[Discussion] ESO: from themepark to sandbox?

petraeus1 · March 2016

Hello fellow-forumpeeps!

Recently I saw an interview with @ZOS_RichLambert on Tales of Tamriel ep. 100 (a YT-podcast), in which the question was asked: 'Are there any more plans for sandbox-like features [...]?' Rich replied interestingly enough: 'Well, what would you like to see?' It ended up with the hosts spewing ideas and Rich not really commenting on any of them, but it's an interesting proposition. Skip to end for discussion questions.

Elder Scrolls and sandbox
TES games have always been praised for their sandboxy nature. Sure, they're RPGs, but their storytelling (from voice-acting, to plot development, to interacting with NPCs and choices you can make) has, in my opinion, been good but not outstanding, not the main charm of the games. The main charm of the games has been: going off the beaten track and messing around. Things will happen, things will go wrong, things will be discovered.

ESO, being an MMO, lacks some of that: because it's a persistent multiplayer world, it can't scale the world to the player, resulting in linear leveling and zone exploration; that same persistent multiplayer world prevents the allowance of actions that alter the world and the fate of its inhabitant (excluding limited phasing and instancing).

So ESO is more on rails, much of its content is delivered via set channels such as quests, dungeons etc. without much variation. One of the charms of sandbox and the single player TES games however is, that players can put their mark on the world, craft their own stories and experience emergent gameplay that is never the same.

Ideas for ESO?
ESO has systems that offer this. Justice and PvP are prime examples. It could be expanded however. Housing is another great incoming feature that allow players to be creative and put their mark on Tamriel (I assume, no details yet). However, with the recent cancellation of EQ: Next, I was wondering if ZOS should take some of the ambitions of that game and put it in ESO. I'm particularly interested in emergent AI.

ESO already does some random things with Dolmens and vignettes, but it's all very minor and static. I'd personally love to see some more dynamism in Tamriel, where NPCs just do stuff and you can respond, and the world changes, without there always being a questgiver tied to things.

Discussion?
For this discussion I'm really interested in your answer to Rich's questions as in the interview:

- Would you like more sandboxy features?
- If yes, what would you like to see?

Solariken · March 2016

Personally, I am only interested in sandbox elements. Theme park MMOs feel incredibly weak and superficial to me. I hate vertical character progression for the same reason. I do occasionally enjoy doing group dungeons with events/quests but the insane number of open world quests are a waste of time and development resources in my opinion.

Cyrodiil/IC are the best things this game has to offer for me, and it's sad that they are the most neglected. ESO is a pretty good game, but ultimately a disappointment for the core TES cult playerbase. There should be meaningful factions a la Morrowind, open world PvP between members of warring factions, player-built persistent structures, player-crafted abilities, dueling, PvP arena, etc.

But by now there is no question they will forever be catering to the theme park crowd and PvE carebears. This is fine, there seems to be a great market for that, and people like me can jump ship to Camelot Unchained when it releases.

Ionan · March 2016

Changing situations, you, the npcs and quests adapt to would help make the questing less linear, and pvp/pve more interesting.

Having seen this done in another game however, I can tell you depending how its implemented you'll have mixed reactions. If something is required for someone and they cannot access it you'll see them annoyed, and if something is too predictable you'll see people say so - Its best done on none required NPCs, map areas, or even new content, that can dynamically alter depending on which pieces of the content interact.

I could expand and will a bit, then leave the rest to your imaginations.

For the PVE:

Various NPC types that interact with each other dynamically, to create a situation unique to that particular moment. NPC Thief -> Town Guard, NPC Trader -> Buyer, NPC Highwayman -> Trader, NPC Thief - Bountyhunter, NPC Noble - Assassin

OR

Faction types which do the same thing, which allow for a more ambitious reflection of this using npc groups, rather than individuals. Patrols, Lairs, Breakaway Guilds, Mini Invasions, Gates to pocket dimensions etc You can make them static, or even grow or shrink in number due to the world around them.

petraeus1 · March 2016

Solariken wrote: »

Personally, I am only interested in sandbox elements. Theme park MMOs feel incredibly weak and superficial to me. I hate vertical character progression for the same reason. I do occasionally enjoy doing group dungeons with events/quests but the insane number of open world quests are a waste of time and development resources in my opinion. ...

