[Megathread] Elder Scrolls Online (See NDA Sticky)

[Malgo]

There is no point bothering with topics about mmo killing, one side attempts to preach whilst the other just pointlessly try to flame it because they have nothing better to do and have spud like intelligence. It's best not to live and die by other peoples comments as i see too many people do on many forums from sports to games, this thread being a good example :P

EDIT: i am aware of the irony of my preaching :P

holy god... just gotta say, that infinity thing looks fucking amazing.

What infinity thing?

[Mcstunner]

What infinity thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_%28MMOG%29

[vizzle]

All this talk about MMO killing, starting to sound like Chicago in here.

[Tabbycat]

A little healthy competition definitely would not hurt the MMO market one bit. WoW has been King of the Hill for a long time. And I think that's the reason why they keep getting lazier and lazier in their development. A little serious competition might make them step it up a bit. I can't say anything about Vanilla or BC because I started playing in WotLK but I did have a lot more fun playing WotLK than I did playing Cata. And MoP with the whole CRZ thing killed the game for me.

On the other hand though, Blizzard might decide it's a better idea to spend their funds on developing Titan rather than continuing to work on WoW. If that happens, then we will eventually see the death of WoW.

[Ryngo Blackratchet]

All this talk about MMO killing, starting to sound like Chicago in here.

Chicago... with less direction, motivation and overall goal, which is scary to be honest. No idea why so many people (Or ANYONE for that matter) is worried about how an MMO stands up against another. What would they even hope to achieve from a scenario where one game was "killing" another game? What then? So what?

If you enjoy a game, play it. Who cares what everyone else is doing?

---------- Post added 2013-02-16 at 01:01 PM ----------

A little healthy competition definitely would not hurt the MMO market one bit. WoW has been King of the Hill for a long time. And I think that's the reason why they keep getting lazier and lazier in their development.

I've gone over this 4 dozen times to 4 dozen posters and I dont think anyone has actually cared yet, so I'll simply summarize: Wow isn't king of the hill for any reason other than its playerbase and its playerbase is there because of routine, addiction and instant gratification, not because the game is/was/will be some revolution in gaming. You can't beat that. It's a concrete foundation won over by years of word-of-mouth. NO new game is going to dent that. None. Why even waste time on it? (Edit: To specify, I mean "why waste time on trying to compete?", not that a new MMO is a waste of time.)

Companies are scared to TRY anything new because no one wants new. Sure, we'll go on and on about how such and such is a clone or how nothing feels innovative, but then we return to the forums to read about the playerbase complaining about every little possible change and demanding their static comfort zone. What company can afford the innovation gamble just to throw it all away on the fickle masses?

[Archangel Tyrael]

All this talk about MMO killing, starting to sound like Chicago in here.

I don't understand it.

[Ryngo Blackratchet]

I don't understand it.

And everyone was shocked!

(No really, don't understand what?)

[Archangel Tyrael]

And everyone was shocked!

(No really, don't understand what?)

What does Chicago has to do with MMO killing.

[Doozerjun]

What does Chicago has to do with MMO killing.

Chicago has the highest murder rate in 2013 for American cities.

[Archangel Tyrael]

Chicago has the highest murder rate in 2013 for American cities.

ah ok, I get it now.

Sorry, my autism is showing.

[Ryngo Blackratchet]

ah ok, I get it now.

Sorry, my autism is showing.

Wasn't sure if you didn't understand the Chicago thing or the meaning behind his statement. Yeah Chicago's well known for its violent gang activity which is sad.

[Archangel Tyrael]

Wasn't sure if you didn't understand the Chicago thing or the meaning behind his statement. Yeah Chicago's well known for its violent gang activity which is sad.

No, I'd never have thought of Chicago that way.

I don't know much about the USA anyway, but I imagined Chicago would be a fine place...

[Doozerjun]

Well Chicago is the third biggest city in the US, so it's bound to have crime. And it's had gang activity there since forever (it's where Al Capone was from if that gives you any indication).

