ESO - stuck firmly in the past.

Laura

scave wrote: »

Laura wrote: »

[Your entire post can be summed up like this.


I don't like to quest and there are lots of quests. I wanted pvp to be more like GW2 but on a larger scale.

I also think servers fix themselves.

there I just saved someone like three minutes of reading.

Ok, I'll respond here because it's a little more reasoned. I would say first, though, that argument reductionism like the above is a shallow, childish tactic that doesn't wash with me.

You called someone a fanboy (the literal warcry of the idiot in gaming) and then you proceed to scold someone about "tactics". I honestly hope for your sake that you are a troll and not that big of a hypocritical cynic.

At the end of the day its all opinion. I can say this, I am a part of a large multi gaming guild that has been seeking a new game since EQ. I haven't seem them all enjoy a game like this one before.

YOU found the quests boring. I am sorry they were not up to YOUR magnificent standards.

I am sorry YOU are not having fun but obviously a ton of people are.

Cancel your sub and move on your input is provided and no amount of debating will prove or disprove to you that people are having fun. Gaming shouldn't be about dissecting "why this game is fun to me" and "why it isn't fun to you"

I think I'm done here. Have fun with your modern game (that you still haven't answered yet you sit there and nitpick I didn't respond to every single detail of your hard to read ramblings)

Laura

dagnome wrote: »

Laura wrote: »

I love this game and I haven't had an MMO pull me in for years and I try them all trying to chase that dragon.

Gatta lay off that Heroine Hero, it's a dangerous game. XD

I'll catch it some day. I'm pretty sure I touched its tail with ESO though... so close.. so close. If only it had housing and a crime system.

scave

Selstad wrote: »

Well fine, I can do that:

It's not outdate, it's far from outdate. World of warcraft per example, The Secret world and Star Wars: The old republic are 3 games that are current yet doesn't do much in terms of changing or being dynamic. And to be honest, I really hated in GW2 that you went from a town to collect something, wanted to go back only to find the dam place under attack from something something the Xth time. Same with Rift, questing along, only to find that the whole dam zone was flooded by invaders. Having a dynamic world where the whole zone changes is rarely a good game design in my eyes. It becomes very boring very fast, and the novelty of it wears of after the Xth time the same event happens. There are limitations to how many different events you can hardcode into a game.

I won't really discuss WoW or clones of it like TOR as they really are 'the past'. Dynamic events and a dynamic gameworld might not be to everybody's tastes. Personally I think they're a big part of the future of themepark mmorpg's.

Sandbox doesn't need to rely on it as the players pretty much make up the events themselves, but a post-WoW themepark needs to offer something that players aren't already potentially very, very bored of (thanks to the multiple clones we've already had).

Another huge negative part with GW2 is the lack of structure in group content such as dungeons. I know they tried to invent the wheel with removing set structures on tank, healer and DPS, but it just turned out to be a chaotic mess in there. Tried several dungeons and it all went the same, we died horribly a good few times because there weren't any patterns to run from. GW2 tried and proved that having some sort of organizing in dungeon content is preferable.

I guess that folks that are used to the trinity system can find the removal of it chaotic. Personally I think that GW2 has an 'order' of it's own, but I accept that it pretty much is a case of 'everybody DPS!' and is little more than that.

And Guild wars 2 is also hub based, where you travel from zone to zone locked away by loading screens. Only problem with GW2 is that it also scales down your level to that of the zone, making the feel of progression and levelling up kind of useless. What's the use of having a levelling system if you're constantly bumped down when you enter a new zone?

Yeah, I get your points here. I never offered GW2 up as something perfect, just a nod in the direction that themepark mmo's need to be headed in. GW2 is just a step in that direction. ESO is a step away from it and back into the past.

scave

Laura wrote: »

You called someone a fanboy (the literal warcry of the idiot in gaming) and then you proceed to scold someone about "tactics". I honestly hope for your sake that you are a troll and not that big of a...(cue several paragraphs of angry waffle)

I agree. Best we both leave it there or it'll just descend even further.

