Straight from the Director

waterfairy · March 2016

It sure feels like an MMO with the continued changes to skills and spells....I'm really waiting for them to "set it and forget it" like Ronco

Volkodav · March 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

Nerouyn wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

TES always had classes, TES V: Skyrim was the first title in the series without classes.

Morrowind and Oblivion had something they called classes but which definitely weren't. All they did was provide something like a +5 / 10 / 15 to certain skills at the beginning of the game and determine which skills were used to calculate your level. They had no impact beyond that. Players could freely level and use any skill / spell / weapon and master everything with a single character.

This is true... Recent Elder Scrolls classes were more like starting templates. ESO is the first Elder Scrolls game with a strictly enforced class system using active combat skills. I expected ZOS and ESO to use the Elder Scrolls skill ideology, but never got it. Rigid classes are, as I see it, a concession to the MMO players, who get a rigid class system with active slotted class abilities, so that they see in ESO something of what they expect to see in an MMO. The action bar and the Trinity are all familiar for an MMO player, while the Elder Scrolls combat, used in Skyrim and older, would not be seen as an "MMO" by many players.

The Elder Scrolls games, in general, seem to be heading in a direction that ESO also seems to be following. While the class and active skill system from ESO is not something I expect to see in TES 6, both Skyrim and ESO are an indication of continued revision of the RPG aspect of the game franchise. The Skyrim skill system introduces perks, which are cousins to the ESO morphing system more than the Oblivion skill system. In this manner, players pick benefits for their character directly rather than increasing a base statistic that spans multiple benefits. I think that the days of the old style Elder Scrolls skills are long gone. I doubt that TES 6 will backpedal, and might even introduce more active skill perks that expand on the power attacks from Skyrim.

Benie wrote: »

From what I've been told, an MMO is a game where you can play your playstyle, but with other people. It's also encouraged to play with others and make friends. People that you can trust that know what they're doing, is the base of an MMO.

I do not see it like that. MMO games are not about personal play styles but are about multi-player play styles. Personal styles take a back seat when in conflict.

Firor is right about the game. It is not a traditional MMO, and I doubt it ever will be. They have taken the online RPG path, which accepts the challenge of working to reduce the conflicts between single player play styles and the multi-player nature of the game. It is a challenge, and it is hard to do. They have recently backed off from some single player immersion in order to better serve the multi-player nature of the game. I call this the right decision. ESO is a multi-player game first, and a single player friendly game second. Note that I say multi-player game, not MMO game.

Whatever ZOS can do to build upon the multi-player nature of the game, and I do not mean MMO nature of the game, will ultimately build the social aspect of the game for both the single player and multiplayer people who play the game. This means enhancing the means by which people group to complete objectives, formally and informally, and how they socially interact with others in the game.

I dont believe it'll be quite as you have said. ZOS might "enhance" player interaction,but they will never "force" it.An MMO IS players being allowed to play with others for them.There are just a few games that force you to interact with a team of people just to play it.Such as those war games that are campaigns.Like War Thunder or World of Planes,World of Tanks.You need others to play those.ESO isnt one of those.
It IS about being able to play your own style if you like.Not having to be pushed into fitting your play style into other people's.

Lysette · March 2016

Forcing group play would be something that attracts more the younger folks - they team up more easily, because they are not that certain about themselves yet - this is just because they are still young and grouping up is what they do in real life as well.

The more mature someone gets, the less likely he/she is to enjoy such grouping - and if, then just for a very limited amount of time, simply because they know who they are, they do not need a group to make them feel more certain about themselves - and they have enough life experience as well to know that other people can be rather annoying at times and you better experience them in just short bursts distributed over a long enough amount of time - most TES fans are older and mature - they do not want to be forced into grouping like a bunch of teenagers.

Browiseth · March 2016

Can I just say I love this article and everything it stands for?
Because I do

Volkodav · March 2016

Lysette wrote: »

Forcing group play would be something that attracts more the younger folks - they team up more easily, because they are not that certain about themselves yet - this is just because they are still young and grouping up is what they do in real life as well.

The more mature someone gets, the less likely he/she is to enjoy such grouping - and if, then just for a very limited amount of time, simply because they know who they are, they do not need a group to make them feel more certain about themselves - and they have enough life experience as well to know that other people can be rather annoying at times and you better experience them in just short bursts distributed over a long enough amount of time - most TES fans are older and mature - they do not want to be forced into grouping like a bunch of teenagers.

Agreed.

aubrey.baconb16_ESO · March 2016

As an older family man I find it very difficult to play in an organised group because I don’t know when and how long I’m going to be able to play. I’m probably going to play for an hour or two tonight but I have no idea at what time, it depends on what the family is doing when I get home and I have no idea what time I’ll finish or when I’ll be away from keyboard. Family life takes priority over gaming.