[Bardarian]

Alright, so, found some better stuff. Again, I know it off topic but it should be addressed.

So Chicago has a shit reputation because of this figure here:

It looks scary. But when you adjust for population it really isn't. Chigago has a population for 2.7 (2,707,120) million and had 292 homicides.
That's 10.79 per 100,000. Pretty high. However, New Orleans tops that at 32.65 per 100,000. You commonly hear that NYC is the safest city in america, and if you just look at that chart you would think its the second most dangerous, however it has a rate of 2.73 out of 100,000. Very safe. Illinois isn't even that dangerous compared to some other states.

Nevada, Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Tennessee all have higher rates of gun violence. (Also, you can sort states by murder or gun homicides here)

A good way to think about it is, two sets of ten people are lined up. One line is going to have three people shot, the other line is going to have 1 person shot. Which line do you want to be in? lol.

[Tabbycat]

Well Chicago is the third biggest city in the US, so it's bound to have crime. And it's had gang activity there since forever (it's where Al Capone was from if that gives you any indication).

To be perfectly honest, I'd be more afraid of going to Detroit than Chicago.

I live about 45 minutes away from Saint Louis.

In every city there are places you just don't go.

[Whitepepper]

I've gone over this 4 dozen times to 4 dozen posters and I dont think anyone has actually cared yet, so I'll simply summarize: Wow isn't king of the hill for any reason other than its playerbase and its playerbase is there because of routine, addiction and instant gratification, not because the game is/was/will be some revolution in gaming. You can't beat that. It's a concrete foundation won over by years of word-of-mouth. NO new game is going to dent that. None. Why even waste time on it? (Edit: To specify, I mean "why waste time on trying to compete?", not that a new MMO is a waste of time.)

What source did you use to determine why people continue to play WoW? Generally speaking, people are much more likely to believe an argument when it has evidence to back it up.

[Snowraven]

wow, didn't know New Orleans is so small in population.

But anyway, MMO killing? To be honest I find that discussion stupid, no MMO kills another, but rather they kill themselves. WoW didn't kill Age of Conan for example simply by existing, Age of Conan killed itself by not being attractive enough for people. I hope ESO doesn't share same fate and I hope it is attractive and interesting.

When we say "I think MMO X will kill MMO Y", we don't mean "I think MMO X will destroy Y just because it exists" but rather we mean "I feel MMO Y is less and less attractive to me and some others, and I hope MMO X will be something I will find interesting and that it will be more attractive then how MMO Y feels now". It's of course said in a childish way "my mmo will kill your mmo", like the person saying it is a kid and doesn't know how to express arguments on why they think so, the reason being that they find something more interesting in their mmo then in the other mmo.

[Doozerjun]

But anyway, MMO killing? To be honest I find that discussion stupid, no MMO kills another, but rather they kill themselves. WoW didn't kill Age of Conan for example simply by existing, Age of Conan killed itself by not being attractive enough for people. I hope ESO doesn't share same fate and I hope it is attractive and interesting.

Not sure what you mean by attractive but AoC "killed" itself (not literally as it is still online and actually gets content updates) due to the release. I mean it had some truly gamebreaking stuff, examples would be stats not working and male characters doing more damage than females due to the differences in animation. I mean I think it's a great game now but it's far too late for the game to be anything other than a small niche game. But yeah "attractiveness" had nothing to do with the failures that occurred with AoC.

[Shinoashi]

What source did you use to determine why people continue to play WoW? Generally speaking, people are much more likely to believe an argument when it has evidence to back it up.

He doesn't need a source to know that he pretty much hit the nail on the head. Now can we please stop talking about what mmo is going to kill what mmo, and what mmo is going to give this other mmo competition; its sorta against the forum rules, and I don't want this thread going down that path.

Thanks.

[Lyriok]

Can we please stop with the game vs game comparisons? We've all heard it before and I'm sure are all over hearing it.

Refering to another game for a feature/design it contains is fine but please can we put a end to " [Insert new mmo] the [insert older mmo] killer" it serves absolutely no use in a discussion.