DLaren

scave wrote: »

Anyway, this is getting silly and non-productive. An actual reasoned response might have been nice (although these sort of reponses were fairly predictable). So I'll leave my OP as food for thought and leave you good folks to it.

I'm not sure what you were hoping to accomplish with this thread.

You used an inflammatory topic-title, ripped the game in the body of your OP, left no room for debate, spoke in platitudes as if your opinion was fact, and now you're taking your ball & going home since people are expressing opposing view-points,

If you just wanted people to cheer & throw roses as you tore the game down you should have posted this on IGN or Gamespot and the users there would have carried you around on their shoulders...

scave

DLaren wrote: »

scave wrote: »

Anyway, this is getting silly and non-productive. An actual reasoned response might have been nice (although these sort of reponses were fairly predictable). So I'll leave my OP as food for thought and leave you good folks to it.

I'm not sure what you were hoping to accomplish with this thread.

You used an inflammatory topic-title, ripped the game in the body of your OP, left no room for debate, spoke in platitudes as if your opinion was fact, and now you're taking your ball & going home since people are expressing opposing view-points,

If you just wanted people to cheer & throw roses as you tore the game down you should have posted this on IGN or Gamespot and the users there would have carried you around on their shoulders...

You're already incorrect. Go back over the thread and you'll see that I'll more than welcome decent, reasoned debate and will respond in kind. My OP, as far as I'm concerned, has some reasonable points. I just get a little bored with the usual knee-jerk responses you get on forums like this were people rush to disagree without actually discussing the discussion (a lot like your own post).

Selstad

I won't really discuss WoW or clones of it like TOR as they really are 'the past'. Dynamic events and a dynamic gameworld might not be to everybody's tastes. Personally I think they're a big part of the future of themepark mmorpg's.

Sandbox doesn't need to rely on it as the players pretty much make up the events themselves, but a post-WoW themepark needs to offer something that players aren't already potentially very, very bored of (thanks to the multiple clones we've already had).

That's a very weak argumentation you have there, you basically label what game you see as "opposition" as "past" and be done with it. The fact that the game is played and updated to this day, makes it very much a current MMO. And WoW being the biggest MMO currently out, certainly leaves that one in the race as a current mmo regardless if what you say.

TESO has about as much dynamic events as I care in an MMO, with the anchor spawns and the random portal spawns here and there. I really hate MMOs that ry to be dynamic, simply because you're bound eventually to run in circles. It happened very quickly in GW2, when a town was attacked by a giant for the 3rd time in my 6 hour gaming session.

I guess that folks that are used to the trinity system can find the removal of it chaotic. Personally I think that GW2 has an 'order' of it's own, but I accept that it pretty much is a case of 'everybody DPS!' and is little more than that.

It's like the wheel, if you can't improve it, don't try invent something to replace it. I don't mind trying new things, but it has to be something that's comfortable and good to use. You were suppose to have "support" roles in GW2 that basically held the monsters in CC, which is a down watered version of what a tank does. It doesn't help trying to invent a new system, when you just make a poor gimmick of the trinity system that doesn't actually work. In all basics, a tank is simply a support class to hold the monsters in CC long enough for the DPS to take them down, and the healer is there to make sure tank and DPS doesn't die. There's a reason this system works. Would you call a wheel a "thing of the past"?

If it's not broken, don't fix it.

Yeah, I get your points here. I never offered GW2 up as something perfect, just a nod in the direction that themepark mmo's need to be headed in. GW2 is just a step in that direction. ESO is a step away from it and back into the past.

I don't think Gw2 is any nod in any direction. It is another MMO and nothing to it and it doesn't do anything out of the ordinary. Dynamic events was in Rift long before GW2, and I wouldn't call scaling down your level to the zone level something revolutionary. The questing is generic and more or less the same as we find in every other MMO and the main quest is instanced. So I really don't see what GW2 brings to the table that is a step in the right direction.

scave

Selstad wrote: »

[
That's a very weak argumentation you have there...