It basically forces me to solo. Which I’m perfectly happy to do and rely on passers-by to do world bosses. Group content is out because of my inability to commit time.

Elsonso · March 2016

Volkodav wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Whatever ZOS can do to build upon the multi-player nature of the game, and I do not mean MMO nature of the game, will ultimately build the social aspect of the game for both the single player and multiplayer people who play the game. This means enhancing the means by which people group to complete objectives, formally and informally, and how they socially interact with others in the game.

I dont believe it'll be quite as you have said. ZOS might "enhance" player interaction,but they will never "force" it.An MMO IS players being allowed to play with others for them.There are just a few games that force you to interact with a team of people just to play it.Such as those war games that are campaigns.Like War Thunder or World of Planes,World of Tanks.You need others to play those.ESO isnt one of those.
It IS about being able to play your own style if you like.Not having to be pushed into fitting your play style into other people's.

I do mean "enhance" and no where do I ever use the word "force", I am not interested in forcing people to group up to complete objectives. That is Craglorn, and that is wrong. That said, I am interested in the game recognizing when the group exists. It is silly to have a quest where you are completing an objective solo while there are a dozen players around. The expectation to "ignore" these other people is not realistic in a multiplayer game and can be handled much better. I am not suggesting that they require people to group, but I also think that if two people are right there doing the same thing, they are grouped already, they just get none of the benefits of it. If the game can detect this so that the players get the benefit from being grouped, without having to actually be grouped, that would get rid of this awkward situation and bring the other players into focus, like they should be. After all, those other players are there, no matter how much we try to ignore them.

The game already does this to a limited extent in other parts of the game. People who are in the same area, doing the same thing, get benefits from being grouped, without actually having to be grouped. It means that when other players are around, they are actually around, not just some artifact of the game that is not properly hidden. This should have been expanded in Thieves Guild so that two players working on the same quest, in the same place, at the same time, could benefit from the other player being there without having to think about grouping. As it is, the Thieves Guild quests are solo quests with other players doing the same solo quest at the same time and it is like we are alone, but we are not alone because there are all these people running around. As a player who enjoys playing multiplayer games, and who enjoys playing single player games, I see a way to do both at the same time without it being awkward like it is today.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Lysette wrote: »

Forcing group play would be something that attracts more the younger folks - they team up more easily, because they are not that certain about themselves yet - this is just because they are still young and grouping up is what they do in real life as well.

The more mature someone gets, the less likely he/she is to enjoy such grouping - and if, then just for a very limited amount of time, simply because they know who they are, they do not need a group to make them feel more certain about themselves - and they have enough life experience as well to know that other people can be rather annoying at times and you better experience them in just short bursts distributed over a long enough amount of time - most TES fans are older and mature - they do not want to be forced into grouping like a bunch of teenagers.

So all those big old timer guilds that have been around for years and group up for game content are a bunch of immature, never grown up adolescents?

The older you get the less likely you are to hang out with your group of friends?

Volkodav · March 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Whatever ZOS can do to build upon the multi-player nature of the game, and I do not mean MMO nature of the game, will ultimately build the social aspect of the game for both the single player and multiplayer people who play the game. This means enhancing the means by which people group to complete objectives, formally and informally, and how they socially interact with others in the game.

I dont believe it'll be quite as you have said. ZOS might "enhance" player interaction,but they will never "force" it.An MMO IS players being allowed to play with others for them.There are just a few games that force you to interact with a team of people just to play it.Such as those war games that are campaigns.Like War Thunder or World of Planes,World of Tanks.You need others to play those.ESO isnt one of those.
It IS about being able to play your own style if you like.Not having to be pushed into fitting your play style into other people's.

I do mean "enhance" and no where do I ever use the word "force", I am not interested in forcing people to group up to complete objectives. That is Craglorn, and that is wrong. That said, I am interested in the game recognizing when the group exists. It is silly to have a quest where you are completing an objective solo while there are a dozen players around. The expectation to "ignore" these other people is not realistic in a multiplayer game and can be handled much better. I am not suggesting that they require people to group, but I also think that if two people are right there doing the same thing, they are grouped already, they just get none of the benefits of it. If the game can detect this so that the players get the benefit from being grouped, without having to actually be grouped, that would get rid of this awkward situation and bring the other players into focus, like they should be. After all, those other players are there, no matter how much we try to ignore them.

The game already does this to a limited extent in other parts of the game. People who are in the same area, doing the same thing, get benefits from being grouped, without actually having to be grouped. It means that when other players are around, they are actually around, not just some artifact of the game that is not properly hidden. This should have been expanded in Thieves Guild so that two players working on the same quest, in the same place, at the same time, could benefit from the other player being there without having to think about grouping. As it is, the Thieves Guild quests are solo quests with other players doing the same solo quest at the same time and it is like we are alone, but we are not alone because there are all these people running around. As a player who enjoys playing multiplayer games, and who enjoys playing single player games, I see a way to do both at the same time without it being awkward like it is today.