I agree to an extent. I feel like themepark content and progression systems are finite, and even when adding more of the same continuously in DLC, depending on the renewal of ZOS' arsenal in content building it'll only partly alleviate players' thirst for new stuff. There's the distinct possibility for things becoming repetitive and predictable, especially in solo-content.

So far, ZOS has done a great job in avoiding that. Orsinium avoided it by simply being better all around than vanilla (in terms of graphics, quest design and layering, puzzles, use of music and assets to set atmosphere, boss encounters) and TG will focus on a system that's been around but hasn't really had lots of attention content-wise: Justice.

But infinite longevity comes from sandbox stuff and multiplayer stuff that's not on rails, particularly PvP for those interested. I wanna see the rest of Tamriel, but I don't hope it'll be an endless 'more of the same'.

petraeus1 · March 2016

Ionan wrote: »

Changing situations, you, the npcs and quests adapt to would help make the questing less linear, and pvp/pve more interesting.

Having seen this done in another game however, I can tell you depending how its implemented you'll have mixed reactions. If something is required for someone and they cannot access it you'll see them annoyed, and if something is too predictable you'll see people say so - Its best done on none required NPCs, map areas, or even new content, that can dynamically alter depending on which pieces of the content interact. [...]

I agree, it should not be part of elaborated quest lines or otherwise inhibit players who wanna do stuff. Waiting for random things is lame. It could be an addition however. I love questing, but there's a lot of very short and shallow quests in ESO that add to what I perceive asthe quest grind that could be replaced by more dynamic, emergent content that tells stories without relying on linear NPC message conveying with non-repeatable objectives.

A long term flaw of MMOs that ESO also suffers from, is that it presents the player character as the great hero, while hardly allowing him to impact the world around him nor accounting for other players in the world. It's lame to see a quest boss get killed by someone else just before you get there, to respawn before your eyes. It's lame to 'save' a village only for the mobs become non-aggro.

This is inherent to MMOs and hard to tackle. Traditionally only by elaborate instancing and phasing, which obviously is hard to pull off without unwanted consequences for people who want to quest together. Guild Wars 2 used dynamic events, an elaborate and neat system, but essentially just self-repeating public quests.

I don't mind MMO quests, but I do mind these single-player focused little stories becoming the main content type for casual PvE leveling and exploring. Especially when there's a lot of quests that aren't precisely 'epic', as the word quest suggests. Quests make the world static and make the player accutely aware of the fact he's doing the same thing as thousands of others and isn't really the hero the game tells him he is. Adding in emergent AI and dynamic events, without taking away questing entirely, make the world feel alive and allow for emergent and multiplayer friendly casual PvE playstyles.

Nerouyn · March 2016

petraeus1 wrote: »

However, with the recent cancellation of EQ: Next, I was wondering if ZOS should take some of the ambitions of that game and put it in ESO.

Interesting news. Was expecting it. They completely botched Landmark - releasing it way too soon - and were obviously hoping to rely on those sadly too few users to cheaply generate content for Next.

Very exciting concept though and yes I think ZO should pick up that thread and run with it, as far as they can anyway. Cyrodiil is already a big chunk of sandbox. Though on one level we all know none of our factions win and the war is Molag Bal's doing so our efforts are at best pointless and at worst, serving evil. So it's just players running around smacking each other.

I reckon Akatosh, Dragon God of Time, should fling us all into the future (ES "present") to meet some new dire threat in a more sandboxy fashion. Leave the existing content there in the past as something we can play through (going back in time, reliving memories or whatever).

petraeus1 · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

petraeus1 wrote: »

However, with the recent cancellation of EQ: Next, I was wondering if ZOS should take some of the ambitions of that game and put it in ESO.

