do with varying levels of success, but instead I feel I've gotten a very restricted theme park game that feels like it's still getting over the hurdles that the genre was dealing with 5 years ago.

Now, the game isn't bad, and I think there is a lot of great lore and potential,
but as it is, Zenimax is going to have to play a lot of "Catch up" in my opinion.

cubansyrusb16_ESO

d0e1ow wrote: »

I think my issue with the game isn't that it's an Elder Scrolls MMO. It's not because the game is an MMO, and that seems to be such a big complaint of people. My issue is that the game feels very stuck in 2009.

It feels stuck in that era between Warhammer and Rift, where MMO developers knew they had to shake up the theme park questing with a few interesting things, but those things were still in their infancy. The Anchors feel like very basic rifts from Rift or like the public quests from Warhammer, as do the public dungeons. Neither feels particularly fleshed out.

The dialogue questing is nice, but falls into the same trap. SW:TOR has dialogue that is more engaging and involves the player much more, and it also did this while still retaining a constant group element to the game is the player so wishes. The dialogue options in ESO, again, feels like something they only half finished or half developed, like it was an earlier version of what we see in SW:TOR.

The combat is a nice change from the tab target and feels alright, but I feel it lacks the polish of GW2. Again, it feels "almost there but not quite."

The graphics fall into this category as well. They lack the brilliance and character of games like GW2, and they also lack the sharpness of games like Final Fantasy ARR. They feel stuck in the middle. Though, to their credit, the game runs extremely smoothly.

As for the quests themselves, I really enjoyed the starting areas for each faction, because it didn't feel overly linear. I did a lot of exploring and running about and finding chests, and that was really cool. It was an extremely positive first impression despite the game feeling like a prototype from the get go. Once I got out of the starting areas though, I really started to see just how locked into one path I was. One zone choice per level range, one path, and very little room to wiggle. I felt choked and restricted in a way that I don't think any MMO should ever do, and this felt like a huge step back.

As far back as 2004 Blizzard understood with World of Warcraft that having several options per level range is good. You can do this starter zone, or that one, you can quest here or there, or you can pvp, or you can grind dungeons. ESO failed to implement this, and I'm frankly shocked. In recent times, GW2 really knocked the "freedom theme park" design out of the stadium.

I was hoping that this game would take what is great about theme parks and sandboxes and mash them together, similarly to what Arena-Net has been trying to do with varying levels of success, but instead I feel I've gotten a very restricted theme park game that feels like it's still getting over the hurdles that the genre was dealing with 5 years ago.

Now, the game isn't bad, and I think there is a lot of great lore and potential,
but as it is, Zenimax is going to have to play a lot of "Catch up" in my opinion.

Nice write up ... but seriously Sharpness of FF:ARR ?

The graphics on the distant landscapes are good yeah ok but that is about i, when you zoom into your character in FF:ARR there is so many bridges on the edges of everything it looks almost 8-bit.

The art style is ok, a bit playstation 1 but its passible ... then again they did just what ESO is only IMO not as good.

I ran FF:ARR completely maxed out and the AA x16 did nothing, i remember a GM saying its listed there but its not implement ... seriously no AA ?

The only character models that i say would be as good as ESO are the ones in Rift as they are quite well done, other than that nothing touches the graphics we currently have in ESO.

The lighting here is also one of the best i have seen and really the graphics are up to par if not better than those on Skyrim .... i think people are to used to the mods on that game ...

d0e1ow

cubansyrusb16_ESO wrote: »

d0e1ow wrote: »

I think my issue with the game isn't that it's an Elder Scrolls MMO. It's not because the game is an MMO, and that seems to be such a big complaint of people. My issue is that the game feels very stuck in 2009.

It feels stuck in that era between Warhammer and Rift, where MMO developers knew they had to shake up the theme park questing with a few interesting things, but those things were still in their infancy. The Anchors feel like very basic rifts from Rift or like the public quests from Warhammer, as do the public dungeons. Neither feels particularly fleshed out.

The dialogue questing is nice, but falls into the same trap. SW:TOR has dialogue that is more engaging and involves the player much more, and it also did this while still retaining a constant group element to the game is the player so wishes. The dialogue options in ESO, again, feels like something they only half finished or half developed, like it was an earlier version of what we see in SW:TOR.