No,no. I wasnt chiding you,or anything.I was merely responding to the insinuated idea of making it more toward people having to put their own personal play styles in the backseat.People like ESO because they dont have to so that.
Why do you find it awkward the way it is now?
People can group up at the entrance of any dungeon,or go it alone,as they choose. I actually enjoy all the people running around.Many times in Hew's Bane,when I go into one of those delves,or tombs,other people seem to gravitate close,and sometimes there are three of us together.I never feel alone.I like it this way.We dont actually group up,but we do go it together.I've made friends like this.

Kendaric · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

TES always had classes, TES V: Skyrim was the first title in the series without classes.

Not true.

Morrowind and Oblivion had something they called classes but which definitely weren't. All they did was provide something like a +5 / 10 / 15 to certain skills at the beginning of the game and determine which skills were used to calculate your level. They had no impact beyond that. Players could freely level and use any skill / spell / weapon and master everything with a single character.

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Classes

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Classes

IMO the levelling mechanic in those games was dinky and it was good Skyrim did away with that. But Skyrim (at launch) was more restrictive than both Oblivion and Morrowind because of the perk system. You could still level every skill but limited perk points meant you couldn't master everything with a single character. But so many players hated that and used the various mods to get around it that they officially patched in unlimited perk points with the legendary system.

And yet, in what not surprisingly turned out to be a vain attempt to appeal to the "class-lovers" of other MMOs, they ignored their MASSIVE elder scrolls fanbase and put classes in ESO.

I'm quite aware of how classes worked

Yes, they had no impact beyond defining your starting skills and which skills you needed to raise to get an increase in level. They should have called them archetypes or professions rather than classes, as they were meant to give you an indication of their playstyle.
A class doesn't have to be as rigid as in D&D or most MMORPGs, sadly ZOS didn't take the more open route.

Lysette · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Forcing group play would be something that attracts more the younger folks - they team up more easily, because they are not that certain about themselves yet - this is just because they are still young and grouping up is what they do in real life as well.

The more mature someone gets, the less likely he/she is to enjoy such grouping - and if, then just for a very limited amount of time, simply because they know who they are, they do not need a group to make them feel more certain about themselves - and they have enough life experience as well to know that other people can be rather annoying at times and you better experience them in just short bursts distributed over a long enough amount of time - most TES fans are older and mature - they do not want to be forced into grouping like a bunch of teenagers.

So all those big old timer guilds that have been around for years and group up for game content are a bunch of immature, never grown up adolescents?

The older you get the less likely you are to hang out with your group of friends?

I don't go for that bait, you just want to fight again and I don't let you this time.

jzholloway · March 2016

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Forcing group play would be something that attracts more the younger folks - they team up more easily, because they are not that certain about themselves yet - this is just because they are still young and grouping up is what they do in real life as well.

The more mature someone gets, the less likely he/she is to enjoy such grouping - and if, then just for a very limited amount of time, simply because they know who they are, they do not need a group to make them feel more certain about themselves - and they have enough life experience as well to know that other people can be rather annoying at times and you better experience them in just short bursts distributed over a long enough amount of time - most TES fans are older and mature - they do not want to be forced into grouping like a bunch of teenagers.

So all those big old timer guilds that have been around for years and group up for game content are a bunch of immature, never grown up adolescents?

The older you get the less likely you are to hang out with your group of friends?

I'm, an older, more "mature" adult, and I enjoy grouping - preferably with other older, more mature adults. I've been playing "MMO's" since EvE, and I've always enjoyed grouping. Being forced to group is not an issue - as long as the grouping tools are adequate. It is not because I don't feel sure of myself, I served in the United States Marine Corps for five years, I hold a job with a lot of responsibility, I have five children - its because I like a game where you are forced to depend on other people to get a job done, a game where you have to work together towards a goal. Solo play is fun, but group play can, and should be, as well. i like not being able to do everything (maybe that is why my main is a no longer needed - it seems - Tank). Again, knocking those of us who enjoy group play by claiming we must be young or unsure of ourselves is a little outrageous.

Elsonso · March 2016

Volkodav wrote: »

Why do you find it awkward the way it is now?
People can group up at the entrance of any dungeon,or go it alone,as they choose. I actually enjoy all the people running around.Many times in Hew's Bane,when I go into one of those delves,or tombs,other people seem to gravitate close,and sometimes there are three of us together.I never feel alone.I like it this way.We dont actually group up,but we do go it together.I've made friends like this.

What you speak of in the delves of Hew's Bane is what I speak of here, but on a game-wide scale. Players can contribute to a kill and get rewarded for it, up to a point where they start to get penalized for it. Players can informally group to take down a boss and everyone gets XP, loot, and achievements. No need to stop and group.