Interesting news. Was expecting it. They completely botched Landmark - releasing it way too soon - and were obviously hoping to rely on those sadly too few users to cheaply generate content for Next.

Very exciting concept though and yes I think ZO should pick up that thread and run with it, as far as they can anyway. Cyrodiil is already a big chunk of sandbox. Though on one level we all know none of our factions win and the war is Molag Bal's doing so our efforts are at best pointless and at worst, serving evil. So it's just players running around smacking each other.

I reckon Akatosh, Dragon God of Time, should fling us all into the future (ES "present") to meet some new dire threat in a more sandboxy fashion. Leave the existing content there in the past as something we can play through (going back in time, reliving memories or whatever).

That's a rather risky proposition in terms of population segregation. There's already region-based megaservers and platform-based mega-servers, as well as different map versions for each faction. That makes many versions of Tamriel already available. Of course, adding new maps adds to this as well, but rebuilding Tamriel on an entirely different ruleset might be a bit of a stretch. What would it offer that can't be done in new zones in the current Tamriel?

One of the cornerstones of EQ:N was of course its voxel-based world, which allowed for dynamic destruction and landscaping. ESO doesn't have that, so emergent AI/dynamic events should somehow work around essentialy static landmarks and props. Is this doable?

Nerouyn · March 2016

petraeus1 wrote: »

That's a rather risky proposition in terms of population segregation. There's already region-based megaservers and platform-based mega-servers, as well as different map versions for each faction. That makes many versions of Tamriel already available. Of course, adding new maps adds to this as well, but rebuilding Tamriel on an entirely different ruleset might be a bit of a stretch. What would it offer that can't be done in new zones in the current Tamriel?

There are often multiple versions of each map - due to there being enough players to warrant that. So I doubt this actually is a risk.

I acknowledge I should have made this point in my earlier post - the bigger and far more dangerous risk would be in converting the existing game into a sandbox. Fundamentally changing the nature of the game post launch rarely works out well, even if the changes are good. The only exception has been FFXIV and that wasn't a case of changing theme but of fixing stupid game design which pretty much everyone hated.

ESO has an existing playerbase who purchased and like(d) the theme park. Take that away and not only would they leave ESO in droves but they would take to the internet in a rage and spew their somewhat justified indignation every time the game is ever mentioned.

Like I did say, there is Cyrodiil for some sandbox action but many of the crowd who like sandbox find the notion of being able to influence the world appealing. But we know both that none of our factions win and the war serves Molag Bal's ends. So for maximum sandbox potential pulling players into the future fixes that.

ThatNeonZebraAgain · March 2016

Unfortunately, ESO has backed away from any of its sandboxy development ideas to its long-term detriment. The potential is definitely there, but it is apparent from the DLC content/model and from the last Road Ahead post in January that that is not the direction they want to take the game, which is a shame. PvP part of Justice System has been canceled, and Spellcrafting has been shelved-- that's the death knell for sandboxy stuff right there. Housing will surely be a static instanced zone (akin to DAoC's housing) with no bearing on the gameworld; sure, the looks of the houses will probably be able to change (like how you rebuilt Orsinium and placed stuff in the museum), but still having no actual effect on the world. I also don't know if the game as it is can even support it given how the world players see if broken into so many instances. Hell, it can be night or day, raining or not raining for players in the same place but in different instances. You hear different sounds, see different NPCs and buildings depending on what quests you've done. The world itself is fragmented by design, which doesn't lend itself to players changing the world because it can be quite different depending on what instance you're in. There's no game/world-wide continuity or persistence of player actions.

If you really want a super sandbox MMO with similar aesthetics, check out the upcoming Camelot Unchained. Nearly all structures player made, crafting materials player harvested and transported, players can actively shape the earth and weather through magic, etc etc and all kinds of awesome stuff. Going into Beta later this year.

Mojmir · March 2016

I wouldn't mind some kind of comminty building type thing, for example when you do writs,per the dialogue the crafted stuff is going to an effort,maybe some kind of structure built.