Ok, let's not descend to silly rhetoric. For all we know your own argument might be the weakest of all. Let's see:

You basically label what game you see as "opposition" as "past" and be done with it. The fact that the game is played and updated to this day, makes it very much a current MMO. And WoW being the biggest MMO currently out, certainly leaves that one in the race as a current mmo regardless if what you say.

Nope. It's the past because it is the past. No game developers can hope to succeed in the future by copying this particular past. We know that because we've seen several failed WoW clones already. Obviously, things need to be done differently if themepark is going to survive.

It's like the wheel, if you can't improve it, don't try invent something to replace it. I don't mind trying new things, but it has to be something that's comfortable and good to use. You were suppose to have "support" roles in GW2 that basically held the monsters in CC, which is a down watered version of what a tank does. It doesn't help trying to invent a new system, when you just make a poor gimmick of the trinity system that doesn't actually work.

You're missing the point here, and it's also a bad example. To know the Guild Wars series is to know that it's primarily a PvP game. The system they've developed is great for fluid pvp that isn't bogged down with the mechanics used for controlling mobs/adds in PVE and for healing in PVE. Sadly, Arenanet didn't develop a PVE system that really utilises their class systems fully (not sure how that would be done).

I don't think Gw2 is any nod in any direction. It is another MMO and nothing to it and it doesn't do anything out of the ordinary.

I don't think you could be more wrong here. Given how damned competitive the mmorpg market is and just how many titles have fallen by the wayside, GW2's 90% rating on Metacritic and it's ongoing success more than proves you wrong.

RylukShouja

scave wrote: »

Laura wrote: »

[Your entire post can be summed up like this.


I don't like to quest and there are lots of quests. I wanted pvp to be more like GW2 but on a larger scale.

I also think servers fix themselves.

there I just saved someone like three minutes of reading.

Ok, I'll respond here because it's a little more reasoned. I would say first, though, that argument reductionism like the above is a shallow, childish tactic that doesn't wash with me.

You don't actually address anything about ESO having a static, unchanging gameworld that delivers a predictable, repetitive experience to players, and has done nothing to provide anything new from the many mmo's we've played before. The dialogue and quest-plots are dull, predictable and uninspiring and are hardly what you'd call groundbreaking. That won't cut it for long in a competitive market.

As for my points about the combat system in pvp, and the player experience of it - they still stand. You didn't address that at all.

The game world is static and unchanging? Have you even done more than one zone of PvE? The game world changes on a regular basis. As you complete certain quests mobs will become passive, enemies will disappear altogether to be replaced by allies who have retaken the fort or town or whatever...it is far from a "static and unchanging" world.

Granted, in the end, everyone ends up with very similar game worlds, but that's par for the course in an mmo. Just imagine for a moment the chaos if you and your buddy are riding through a zone to quest/kill things/dungeon delve etc, and all of a sudden, you ride into a zone that you picked option a, causing the town to remain overrun by hordes of Daedra, and be picked option b, which freed the town from the power of the evil summoner.

Suddenly you are in different phases and you are having your ass beat and your friend can't help. Some things just have to end up the same so as not to drive everyone insane.

As for your earlier comment about quest hubs...that's a blatant lie. The most quests I have ever seen in one place is three, maybe four, and those are in major cities. The vast majority of your quests will be discovered while exploring and you find them in pockets of one or two at a time.

Awfully small hubs, if you ask me.

Selstad

Nope. It's the past because it is the past. No game developers can hope to succeed in the future by copying this particular past. We know that because we've seen several failed WoW clones already. Obviously, things need to be done differently if themepark is going to survive.

Then simply; Guild wars 2 is the past as well. In terms that when it came out, it became the past. Though we can argue semantics here as much as you like. However stating that something is a clone or in the past simply doesn't cut it and doesn't prove anything one way or the other.

You're missing the point here, and it's also a bad example. To know the Guild Wars series is to know that it's primarily a PvP game. The system they've developed is great for fluid pvp that isn't bogged down with the mechanics used for controlling mobs/adds in PVE and for healing in PVE. Sadly, Arenanet didn't develop a PVE system that really utilises their class systems fully (not sure how that would be done).