This is the sort of multiplayer enhancement that I want to extend to the rest of the game. Seamless grouping that rewards cooperation between players. Having the game world react when multiple players are around to better socialize the multiplayer interactions that are going on just because they are in the same space at the same time.

1. Raise the XP penalty number so that more players can contribute to a "kill" before XP is reduced. This is a powerful benefit over games where only one player can tag a mob, and it is unfortunate that they enacted this restriction at the level that they did. It is 2 right now, so if I see 2 players taking out a mob, I do the antisocial thing and stand back.
2. Change how the game handles killing bosses (ie: world boss, delve boss, etc) so that the achievement for completing the task and the XP and loot rewards operate in harmony. It is possible to get the achievement to complete a boss kill, or delve, without getting any XP or loot for doing so due to the difference in how these things are calculated.
3. Two or more players on the same quest in the same area should automatically work together to complete the objective. This is as simple as making it so that not everyone has to interact with every quest waypoint and object. If there is a lever to be pulled to open a door, lift a grate, turn off a trap, or whatever, if one player does it, it should be good enough for the other players nearby. If players have to pick up something off the ground, yeah, they can do that, but if they have to get something out of a chest, if anyone unlocks and opens the chest, it should just be open for all the players there at the same place in the quest.
4. Wrothgar daily boss quests should be automatically shared (or offered) whenever an eligible player who does not have the quest joins in with other players that are doing that quest objective. This should happen game-wide when appropriate so that players that just happen to be there when all the action is happening do not find out, after the fact, that they were helping on a quest that they cannot benefit from. Yes, the quests can be shared, but only if someone formally offers it. I am looking for ways of "grouping" without the need to take direct action.

These are the things that I think might make ESO a better multiplayer game, without forcing group play or cutting off solo play. I am looking for ways to build the multiplayer parts of the game in situations where players are already working as part of a group of players with a common goal, without having to take action to form a formal group.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · March 2016

Anzriel wrote: »

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

Benie wrote: »

From what I've been told, an MMO is a game where you can play your playstyle, but with other people. It's also encouraged to play with others and make friends. People that you can trust that know what they're doing, is the base of an MMO.

With that said, I'm a soloer. I've solo'd in WoW for 8 years (though occasionally did a few dungeons with other players. Even made a few friends). But my most favorite thing to so is soloing dungeons and raids, mainly for profit (and the feeling that I can pretty much handle everything).
I can understand how people see ESO not feeling like an MMO, and I can understand. But I see it as being based from the Single Player series with a Multiplayer aspect -- not a true MMO.

I'd prefer ESO would stay like this.. well, of course I'd love to see bugs fixed and class balancing.
But I don't feel the game "dying" anytime soon... unlike WoW.

Signed,
a PvE/Soloer person.

Well thats good because ESO is not just a WoW knock off. I dont get people (and I dont mean you) who come here wanting this to be basically WoW 2. No wonder they are disappointed.

I see this everywhere. Calling games WoW clones, especially given WoW is largely a "clone" itself, has always annoyed me. People are always going to take elements of successful games and that's fine. That doesn't make everything under the sun a WoW clone just because it has a few familiar features. Going into ANY game expecting it to be another game is a recipe for disappointment.

I think this is why they said without naming WoW that this game isnt WoW. He said its not your typical mmo from 2004. WoW came out in 2004. Hes saying if they want features from WoW they really should go play it rather than this game. This particular game is focused on story and the PVE crowd with a little bit of PVP mixed in for good measure.

Also believe it or not most poeple like ESO pvp who do it regularly. The only thing that stops me is the 300ms+ ping times. Once they fix the latency I am pretty happy with the rest of the pvp system.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

Lysette wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Lysette wrote: »

Forcing group play would be something that attracts more the younger folks - they team up more easily, because they are not that certain about themselves yet - this is just because they are still young and grouping up is what they do in real life as well.

The more mature someone gets, the less likely he/she is to enjoy such grouping - and if, then just for a very limited amount of time, simply because they know who they are, they do not need a group to make them feel more certain about themselves - and they have enough life experience as well to know that other people can be rather annoying at times and you better experience them in just short bursts distributed over a long enough amount of time - most TES fans are older and mature - they do not want to be forced into grouping like a bunch of teenagers.

So all those big old timer guilds that have been around for years and group up for game content are a bunch of immature, never grown up adolescents?

The older you get the less likely you are to hang out with your group of friends?

I don't go for that bait, you just want to fight again and I don't let you this time.

We never fight

just using sarcasm to point out your personal feelings aren't always right.

Nerouyn · March 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

This is true... Recent Elder Scrolls classes were more like starting templates. ESO is the first Elder Scrolls game with a strictly enforced class system using active combat skills.

Sorry but that's not true either.