Mojmir · March 2016

I picked something easy and no one else did

tinythinker · March 2016

Sounds great. I love the theme-park stuff, but sandbox aspects would be great. Examples previously under discussion include Spellcrafting and Player Housing, so it isn't like there was nothing sand-boxy ever considered even though those examples seem to be on hiatus.

More ideas will take shape later I'm sure, but my first reaction includes the following:

- allow guilds to enhance strongholds (i.e. keeps, forts, castles) and outposts by spending AP after allowing players to donate AP to a guild for such purposes. Extra fortifications, changes to appearance, etc, come to mind. This allows more pride and sense of ownership and gives extra reason to make sure a stronghold is well-defended and properly maintained. The options would still be pick and choose rather than truly building things from scratch like Camelot Unchained does with C.U.B.E., but that's more dynamic than what we have now.

- same as above but with modifications to siege engines, with a crafting area that requires multiple players to participate (like when using a ram). Again, there will be a somewhat limited number of options but they would cost a lot and be more effective than pre-made siege from the quarter master.

- have significant changes possible when capturing cities in Cyrodiil and districts in the Imperial City. Details later.

- add a PvE zone way out there in a remote location with lots of elements that can be altered by player activity, and perhaps involving more dynamic AI as well (or at least a complex script for many situations.

IcyDeadPeople · March 2016

Although I'd love to see PVP Justice system, even the existing PVE system could be greatly improved if the guards were not entirely invincible. Make them incredibly difficult to kill, even perhaps zero XP, but at least give criminals a chance to defeat them. It's frustrating that they are 100% impossible to kill and feels much less like a dynamic environment.

Another huge difference with the single player games is the proliferation of invisible walls in ESO. There are many times I want to go a particular direction on a map, but have to run all the way around in the opposite direction. Perhaps to make the progression in zones more linear? At any rate it feels less like a truly open world as a result.

Rex-Umbra · March 2016

Make entire game like wrothgar so players can quest and level in any way they want. Add more daily content to each zone and add a lot more stuff to do in cyrodiil more dailies, capture towns and districts. Player housing and expand mage and fighters guilds.

Rex-Umbra · March 2016

Remove bop to help economy make sense.

Nerouyn · March 2016

Rex-Umbra wrote: »

Make entire game like wrothgar so players can quest and level in any way they want.

They might be doing that. I read an article about their plans and along with getting rid of veteran levels there was something about making the existing content level to you.

tinythinker · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

Rex-Umbra wrote: »

Make entire game like wrothgar so players can quest and level in any way they want.

They might be doing that. I read an article about their plans and along with getting rid of veteran levels there was something about making the existing content level to you.

They may or may not do it for the Cadwell zones, but the level 1-50 zones should be left alone as they teach players the game through increasing difficulty as a course of progression.

Nerouyn · March 2016

tinythinker wrote: »

They may or may not do it for the Cadwell zones, but the level 1-50 zones should be left alone as they teach players the game through increasing difficulty as a course of progression.

I just LOL'ed quite fiercely.

I finished the Coldharbour Map today. In level 36 armour. No armour enchantments. No food or drink or potions. 25+ unspent skill points. My sole moment of difficulty in the map was one boss in the group delve - which I solo'ed like every other group delve at level - and it was just a matter of me needing to stand somewhere better to avoid being blicked.

There's almost no difficulty in the solo content. Most of the group content can also be solo'ed with ease. If anything content becomes easier the higher you go. Courtesy of better abilities, more passives, stat scaling etc.

But to address your point, yes I believe they are looking at applying this to the 1-50 zones and think that's a great idea.

Knootewoot · March 2016

It's to late for that now to implement

I loved SWG and Vanguard and Ryzom for their sandbox nature.

SWG (pre-cu)
- you don't "level" up. Humans start with 800 health and that's it. You could use stat migration to migrate (long process) points from mind or action to health. Rest is skill based
- Good crafting economy. Certain professions (ranger) could do something others could not. People had to connect and work together in a living world
- socializing and interacting. You could sit on any chair/bench, do a load and I mean a LOAD of emotions with animations. Players who fought all they got battle fatique only players who where dancer or musician could heal. Docters had to tend to your wounds. Creatures gave sickness and diseases you had to cure.
- No quests except some repeatable fetch/kill/escort stuff.
- player housing
- player cities
- multipassenger vehicles (later on)

Vanguard had more themepark as in questlines per zone. But mainly also sandbox with awesome crafting. Boats and player housing.