Regardless of what it wants to be known as, it still tries being a PvE game as well. I know the guild wars series, been around them since the first game, no worries there. The point however is that you use GW2 dynamic PvE events as an example of how things are done or should be done. GW2 doesn't cater on being PvP or solely build for PvP, it also does PvE and is part of the game's judgement. That you use GW2's PvE as an example why TESO is bad, yet say that GW2 is a PvP game and doesn't do PvE too good, kinds of contradicts your original statements.

I don't think you could be more wrong here. Given how damned competitive the mmorpg market is and just how many titles have fallen by the wayside, GW2's 90% rating on Metacritic and it's ongoing success more than proves you wrong.

Please elaborate how a 90 rating on Metacritics translate to GW2 being new and revolutionary? Oh wait, it doesn't. It's just an average indicating that the critics liked it. Nothing more. It doesn't prove anything.

World of Warcraft has a 93 rating, does that mean that WoW is even more revolutionary and new than GW2? In accordance with your logic, yes.

Lalai

I have to disagree entirely about the PvE aspect. Yes, they do have some things to iron out, but I find the world much more interesting than previous MMOs I've played. I find the quests appealing, and I love reading/listening to them. I'm absorbed in the story as I would be with a book I enjoy. I also like how most of them aren't actually located at one single hub (as you stated they were), you find them as you run along (kinda like in GW2) and they help you progress through the area without having to constantly go back to one single town. Some you can be led to by talking to various NPCs, and then the mark the area on the map for you...which provides a reason to talk to people outside of them being marked as having a quest. Additionally, if you want to find anywhere near all the quests in an area you're going to have to go exploring, find all the dungeons/delves, and the quests that are off the beaten path.

Completing quests often results in the area changing. NPCs will talk about some of your most recent adventures in the world, in some cases towns become open to you because you saved them, This is one of the aspects the drew me in during beta. I loved the first time I saved a town and it actually became a town I could visit/shop at. Now, they could make things more dynamic, which I've stated elsewhere, by giving more choices for quests that effect the outcome of what you see. However, I would prefer they did that after making it possible to group while in different phases and still see each other/quest together prior to making the world anymore dynamic than it is. Unless by dynamic you're talking CoV/CoH style stuff where groups that control one area control a different area after a patch sometime later with a bit of a story on why they shifted.. I don't really feel that would fit in the ESO world though. I much prefer the sort of dynamic content they currently have through phasing.. the grouping bit for phasing specifically just needs to be improved.

In contrast, I couldn't keep interested in GW2 at all. The quests did not appeal to me, I didn't read/listen to them because I found the story boring.. and the world didn't really feel alive to me at all. Nothing about that game really drew me in, nor did I ever feel compelled to explore the world they created. It definitely had some things that worked.. in particular I loved that gathering nodes were specific to the individual, and I absolutely loved their crafting storage...but the world itself I found bland and boring.

The rest of your post I can't really comment on. I didn't get into PvP in GW2, and I haven't gotten into PvP yet for ESO.

KerinKor

scave wrote: »

There's no dynamic world here with evolving, spontaneous chains of events and changing content.

So the end of Bleakrock for example doesn't qualify?

Really?

ESO makes great use of phasing to reflect player actions, such as eliminating 'baddies' from towns, restoring statues, etc.

You clearly have an agenda, and don't seem to want facts to get in the way.

As for GW2, by no means everyone playing GW2 likes the way that game's gone with the Living World event chain. And in spite of your lauding it, GW2's PVP is the subject of endless complaints.

I 'get' you love GW2, you refer to it a lot and I also enjoy it having 5 level 80s, but objectively it's nothing like as different as you want to make out.

Gohlar

mutharex wrote: »

Hub to hub questing?? People are weird

Um, that's ESO. Don't tell me the superficial changes to a very well tread path have fooled you into thinking you are doing something different...