The combat is a nice change from the tab target and feels alright, but I feel it lacks the polish of GW2. Again, it feels "almost there but not quite."

The graphics fall into this category as well. They lack the brilliance and character of games like GW2, and they also lack the sharpness of games like Final Fantasy ARR. They feel stuck in the middle. Though, to their credit, the game runs extremely smoothly.

As for the quests themselves, I really enjoyed the starting areas for each faction, because it didn't feel overly linear. I did a lot of exploring and running about and finding chests, and that was really cool. It was an extremely positive first impression despite the game feeling like a prototype from the get go. Once I got out of the starting areas though, I really started to see just how locked into one path I was. One zone choice per level range, one path, and very little room to wiggle. I felt choked and restricted in a way that I don't think any MMO should ever do, and this felt like a huge step back.

As far back as 2004 Blizzard understood with World of Warcraft that having several options per level range is good. You can do this starter zone, or that one, you can quest here or there, or you can pvp, or you can grind dungeons. ESO failed to implement this, and I'm frankly shocked. In recent times, GW2 really knocked the "freedom theme park" design out of the stadium.

I was hoping that this game would take what is great about theme parks and sandboxes and mash them together, similarly to what Arena-Net has been trying to do with varying levels of success, but instead I feel I've gotten a very restricted theme park game that feels like it's still getting over the hurdles that the genre was dealing with 5 years ago.

Now, the game isn't bad, and I think there is a lot of great lore and potential,
but as it is, Zenimax is going to have to play a lot of "Catch up" in my opinion.

Nice write up ... but seriously Sharpness of FF:ARR ?

The graphics on the distant landscapes are good yeah ok but that is about i, when you zoom into your character in FF:ARR there is so many bridges on the edges of everything it looks almost 8-bit.

The art style is ok, a bit playstation 1 but its passible ... then again they did just what ESO is only IMO not as good.

I ran FF:ARR completely maxed out and the AA x16 did nothing, i remember a GM saying its listed there but its not implement ... seriously no AA ?

The only character models that i say would be as good as ESO are the ones in Rift as they are quite well done, other than that nothing touches the graphics we currently have in ESO.

The lighting here is also one of the best i have seen and really the graphics are up to par if not better than those on Skyrim .... i think people are to used to the mods on that game ...

I thought the graphics in FF were very sharp. Maybe it's just a differing of opinion. Let's say you are right though.

Even still, I don't feel that the game has a lot of visual character. It's all quite drab and generic feeling. Compare this to games like World of Warcraft or Guild Wars 2. While they may not have cutting edge state of the art visuals, their worlds ooze a style and identity that is memorable and engaging for the imagination. It feels "fantastic", which fantasy should. I don't get that vibe from the visuals in ESO. I didn't get it from Rift either, since you mentioned that. I felt that game was very visually flat as well.

cubansyrusb16_ESO

d0e1ow wrote: »

cubansyrusb16_ESO wrote: »

d0e1ow wrote: »

I think my issue with the game isn't that it's an Elder Scrolls MMO. It's not because the game is an MMO, and that seems to be such a big complaint of people. My issue is that the game feels very stuck in 2009.

It feels stuck in that era between Warhammer and Rift, where MMO developers knew they had to shake up the theme park questing with a few interesting things, but those things were still in their infancy. The Anchors feel like very basic rifts from Rift or like the public quests from Warhammer, as do the public dungeons. Neither feels particularly fleshed out.

The dialogue questing is nice, but falls into the same trap. SW:TOR has dialogue that is more engaging and involves the player much more, and it also did this while still retaining a constant group element to the game is the player so wishes. The dialogue options in ESO, again, feels like something they only half finished or half developed, like it was an earlier version of what we see in SW:TOR.

The combat is a nice change from the tab target and feels alright, but I feel it lacks the polish of GW2. Again, it feels "almost there but not quite."

The graphics fall into this category as well. They lack the brilliance and character of games like GW2, and they also lack the sharpness of games like Final Fantasy ARR. They feel stuck in the middle. Though, to their credit, the game runs extremely smoothly.