I also now play BDO because it has lots of these sandbox features. Some people think the game is only grinding, well that's a choice. So far I am lvl 31 by only fishing, crafting and overall doing fun stuff I like (gathering, farming, decorating houses, sailing across ocean, searching treasures, guild-quests, talking to NPC's).

TESO was sold as a themepark mmo. That's it's foundation. Every DLC you get is a zone with a questline and some sidequests. Thievesguild does offer some thievery which could count as sandbox stuff, but you can't place your loot in your house. In the end it's just dailies for rewards. I don't play TESO for it's quests, but for it's massive PvP. I liked the main questline and side quests though but only 1 time. There is hardly exploration since there is always
- an ocean with slaughterfish
- an impassible mountain ridge
- an invisible wall

You are guided where to go from zone to zone. The new ones offer levelscaling and that's great and gives some freedom. I hope they will do it all across Tamriel. They did it in SWTOR and every zone was a challenge once again (although stuill to easy).

Hopefully this, player housing and future stuff will bring more toys to the game for:
roleplaying
sandbox-lovers

MornaBaine · March 2016

The one thing I have always wanted to see MMOs start doing is to allow players to GM. Let us take a group of players to an instanced location anywhere in the game and spawn in the mobs and bosses of our choice. This would allow for player-created content that would never get boring. It would call for minimal resources from ZOS, especially once it was set up, and would only be limited by the imaginations of the players themselves.

Faulgor · March 2016

I'd like to see more open, pick-your-challenge public dungeons like IC sewers. The normal ones are too trivial in difficulty and scope.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/253691/can-we-have-more-huge-dungeons-like-ic-sewers

tinythinker · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

tinythinker wrote: »

They may or may not do it for the Cadwell zones, but the level 1-50 zones should be left alone as they teach players the game through increasing difficulty as a course of progression.

I just LOL'ed quite fiercely.

[a lot of complaining]

But to address your point...

FYI, your opening could be interpreted as rudeness, and I initially was going to ignore your post because there has been too much of that lately on the forums (along with, for some reason, a drop in either attention span/reading comprehension, but that's off track...).

Anyway, zone scaling currently works by making leveling a character up to the level of the zone. The DLC zones are set to VR16 so players are scaled to that level. If the same scaling system used in the 1-50 zones, they would have to flatten them, because Shadowfen, to use one example, has mobs that range from level 25 to level 30. So what level are you scaled up to? Even if you got scaled based on the region within the zone you are in ("this area in the zone is level 27"), the scaling itself means you will never be underleveled. If you think you are over-powered as a level 25 fighting level 30 mobs, how much more OP will you feel scaled up to level 30 fighting those same mobs? A level 24 scaled to level 27 to fight level 27 mobs? And so on?

The current system for 1-50 is intended to scale the difficulty to match progression of new characters by new players with no CP, no ESO Plus xp bonus, and using the gear that drops from mobs or through quest rewards. You may find it easy, but new players with new characters who are still learning the game, especially those new to MMORPGs, don't always find that to be the case. ZOS won't put off those new players because more skilled or experienced players are bored.

The better option for your concern is to have a difficult toggle or slider where your character, and yours alone, has damage done and healing received reduced by X% while damage received is increased by X%. Those who are new and learning can still see the difference when over or under-leveled in the 1-50 experience as it is now, and those who think it is too easy can get more of a challenge, all while leaving the zones are their current level of difficulty distribution intact. The toggle/slider would have the current normal as the "easiest" end of the range. You could still be scaled for Cyro and DLC zones just as the system currently works, and again, you could use that difficulty toggle/slider in those zones as well if you so desired, with the current default level of challenge as the "easiest" setting.