To the OP: Most people have quit by this point. There are mostly only white knights left who will tell you this is some new kind of game despite the obvious fact that it is not. The voice acting is nice but without that what's left? A very antiquated mmo.

vyndral13preub18_ESO

It is strange, it is like different people like different things. For example i enjoy the questing much more then any questing i did in Gw2.

I am confused by the static unchanging world idea though. Have you read any of the complaints about phasing? They are all over the place. You know what those are right? People took different choices or different actions and now their world is no longer the same as the person they are with. When i save the king i walk out the door and the crowd cheers me. And then they talk to me as i go through town thanking me.

In gw2 i save a pack of refugees, and 3 minutes later i can come back and save them again. Gw2 'dynamic' events are anything but dynamic. Heck they are so dynamic the main events are now on a set schedule. It is 530 world boss 1 is up!!! Charge!!! This is exciting and dynamic!!

vyndral13preub18_ESO

Gohlar wrote: »

mutharex wrote: »

Hub to hub questing?? People are weird

Um, that's ESO. Don't tell me the superficial changes to a very well tread path have fooled you into thinking you are doing something different

Why wouldn't they? according to the op they fooled the people playing gw2.

Gohlar

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

Gohlar wrote: »

mutharex wrote: »

Hub to hub questing?? People are weird

Um, that's ESO. Don't tell me the superficial changes to a very well tread path have fooled you into thinking you are doing something different

Why wouldn't they? according to the op they fooled the people playing gw2.

I don't agree with everything he said, but ESO is definitely a hub to hub questing game, just like every other mmo since WoW.

LadyChaos

scave wrote: »

The PVE is the most obvious relic from an outdated history of mmorpg gaming. That tired old hub-to-hub questing progression within a static, unchanging gameworld was superceded years ago. There's no dynamic world here with evolving, spontaneous chains of events and changing content. Sure, I know games like GW2 and their scripted events never really delivered on their promise of a gameworld were your actions have consequences, but at least that gameworld feels more alive and adaptive to player actions.

ESO takes the lore-rich world of Tamriel and reduces it to that old-fashioned mmo staple of a series of laddered levelling areas that you move on from and never really look back on, in the same way that Turbine reduced lovely old Middle Earth in Lotro, and Bioware did with TOR.

There isn't a AAA MMORPG without quest-lines. People are dissapointed that questing is overly encouraged by the leveling system. That is personal preference, and only time will tell if the dissapointement is impatient players wanting easy fast track to max level or not.

As for dynamic environment, aside from GW2 and Rift dynamic environments I cannot think of another big hit to do it well, and GW2 didn't do it so well TBH. And ESO didn't claim dynamic environment in PvE. I WAS a little disappointed with the dark anchors didn't turn out to be more challenging/exciting/dynamic personally, but that's more do to misguided expectations on my part. I was thinking "rifts" when they never said that's what they would be...

---

scave wrote: »

Yet I can live with the lacklustre PVE, because the promise of epic RvR was really what I came here for, and I love the idea of a vast Cyrodil with big objectives to fight over. It was a real dissapointment to find out how the actual combat played out.

I liked the PvP, right up until I kept getting perma-stunned... but as the PvPer in me abhors crying about anything being unfair, I rebuilt, leveled and learned. I went back over and over until I reached both a level and build that makes the amount of stun-to-deaths vs the amount of times I have the same upper hand on my enemies fairly equal. Stammina, Stammina, Stammina...

scave wrote: »

The real acid test of mmorpg pvp is whether players are fighting each other or farming each other. In the latter, your typical experience of pvp might be constantly finding yourself being killed while incapacitated for periods were you can't fight back. Players just perfect their techniques of stun and stomp because of a huge range of cc available to them. It's totally reminiscent of the failed pvp within games like TOR, Lotro and Aion.

