nameplates

Dragonknight, Sorcerer, Templar.
Choose your class.

Nifty2g wrote: »

Unpopular opinion but I really do like how the ui is compared to that

The UI in general @Nifty2g or specific elements? I'm not a fan of that super long inventory list, or how the options pop up - I guess not a fan of the actual "windows", but I enjoy the minimap, multi-quest tracker and map. Oh, and I totally don't enjoy nameplates.. ick.. but hey if people like them and I could turn them off - I'd be fine with that!

This just p*sses me off.

We've had a year of playing a game with an ugly sparse Skyrim-ish UI.
It's time to turn this into an MMO and give us a UI more like the one in this video.
The minimap and main maps both looked great.

I would love an option to turn on nameplates. I'm sure there are a ton of people that feel the same way I do.

I hate, hate, hate, hate the default UI we are stuck with now.

Fun to watch this now. The finesse system was referenced in the achievements.

There was a soul healer at the wayshrine when reviving after dying and at the very end of the vid he had an XP debt which meant death had more consequence too.

Nifty2g wrote: »

Unpopular opinion but I really do like how the ui is compared to that

You're not the only one! If some of these guys had their way, the UI would be festooned with fugly icons and have gibberish scrolling down the screen all the time. This is one thing ZoS got RIGHT, in my opinion.

Looking at the map and still running, nice. And the mini-map is kick ass..

Sallington wrote: »

Emma_Eunjung wrote: »

Nifty2g wrote: »

Unpopular opinion but I really do like how the ui is compared to that

You're not the only one! If some of these guys had their way, the UI would be festooned with fugly icons and have gibberish scrolling down the screen all the time. This is one thing ZoS got RIGHT, in my opinion.

And also the ability to turn all of that off.

Exactly. They didn't need to REMOVE the elements, just let those of us who don't want them turn them off.

I have never once seen a single player ask that UI options be mandatory. However, I have lost count how many times I've seen immersion cultists say no one should have options because they don't like them.

More Options = More Players staying with the game

Every time I see early footage I always wish we had those maps.

Psychobunni wrote: »

I have never once seen a single player ask that UI options be mandatory. However, I have lost count how many times I've seen immersion cultists say no one should have options because they don't like them.

More Options = More Players staying with the game

Exactly. That's why even though I absolutely hate nameplates and chat bubbles with a passion, I have always supported having them in the game as long as they're optional (and it would be stupid to have anything like that not be optional).

Psychobunni wrote: »

I have never once seen a single player ask that UI options be mandatory. However, I have lost count how many times I've seen immersion cultists say no one should have options because they don't like them.

More Options = More Players staying with the game

They're busy trying to project a superficial image that will attract people who enjoyed the singleplayer games. I've let a couple family members who loved Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim try it and they're a bit disgusted by how it apes those experiences. They were interested until they actually played it. One, for example, loves her an action RPG but as she creeps into her 60's she's just not able to keep up with the activity so much and needs her manual saves and pause button, things that the uninitiated may assume exist at a glance. She was informed it was online only and these features don't exist but she didn't expect such a huge difference in experience. Instead she's playing Witcher 3 now. On the easiest difficulty but she's having a blast and that's what it's for right?

Just injecting a little MMO into the MMO would no doubt bring in more people who are into, I dunno, MMO's, who have previously been disinterested, but prevent those disappointed players who were expecting something so much different. That's right, steering people clear of a game can be a good thing being that selling them something they don't want because of ambiguous marketing just means they no longer trust your company.

When you try to attract too many playerbases at once you're just diluting the experience and giving half or less of the product each of them is used to getting. So as is we have a shallow MMO with subpar social aspects and a crippled Elder Scrolls game with only the barest underpinning of the freedom and detail inherent in those titles. I still enjoy it but if they could tip the balance one way or the other it'd probably be a lot more fun and I don't think they can make it MORE single player. Unless they take text chat out of the PC version too... Making it MORE MMO is a cinch though, give players some options and let them socialize more effectively.

What irks me most is that they completely removed elements that were in the game and could've remained as optional - minimap, name plates, etc. Neither does much for me, but I can't see a single problem with having them in-game.

Other than that, some of the abandoned systems look interesting. I believe finesse was about killing stuff "the right way"? I.e. dodging aoes, blocking heavy attacks, interrupting channeled attacks?

Emma_Eunjung wrote: »

You're not the only one! If some of these guys had their way, the UI would be festooned with fugly icons and have gibberish scrolling down the screen all the time. This is one thing ZoS got RIGHT, in my opinion.

No, ZOS did not "get it right" and you have "got it wrong"... This post explains:

Psychobunni wrote: »

I have never once seen a single player ask that UI options be mandatory. However, I have lost count how many times I've seen immersion cultists say no one should have options because they don't like them.

More Options = More Players staying with the game