As I pointed out, the big successes like Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim (after that patch) had no classes and very open character development but earlier Elder Scrolls titles like Arena and Daggerfall - which I didn't play but am aware of courtesy of the uesp wiki - did have more restrictive classes.

lordrichter wrote: »

Rigid classes are, as I see it, a concession to the MMO players, who get a rigid class system with active slotted class abilities, so that they see in ESO something of what they expect to see in an MMO.

That's not just as you see it. That's a confirmed fact straight from the developers' mouths. They completely ignored the stellar sales figures of their own single-player TES titles, i.e. their own massive fan base, and had their eyes firmly fixed on WOW's subscribers.

Making ESO yet another example of how shafting your existing fans to attract new ones not working out so well.

lordrichter wrote: »

While the class and active skill system from ESO is not something I expect to see in TES 6, both Skyrim and ESO are an indication of continued revision of the RPG aspect of the game franchise. The Skyrim skill system introduces perks, which are cousins to the ESO morphing system more than the Oblivion skill system. In this manner, players pick benefits for their character directly rather than increasing a base statistic that spans multiple benefits. I think that the days of the old style Elder Scrolls skills are long gone. I doubt that TES 6 will backpedal, and might even introduce more active skill perks that expand on the power attacks from Skyrim.

As I pointed out, this was so unpopular in Skyrim that they changed it in an official patch. So having learned that players hate this design and effectively removing it, it would be very odd to see them take it even further in future games.... like they did with ESO.

Not that it would matter much of course. That's the beauty of modding with the single-player games. Dollars to doughnuts someone would release a mod to fix something like that within days of release.

Elsonso · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

This is true... Recent Elder Scrolls classes were more like starting templates. ESO is the first Elder Scrolls game with a strictly enforced class system using active combat skills.

Sorry but that's not true either.

As I pointed out, the big successes like Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim (after that patch) had no classes and very open character development but earlier Elder Scrolls titles like Arena and Daggerfall - which I didn't play but am aware of courtesy of the uesp wiki - did have more restrictive classes.

Yeah, my intent was to be referring to the games starting in Morrowind ("recent").

Nerouyn wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

While the class and active skill system from ESO is not something I expect to see in TES 6, both Skyrim and ESO are an indication of continued revision of the RPG aspect of the game franchise. The Skyrim skill system introduces perks, which are cousins to the ESO morphing system more than the Oblivion skill system. In this manner, players pick benefits for their character directly rather than increasing a base statistic that spans multiple benefits. I think that the days of the old style Elder Scrolls skills are long gone. I doubt that TES 6 will backpedal, and might even introduce more active skill perks that expand on the power attacks from Skyrim.

As I pointed out, this was so unpopular in Skyrim that they changed it in an official patch. So having learned that players hate this design and effectively removing it, it would be very odd to see them take it even further in future games.... like they did with ESO.

Not that it would matter much of course. That's the beauty of modding with the single-player games. Dollars to doughnuts someone would release a mod to fix something like that within days of release.

The one key property of a true RPG game is that, with each development of the character in one direction, it becomes harder to develop the character in another direction. The player is free to decide, but the decision has consequences.

DaniAngione · March 2016

I can't believe this got to 7 pages already :P

There's a bit of poor interpretation skills on the OP's part here...
Saying it's not a "traditional MMO" doesn't mean it's not a MMO. It means it is a MMO but not a traditional one.

Regardless, some of the things that define MMOs according to our favorite not-always-legitimate-source-but-still-referenced-all-the-time-anyways Wikipedia:

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is an online game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance (or world). MMOs usually have at least one persistent world... [...]
MMOs can enable players to cooperate and compete with each other on a large scale, and sometimes to interact meaningfully with people around the world. They include a variety of gameplay types, representing many video game genres.

"Capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance"? Check; "(or world)" Check; Megaservers.

"...persistent world..."? Check; - to those unaware, a persistent world is a game world that "is there before you join and stays there after you leave", still alive and kicking whenever you're online or offline, and serves as a progressively changing world based on the game's updates and player interactions. It's kind of the opposite of the "round-based games" like traditional shooters or MOBAs where each instance of a round exists on its own limited time.

"...enable players to cooperate and compete with each other on a large scale..." Check; Grouping for quests, dungeons, raids for trials, Cyrodiil, etc.

"...interact meaningfully with people around the world." Check;

"They include a variety of gameplay types, representing many video game genres." Check; RPG aspects, Idle game mechanics (like horse feeding), social games interactions (trading; requesting stuff; etc), stealth mechanics, adventure mechanics, etc, etc...

ESO IS a MMO.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

DaniAngione wrote: »

I can't believe this got to 7 pages already :P

There's a bit of poor interpretation skills on the OP's part here...
Saying it's not a "traditional MMO" doesn't mean it's not a MMO. It means it is a MMO but not a traditional one.