As for the quests themselves, I really enjoyed the starting areas for each faction, because it didn't feel overly linear. I did a lot of exploring and running about and finding chests, and that was really cool. It was an extremely positive first impression despite the game feeling like a prototype from the get go. Once I got out of the starting areas though, I really started to see just how locked into one path I was. One zone choice per level range, one path, and very little room to wiggle. I felt choked and restricted in a way that I don't think any MMO should ever do, and this felt like a huge step back.

As far back as 2004 Blizzard understood with World of Warcraft that having several options per level range is good. You can do this starter zone, or that one, you can quest here or there, or you can pvp, or you can grind dungeons. ESO failed to implement this, and I'm frankly shocked. In recent times, GW2 really knocked the "freedom theme park" design out of the stadium.

I was hoping that this game would take what is great about theme parks and sandboxes and mash them together, similarly to what Arena-Net has been trying to do with varying levels of success, but instead I feel I've gotten a very restricted theme park game that feels like it's still getting over the hurdles that the genre was dealing with 5 years ago.

Now, the game isn't bad, and I think there is a lot of great lore and potential,
but as it is, Zenimax is going to have to play a lot of "Catch up" in my opinion.

Nice write up ... but seriously Sharpness of FF:ARR ?

The graphics on the distant landscapes are good yeah ok but that is about i, when you zoom into your character in FF:ARR there is so many bridges on the edges of everything it looks almost 8-bit.

The art style is ok, a bit playstation 1 but its passible ... then again they did just what ESO is only IMO not as good.

I ran FF:ARR completely maxed out and the AA x16 did nothing, i remember a GM saying its listed there but its not implement ... seriously no AA ?

The only character models that i say would be as good as ESO are the ones in Rift as they are quite well done, other than that nothing touches the graphics we currently have in ESO.

The lighting here is also one of the best i have seen and really the graphics are up to par if not better than those on Skyrim .... i think people are to used to the mods on that game ...

I thought the graphics in FF were very sharp. Maybe it's just a differing of opinion. Let's say you are right though.

Even still, I don't feel that the game has a lot of visual character. It's all quite drab and generic feeling. Compare this to games like World of Warcraft or Guild Wars 2. While they may not have cutting edge state of the art visuals, their worlds ooze a style and identity that is memorable and engaging for the imagination. It feels "fantastic", which fantasy should. I don't get that vibe from the visuals in ESO. I didn't get it from Rift either, since you mentioned that. I felt that game was very visually flat as well.

Dont get me wrong the world in Rift did not inspire me at all but the characters looked realistic enough to convince me they were solid, the actual characters in FF:ARR apart from the hair (very edgy) where quite well done .....
We do know that FF:ARR was made to scale into the limited memory of the PS2 which obviously held the graphics back, maybe if they had held out till the till the PS4 came out it would have been alot more "silky"

What i personally think ESO has done well in the world design is the way they have the light working for them.
I like how it comes through the trees and acts like it would in reality which for me works, how the day looks different depending on what time it is in the days, how its glistens of your Armour... the rolling fog on the roads, the clouds and shadows all done to a very high quality.

These are the types of things people are over looking, done in a SPRPG people would be more likely to give credit, not sure why everyone is so critical when if comes to an MMO.

Mortelus

Zeni cannot win here, If they make it too MMO in style, they will be going back on their word and will be alienating many more players that came here because of the ES tag.

If they don't change it up then they will get the MMO players complaining that it isn't like other MMO's.

Personal the latter is of less importance I think. Taking into how successful the ES games have been, especially Skyrim, I think it is more important for Zeni to keep the fans of the series happy.

Judging by what I read here in the forums, I think the majority of complainers are not original ES fans, but rather MMO'ers from other games and make up the minority of the player base.

Because from what i see in game is that people are rarely complaining about anything other than bots and spam... As the saying goes, 'proof is in the pudding'

loco

Mortelus wrote: »

Zeni cannot win here, If they make it too MMO in style, they will be going back on their word and will be alienating many more players that came here because of the ES tag.

If they don't change it up then they will get the MMO players complaining that it isn't like other MMO's.

Personal the latter is of less importance I think. Taking into how successful the ES games have been, especially Skyrim, I think it is more important for Zeni to keep the fans of the series happy.