Players camping each other is not a "sign" of a game. PvPers are *** in a nutshell... we as a whole have a mindset to exploit our enemies weakness, and a thirst to be the player who goes home with a bag full of heads, not the headless one. I'm about as "look our for the little guy", as they come for a PvPer, and I will rock a level 10 off his horse just to teach him, don't travel alone... so many complaints are about being jumped and no chances to counter, by a higher level player.. but the majority of those are people who didn't take the time to travel with a buddy. I wait outside keeps for low level players to escort them, (I can make it on my own), especially when they ask for escort or take the time to tell us "gank group xxx location..." I'll heal a low level player trying to escape in stead of bolting to my own safety a lot of the time, it's about the multi-class working together. If you focus onthe 1v1 of this game you won't get it IMO. The ones who enjoy it are not trying to be 1 v 1 gods, but team focused.

scave wrote: »

The fun is immediate and obvious in a combat system like GW2's, yet The Fun is something that Zeni seemed to have sucked all the life out of in what could have been a hugely promising pvp system. This system is mostly about 'battle of the stuns', and reminds me so much of mmorpg pvp from days of yore. Instead of fun, it can be tedious and, I imagine, a pretty repellent experience to new players to be farmed repeatedly in this fashion for Alliance Points.

You can only be farmed here (unlike in GW2) if you travel alone, try to play solo at under VR levels. In GW2 the servers so completely unbalanced since launch only the top tier servers had any kind of a fun fight. And once we pulled away in points what does everyone do.... 24 hour camping the spawn point, with very little options to get out of that situation for the underdog. Here the map looks a whole different animal from 8 AM to 8 PM.

In GW2 no one bothers to do large scale coordination or hold objective anymore, it is capture this keep, move to next, if they 6 guys on the other team manage to recap it it, even better they are just there to farm the karma points or speed level not PvP.

Shimond

Gohlar wrote: »

I don't agree with everything he said, but ESO is definitely a hub to hub questing game, just like every other mmo since WoW.

I guess if you're defining 'hub' as 'any place a quest is available' sure. However that's really not how I would define it. WOW was very much donkey/carrot in terms of leading you from 'place to get all your quests'. ESO only has a few real 'hubs' like that, many of the quests are obtained out in the wild one at a time.

Gohlar

Shimond wrote: »

Gohlar wrote: »

I don't agree with everything he said, but ESO is definitely a hub to hub questing game, just like every other mmo since WoW.

I guess if you're defining 'hub' as 'any place a quest is available' sure. However that's really not how I would define it. WOW was very much donkey/carrot in terms of leading you from 'place to get all your quests'. ESO only has a few real 'hubs' like that, many of the quests are obtained out in the wild one at a time.

ESO leads you from place to place and the quests are along a path for the most part. The donkey/carrot is in full effect. Loosely spreading out quest givers is such a superficial way to fake spontaneity. I know you guys really want to pretend this is vastly different from WoW, but if you take a step back and look at it objectively, it isn't. It's the same design. You're doing the same things, there's just voice acting and collection quests (skyshards etc).

Sarenia

Shimond wrote: »

Gohlar wrote: »

I don't agree with everything he said, but ESO is definitely a hub to hub questing game, just like every other mmo since WoW.

I guess if you're defining 'hub' as 'any place a quest is available' sure. However that's really not how I would define it. WOW was very much donkey/carrot in terms of leading you from 'place to get all your quests'. ESO only has a few real 'hubs' like that, many of the quests are obtained out in the wild one at a time.

To reinforce this, when people complain about being outleveled by their quests, it's a fairly safe bet it's because they're not looking for quests outside cities, and thus losing out on a lot of content.

mutharex

So I suppose all TES games have hub to hub questing lol
Next time I find a quest while I am wandering about fishing or gathering, I'll make sure I'll ignore it

Shimond

Gohlar wrote: »

ESO leads you from place to place and the quests are along a path for the most part. The donkey/carrot is in full effect. Loosely spreading out quest givers is such a superficial way to fake spontaneity. I know you guys really want to pretend this is vastly different from WoW, but if you take a step back and look at it objectively, it isn't. It's the same design. You're doing the same things, there's just voice acting and collection quests.