Regardless, some of the things that define MMOs according to our favorite not-always-legitimate-source-but-still-referenced-all-the-time-anyways Wikipedia:

A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is an online game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance (or world). MMOs usually have at least one persistent world... [...]
MMOs can enable players to cooperate and compete with each other on a large scale, and sometimes to interact meaningfully with people around the world. They include a variety of gameplay types, representing many video game genres.

"Capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously in the same instance"? Check; "(or world)" Check; Megaservers.

"...persistent world..."? Check; - to those unaware, a persistent world is a game world that "is there before you join and stays there after you leave", still alive and kicking whenever you're online or offline, and serves as a progressively changing world based on the game's updates and player interactions. It's kind of the opposite of the "round-based games" like traditional shooters or MOBAs where each instance of a round exists on its own limited time.

"...enable players to cooperate and compete with each other on a large scale..." Check; Grouping for quests, dungeons, raids for trials, Cyrodiil, etc.

"...interact meaningfully with people around the world." Check;

"They include a variety of gameplay types, representing many video game genres." Check; RPG aspects, Idle game mechanics (like horse feeding), social games interactions (trading; requesting stuff; etc), stealth mechanics, adventure mechanics, etc, etc...

ESO IS a MMO.

What's my interpretation exactly?

Korah_Eaglecry · March 2016

Id say it still falls into the MMO genre due to the large numbers of players in Cyrodiil.

Nerouyn · March 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

The one key property of a true RPG game is that, with each development of the character in one direction, it becomes harder to develop the character in another direction. The player is free to decide, but the decision has consequences.

ROFL.

The one key property of true nonsense is it is pulled out of one's buttski.

Pet, that may be how you like your RPG's but just because you claim it to be a fundamental property doesn't make it so. Especially since those big successes we were talking about didn't adhere to it.

According to you, Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim aren't true RPGs. Oh my!

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO · March 2016

If you say something is "not your typical mmo" that means it still is a mmo. Same as saying this is not your typical car. Its still a car. Still has a steering wheel and a motor. Same with this game. Its a mmo yes. Mmorpg? Yes that too. You do play the role of your character. So I dont even get what all this bickering back and forth is even about.

KingYogi415 · March 2016

he kind of explained how this game is targeted for solo skyrim players then tricks them into group content.

Why cant they just say it's an MMO?

Would to many casuals relate it to WOW and never try it?

anitajoneb17_ESO · March 2016

KingYogi415 wrote: »

he kind of explained how this game is targeted for solo skyrim players then tricks them into group content.

Why cant they just say it's an MMO?

Would to many casuals relate it to WOW and never try it?

Yes. Exactly.

ADarklore · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Rigid classes are, as I see it, a concession to the MMO players, who get a rigid class system with active slotted class abilities, so that they see in ESO something of what they expect to see in an MMO.

That's not just as you see it. That's a confirmed fact straight from the developers' mouths. They completely ignored the stellar sales figures of their own single-player TES titles, i.e. their own massive fan base, and had their eyes firmly fixed on WOW's subscribers.

Making ESO yet another example of how shafting your existing fans to attract new ones not working out so well.

Um, yes... because ESO is an ONLINE game and NOT a single-player game... they didn't make ESO to be 'Skyrim 2' nor the successor to Skyrim- because- the successor to Skyrim would be ES6 and also a single-player game. So yes, they created ESO to not only be attractive to ES franchise players- which I'll remind you is the majority of ESO players so clearly most ES players are OK with ESO in that regard... but they also created it to attract non-ES franchise players. Just because ESO is an MMO doesn't mean they're "firmly fixed on WOW subscribers"- that's like saying ALL MMOs are fixed on WOW subscribers just because they're an MMO. Developers create titles and hope to attract an audience based upon the games content, ESO had an added benefit of already having a massive fan base to attract, which they clearly did.

Volkodav · March 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

Why do you find it awkward the way it is now?
People can group up at the entrance of any dungeon,or go it alone,as they choose. I actually enjoy all the people running around.Many times in Hew's Bane,when I go into one of those delves,or tombs,other people seem to gravitate close,and sometimes there are three of us together.I never feel alone.I like it this way.We dont actually group up,but we do go it together.I've made friends like this.

What you speak of in the delves of Hew's Bane is what I speak of here, but on a game-wide scale. Players can contribute to a kill and get rewarded for it, up to a point where they start to get penalized for it. Players can informally group to take down a boss and everyone gets XP, loot, and achievements. No need to stop and group.

This is the sort of multiplayer enhancement that I want to extend to the rest of the game. Seamless grouping that rewards cooperation between players. Having the game world react when multiple players are around to better socialize the multiplayer interactions that are going on just because they are in the same space at the same time.