Judging by what I read here in the forums, I think the majority of complainers are not original ES fans, but rather MMO'ers from other games and make up the minority of the player base.

Because from what i see in game is that people are rarely complaining about anything other than bots and spam... As the saying goes, 'proof is in the pudding'

If Zeni had just made an open world game with defocused questing progression they would have made a game about 100 times better. They should have never tried to make this PvP side to it with split factions either. He'll they could have put a colosseum in for PvP.

Instead it's a rail road themepark where you go from area to area till you make it to the end then go through the other factions area by area. I'm still pissed at the lazy reuse of assets, level 50 mud crabs????

If they had just done one huge open world with cities you wanted to visit for some reason other than it's in your leveling range, it would have been an awesome game. Throw in some GM ran assaults and sieges on towns and it would have been even better.

They could have also added depth to the game and skills more in line with the single player games, with interesting spells, actual warriors, ect ect.

The game is just boring.

Mortelus

loco wrote: »

Mortelus wrote: »

Zeni cannot win here, If they make it too MMO in style, they will be going back on their word and will be alienating many more players that came here because of the ES tag.

If they don't change it up then they will get the MMO players complaining that it isn't like other MMO's.

Personal the latter is of less importance I think. Taking into how successful the ES games have been, especially Skyrim, I think it is more important for Zeni to keep the fans of the series happy.

Judging by what I read here in the forums, I think the majority of complainers are not original ES fans, but rather MMO'ers from other games and make up the minority of the player base.

Because from what i see in game is that people are rarely complaining about anything other than bots and spam... As the saying goes, 'proof is in the pudding'

If Zeni had just made an open world game with defocused questing progression they would have made a game about 100 times better. They should have never tried to make this PvP side to it with split factions either. He'll they could have put a colosseum in for PvP.

Instead it's a rail road themepark where you go from area to area till you make it to the end then go through the other factions area by area. I'm still pissed at the lazy reuse of assets, level 50 mud crabs????

If they had just done one huge open world with cities you wanted to visit for some reason other than it's in your leveling range, it would have been an awesome game. Throw in some GM ran assaults and sieges on towns and it would have been even better.

They could have also added depth to the game and skills more in line with the single player games, with interesting spells, actual warriors, ect ect.

The game is just boring.

I don't disagree with having one huge open world that would have been awesome. With seperate servers for open world PvP, RP and PvE.

However you need questing in a game that is based upon lore, you cannot just expect people to run around blindly not following a story of some description.

If you want that type of game, sorry but you need a proper sandbox game.

This is a Themepark game, it was never touted as a sandbox, no ES game is sandbox despite what people here argue. True sandbox is build anything anywhere do anything anywhere... Change the landscape design a world in your own image.

It sounds to me this is more of what you were expecting, an open world to go as you please and do as you please.

*waves hand* 'This isn't the game your looking for'

txfeinbergsub17_ESO

robby41525_ESO wrote: »

Sorry if this is the wrong section but i couldn't find the right one.

This is to the Devs of the game that tried so hard to do this right, but in the end for many fans, ruined the very essence of what the Elder Scrolls series as a multiplayer game should've been. THIS IS NOT AN INSULT! This is a conversation i find highly true between a friend, me, and many others. Please feel free to move this to the proper forum section if need be.

Friend: in the golden days of gaming, money and hardware limitations made developers be creative to get around those limitations
Me: ESO tried to make that work, and it failed horribly for me
Friend: and make things unique and interesting
Friend: but now its just "lets make it generic as *** and cheap as possible"
Friend: eso woulda been good if they didnt force all the *** mmo elements into it
Me: THATS THE THING
Me: THEY TRIED MAKING AN MMO
Friend: if they kept it elder scrolls plus multiplayer it woulda been good
Me: exaaaaaactly
Friend: MMO just means multiplayer with a bunch of people
Friend: it doesnt mean you have to make it like EQ/ WoW
Friend: thats what nobody understands

Please don't take this as an insult, as this is clearly not one, but a solid statement that has yet to be proven incorrect.

Your statement is wrong. It turned out to be exactly what I wanted. Don't speak for me.