I didn't say it was vastly different, I said it wasn't the same thing and it isn't. You can pretend that because there is a general flow to the zone you're in that it's the same thing as holding your hand from hub to hub like WOW did, but it really isn't. In fact if you go strictly by the quests that guide you from place to place without exploring at all you'll be horribly underleveled and unable to progress (a complaint I've actually seen multiple times on this forum from people expecting this to be just like WOW - it isn't).

Gohlar

Sarenia wrote: »

Shimond wrote: »

Gohlar wrote: »

I don't agree with everything he said, but ESO is definitely a hub to hub questing game, just like every other mmo since WoW.

I guess if you're defining 'hub' as 'any place a quest is available' sure. However that's really not how I would define it. WOW was very much donkey/carrot in terms of leading you from 'place to get all your quests'. ESO only has a few real 'hubs' like that, many of the quests are obtained out in the wild one at a time.

To reinforce this, when people complain about being outleveled by their quests, it's a fairly safe bet it's because they're not looking for quests outside cities, and thus losing out on a lot of content.

I never understood when people said this either. There are quests everywhere, the game runs you right over them. How are people missing them?

mutharex

I feel we got to that point of the conversation where this is necessary
I LIKE DO DA CHA-CHA

Gohlar

Shimond wrote: »

I didn't say it was vastly different, I said it wasn't the same thing and it isn't. You can pretend that because there is a general flow to the zone you're in that it's the same thing as holding your hand from hub to hub like WOW did, but it really isn't. In fact if you go strictly by the quests that guide you from place to place without exploring at all you'll be horribly underleveled and unable to progress (a complaint I've actually seen multiple times on this forum from people expecting this to be just like WOW - it isn't).

Yes it really is. Why pretend otherwise? Does picking up a quest outside of town
make it that much cooler? We are talking about very superficial differences here. This game does not make it difficult to find it's quests, at all.

I never went out of my way to look for quests and there were more than I needed. Just follow the arrows, just like WoW. ESO even puts icons on the map for you. I mean honestly...it's so theme park it hurts, especially with it being in the Elder Scrolls series.

Now go run along from quest to quest and talk about how much better is than WoW, while doing what you would be doing in WoW (with voice acting!).

Nijjion

I'm kinda sad that ESO is in the past for damage numbers. Default UI has nothing, addons are stuck in the year 2005 for mmos.

Really disappointing imo.

mutharex

Nijjion wrote: »

I'm kinda sad that ESO is in the past for damage numbers. Default UI has nothing, addons are stuck in the year 2005 for mmos.

Really disappointing imo.

Lots of addons for that, look on esoui.com for example.
It's a design philosophy that is present in all TES games, not an oversight

Eris

I agree whole heartedly with the title of this topic. Now let me explain myself before you all go crazy... by my calculations using all available data the game is set approximately 950 years in the past of 4E 202 which is the last known date for the Elder Scrolls universe. Since we are set in 2E 582 it is just a matter of doing the math to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt this game is stuck firmly in the past.

Audigy

I don't understand the love for GW2 by some players. Its horrible if you are into RPG´s which most players actually should be at this forum here.

The events are predictable and always the same, the world is split into loading screen after loading screen, you have no real differences between characters, everyone is a dps ...

GW2 isn't an MMORPG and comparing it to TESO is very silly.

They tried to create a new genre, also with GW1. Its an Arena based action game, but those games existed before too like some of the HL2 mods. Arena net copied this and ya sure if you liked that type of arcade style it might be your game, but we are here at an RPG forum and there mentioning GW2 as a "future of MMOs" is just laughable.

vyndral13preub18_ESO

Gohlar wrote: »

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

Gohlar wrote: »

mutharex wrote: »

Hub to hub questing?? People are weird

Um, that's ESO. Don't tell me the superficial changes to a very well tread path have fooled you into thinking you are doing something different

Why wouldn't they? according to the op they fooled the people playing gw2.

I don't agree with everything he said, but ESO is definitely a hub to hub questing game, just like every other mmo since WoW.

Im not sure i said it wasn't. What i was saying is gw2 quest/events aren't dynamic like he was claiming. Quest might be spread out and you don't have a 'hub', But it certainly isn't dynamic.