1. Raise the XP penalty number so that more players can contribute to a "kill" before XP is reduced. This is a powerful benefit over games where only one player can tag a mob, and it is unfortunate that they enacted this restriction at the level that they did. It is 2 right now, so if I see 2 players taking out a mob, I do the antisocial thing and stand back.
2. Change how the game handles killing bosses (ie: world boss, delve boss, etc) so that the achievement for completing the task and the XP and loot rewards operate in harmony. It is possible to get the achievement to complete a boss kill, or delve, without getting any XP or loot for doing so due to the difference in how these things are calculated.
3. Two or more players on the same quest in the same area should automatically work together to complete the objective. This is as simple as making it so that not everyone has to interact with every quest waypoint and object. If there is a lever to be pulled to open a door, lift a grate, turn off a trap, or whatever, if one player does it, it should be good enough for the other players nearby. If players have to pick up something off the ground, yeah, they can do that, but if they have to get something out of a chest, if anyone unlocks and opens the chest, it should just be open for all the players there at the same place in the quest.
4. Wrothgar daily boss quests should be automatically shared (or offered) whenever an eligible player who does not have the quest joins in with other players that are doing that quest objective. This should happen game-wide when appropriate so that players that just happen to be there when all the action is happening do not find out, after the fact, that they were helping on a quest that they cannot benefit from. Yes, the quests can be shared, but only if someone formally offers it. I am looking for ways of "grouping" without the need to take direct action.

These are the things that I think might make ESO a better multiplayer game, without forcing group play or cutting off solo play. I am looking for ways to build the multiplayer parts of the game in situations where players are already working as part of a group of players with a common goal, without having to take action to form a formal group.

These things seem reasonable.Just as long as it is by choice people group up,and not forced.If that day comes,I'm afraid I might have to find a new home to play in,sadly.I just like that ESO has a lot of choices.

Nerouyn · March 2016

ADarklore wrote: »

Nerouyn wrote: »

Making ESO yet another example of how shafting your existing fans to attract new ones not working out so well.

Um, yes... because ESO is an ONLINE game and NOT a single-player game... they didn't make ESO to be 'Skyrim 2' nor the successor to Skyrim- because- the successor to Skyrim would be ES6 and also a single-player game.

That's silly. An MMO doesn't have to include classes. There are many class-less MMOs.

ADarklore wrote: »

So yes, they created ESO to not only be attractive to ES franchise players- which I'll remind you is the majority of ESO players so clearly most ES players are OK with ESO in that regard...

Maybe most ESO players are ES fans. But it does not follow that most ES fans like ESO. All signs point to the contrary.

ADarklore wrote: »

but they also created it to attract non-ES franchise players. Just because ESO is an MMO doesn't mean they're "firmly fixed on WOW subscribers"- that's like saying ALL MMOs are fixed on WOW subscribers just because they're an MMO.

I didn't claim ESO is an MMO therefore ZO wanted WOW's subscribers.

I pointed out that ESO's developers quite openly admitted that the decision to include classes in ESO - something not seen in the franchise for a very long time and notably absent from all of its recent and hugely successful single-player titles - was specifically to appeal to players of class-based MMOs like WOW.

And yes, pretty much every MMO developer post WOW has had their eyes fixed firmly on their subscribers. WOW made ridiculous amounts of money and naturally other developers wanted to steal away their customers who make up a very large proportion of the market.

ADarklore wrote: »

Developers create titles and hope to attract an audience based upon the games content, ESO had an added benefit of already having a massive fan base to attract, which they clearly did.

Zenimax boasted (quite rightly) about the sales figures of the last few single-player ES games. Skyrim's sales were in excess of $700 million last time I checked. ESO.... they've never said. Funny that.

I wish they'd made some better choices and the game had done better. But they didn't and it didn't. That's reality.

Elsonso · March 2016

Nerouyn wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

The one key property of a true RPG game is that, with each development of the character in one direction, it becomes harder to develop the character in another direction. The player is free to decide, but the decision has consequences.

ROFL.

The one key property of true nonsense is it is pulled out of one's buttski.

Pet, that may be how you like your RPG's but just because you claim it to be a fundamental property doesn't make it so. Especially since those big successes we were talking about didn't adhere to it.

According to you, Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim aren't true RPGs. Oh my![/quote]

No, they aren't.

True role playing games are not about playing clones, and that is ultimately what the characters in Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim end up being. They all learn the same skills. They all do the same things. They even tend to look the same, particularly in Morrowind.

We used to linguistically separate RPG games in to two buckets. In one bucket, you find role playing games. In the other bucket, you find computer role playing games. They share some of the same words, but they are not the same thing. Elder Scrolls games are in the latter bucket. Today, people drop the word "computer" quite handily, but it is still there.

I am not saying that I don't like computer role playing games, but they aren't true role playing games.

Nerouyn wrote: »

[They] boasted (quite rightly) about the sales figures of the last few single-player ES games. Skyrim's sales were in excess of $700 million last time I checked. ESO.... they've never said. Funny that.

I was surprised when they announced the Skyrim sales, a little less surprised when they announced the Fallout 4 sales. The numbers for Brink were released by the developer, not Bethesda. We have no official word on how Dishonored sales were. We have only estimates on how well Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas did. We don't even know for sure what the sales were for Oblivion. It is more funny that they talked about Skyrim and Fallout 4.

Bethesda tends to be tight lipped on these numbers, and ZOS has every reason to be more tight lipped than that. Whatever they say will be both "successful" and "fail" simultaneously, depending on what it is compared to and who is doing the comparing.

BucMan55 · March 2016

lordrichter wrote: »

Nerouyn wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

TES always had classes, TES V: Skyrim was the first title in the series without classes.

Morrowind and Oblivion had something they called classes but which definitely weren't. All they did was provide something like a +5 / 10 / 15 to certain skills at the beginning of the game and determine which skills were used to calculate your level. They had no impact beyond that. Players could freely level and use any skill / spell / weapon and master everything with a single character.

This is true... Recent Elder Scrolls classes were more like starting templates. ESO is the first Elder Scrolls game with a strictly enforced class system using active combat skills. I expected ZOS and ESO to use the Elder Scrolls skill ideology, but never got it. Rigid classes are, as I see it, a concession to the MMO players, who get a rigid class system with active slotted class abilities, so that they see in ESO something of what they expect to see in an MMO. The action bar and the Trinity are all familiar for an MMO player, while the Elder Scrolls combat, used in Skyrim and older, would not be seen as an "MMO" by many players.

The Elder Scrolls games, in general, seem to be heading in a direction that ESO also seems to be following. While the class and active skill system from ESO is not something I expect to see in TES 6, both Skyrim and ESO are an indication of continued revision of the RPG aspect of the game franchise. The Skyrim skill system introduces perks, which are cousins to the ESO morphing system more than the Oblivion skill system. In this manner, players pick benefits for their character directly rather than increasing a base statistic that spans multiple benefits. I think that the days of the old style Elder Scrolls skills are long gone. I doubt that TES 6 will backpedal, and might even introduce more active skill perks that expand on the power attacks from Skyrim.

If you think back to skyrim, there were really only a few styles of play after people leveled up. You had spell swords, wizards, tanks, and sneaky types. When you have access to all skills at all times, you create a very homogenous system.

I believe the reason ESO brought in classes was to ensure variety. If you simply offer skill lines based on abilities you will eventually get to a single tank build, single heal build, and single dps build. Sure some folks will use sub-optimal builds that offer more fun and flavor, but when push comes to shove the top dog builds get used or you get kicked from the group. At least with the class system you have best builds but with multiple classes so there is more variety.

WalkingLegacy · March 2016

BucMan55 wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Nerouyn wrote: »

Kendaric wrote: »

TES always had classes, TES V: Skyrim was the first title in the series without classes.

Morrowind and Oblivion had something they called classes but which definitely weren't. All they did was provide something like a +5 / 10 / 15 to certain skills at the beginning of the game and determine which skills were used to calculate your level. They had no impact beyond that. Players could freely level and use any skill / spell / weapon and master everything with a single character.

This is true... Recent Elder Scrolls classes were more like starting templates. ESO is the first Elder Scrolls game with a strictly enforced class system using active combat skills. I expected ZOS and ESO to use the Elder Scrolls skill ideology, but never got it. Rigid classes are, as I see it, a concession to the MMO players, who get a rigid class system with active slotted class abilities, so that they see in ESO something of what they expect to see in an MMO. The action bar and the Trinity are all familiar for an MMO player, while the Elder Scrolls combat, used in Skyrim and older, would not be seen as an "MMO" by many players.

The Elder Scrolls games, in general, seem to be heading in a direction that ESO also seems to be following. While the class and active skill system from ESO is not something I expect to see in TES 6, both Skyrim and ESO are an indication of continued revision of the RPG aspect of the game franchise. The Skyrim skill system introduces perks, which are cousins to the ESO morphing system more than the Oblivion skill system. In this manner, players pick benefits for their character directly rather than increasing a base statistic that spans multiple benefits. I think that the days of the old style Elder Scrolls skills are long gone. I doubt that TES 6 will backpedal, and might even introduce more active skill perks that expand on the power attacks from Skyrim.

If you think back to skyrim, there were really only a few styles of play after people leveled up. You had spell swords, wizards, tanks, and sneaky types. When you have access to all skills at all times, you create a very homogenous system.

I believe the reason ESO brought in classes was to ensure variety. If you simply offer skill lines based on abilities you will eventually get to a single tank build, single heal build, and single dps build. Sure some folks will use sub-optimal builds that offer more fun and flavor, but when push comes to shove the top dog builds get used or you get kicked from the group. At least with the class system you have best builds but with multiple classes so there is more variety.

What variety? We can all be tanks, mages, Thieves, murderers, sneaks, assassins, healers, duel wielders, staff pokers, bowmen, etc etc all from one class.