[Megathread] Elder Scrolls Online

[Kalyyn]

I'm failing to see how this game is going to be any different from features already available on the market. Call me cynical, but it just looks like another cookie cutter MMO taking features from WoW and GW2 (and maybe others) - if you've played those games, you've played ESO. That being said, I haven't kept up with the feature list since I was disappointed after hearing about the PvP system (sounded just like WvWvW to me).

I can't speak for everyone here, but that is exactly what I want. I loved almost everything about Guild Wars 2, but a few things killed it for me: I couldn't find a class I felt connected with, and I don't like the Guild Wars universe. Also, their idea of cut-scenes was pretty upsetting.

So if this game is literally just Guild Wars in the Elder Scrolls universe, then consider me satisfied.

[Woakerio]

I'm failing to see how this game is going to be any different from features already available on the market. Call me cynical, but it just looks like another cookie cutter MMO taking features from WoW and GW2 (and maybe others) - if you've played those games, you've played ESO. That being said, I haven't kept up with the feature list since I was disappointed after hearing about the PvP system (sounded just like WvWvW to me).

You could say that about any MMO, they all take different things from each other and try to improve upon it. Some do it better than others so just because WvW-type pvp is in ESO doesn't mean it will be like it is in GW2...it could be more like in DAOC which people have largely praised.

[papajohn4]

You could say that about any MMO, they all take different things from each other and try to improve upon it. Some do it better than others so just because WvW-type pvp is in ESO doesn't mean it will be like it is in GW2...it could be more like in DAOC which people have largely praised.

the difference with Daoc is that there wasn't duplicate zones/battles and developers didn't take place to "help" in the battle for balance. Also there was a solid population/community like in vanilla wow where everyone knew each other and there were rivarlies/alliances. You knew all the names of your enemies and if you win you keep the place for you and the next time you will go to that place will be there. Megaserver and multiplie instances of the same battle maybe will kill immersion and make you fighting just for points like in any battleground rather than fighting for a permanent place in your server.

[trips25]

Anyone going to Pax East today and plan on playing? Let us know!

[Fencers]

The thing about RvR in DAOC was that the concept and system were pervasive throughout the majority of the game. It was tied to the lore, to your faction, to reason for existing in that game totally. RvR/PVP wasn't one battlefield, map or instance.

There is a big difference in how DAOC handled 3 faction PVP as principle motivation of design and games that have stuff+RVR [GW2, Rift, War, TESO].

Also, permanence.

Stuff was at stake in DAOC. Like for reals.

[blackyfrost]

the difference with Daoc is that there wasn't duplicate zones/battles and developers didn't take place to "help" in the battle for balance. Also there was a solid population/community like in vanilla wow where everyone knew each other and there were rivarlies/alliances. You knew all the names of your enemies and if you win you keep the place for you and the next time you will go to that place will be there. Megaserver and multiplie instances of the same battle maybe will kill immersion and make you fighting just for points like in any battleground rather than fighting for a permanent place in your server.

DAOC peaked at 250,000 subs. when a game is that small you can do things that today's mmos can't possibly do. they specifically addressed it (and since they have direct ties to DAOC development) and how they wanted that feel.

considering 100% of what they said has proven to be true during hands-on testing, we can assume they're at least trying to recreate the good parts about DAOC

also, if DAOC launches today it fails just like all the old MMOs would. today's gamers aren't like they were in 2000. there has to be more elements to gameplay and quicker ways in/out or it will be seen as a failure

so far there has been literally nothing you can criticize that we know about. people have been blown away and even skeptics impressed. this game went into development in 2007

that's gonna be about 6 years when it's said and done, assuming it gets launched in 2013 still (alpha has been called very polished, beta is set to start this month, 2013 is looking like a safe bet)

compare that 4 years for SWTOR, 4 years for WOW, 3 years for GW, 4 years for GW2, 3 years for TERA, etc
a lot of games that start out with a lore base like this go from idea to release in 3-4 years. that's standard. sometimes they're rushed like swtor and release with so much shit wrong people leave. gw2's problem is how casual it is. the kids who have wet dreams about top players won't respect a game like gw2 since top players don't focus on it

this reminds me of 2001-2004 when blizz was making wow. it's all in house, established rep due to their other games, nobody forcing it out the door before it's ready, guys with a track record of success with a clear-cut plan of what they want and how to do it

i just can't imagine this game flopping. the time is right, blizz countered GW2 with mop and now they're countering TESO with an online card game

1,000,000 subs and a high quality launch and TESO might be completely fine for a long time to come, it should be comfortable for TES players (VERY important), easy to learn for new players, the lore is insanely deep, it has the holy trinity (which every wow player seems to be unable to do without because healers are lazy) and so far, what we know we like

if it's released when it's done, it will be great

[Eldryth]

the difference with Daoc is that there wasn't duplicate zones/battles and developers didn't take place to "help" in the battle for balance. Also there was a solid population/community like in vanilla wow where everyone knew each other and there were rivarlies/alliances. You knew all the names of your enemies and if you win you keep the place for you and the next time you will go to that place will be there. Megaserver and multiplie instances of the same battle maybe will kill immersion and make you fighting just for points like in any battleground rather than fighting for a permanent place in your server.

In Cyrodiil, there will be permanent servers in all but name. Once you join a campaign (AvA server), you're locked in until the season ends or you pay a heavy price (might be in-game money, but as it's basically a server transfer, a real money cost isn't out of the question).

[thewallofsleep]

DAOC peaked at 250,000 subs. when a game is that small you can do things that today's mmos can't possibly do. they specifically addressed it (and since they have direct ties to DAOC development) and how they wanted that feel.

considering 100% of what they said has proven to be true during hands-on testing, we can assume they're at least trying to recreate the good parts about DAOC

also, if DAOC launches today it fails just like all the old MMOs would. today's gamers aren't like they were in 2000. there has to be more elements to gameplay and quicker ways in/out or it will be seen as a failure

so far there has been literally nothing you can criticize that we know about. people have been blown away and even skeptics impressed. this game went into development in 2007

that's gonna be about 6 years when it's said and done, assuming it gets launched in 2013 still (alpha has been called very polished, beta is set to start this month, 2013 is looking like a safe bet)

compare that 4 years for SWTOR, 4 years for WOW, 3 years for GW, 4 years for GW2, 3 years for TERA, etc
a lot of games that start out with a lore base like this go from idea to release in 3-4 years. that's standard. sometimes they're rushed like swtor and release with so much shit wrong people leave. gw2's problem is how casual it is. the kids who have wet dreams about top players won't respect a game like gw2 since top players don't focus on it

this reminds me of 2001-2004 when blizz was making wow. it's all in house, established rep due to their other games, nobody forcing it out the door before it's ready, guys with a track record of success with a clear-cut plan of what they want and how to do it

i just can't imagine this game flopping. the time is right, blizz countered GW2 with mop and now they're countering TESO with an online card game

1,000,000 subs and a high quality launch and TESO might be completely fine for a long time to come, it should be comfortable for TES players (VERY important), easy to learn for new players, the lore is insanely deep, it has the holy trinity (which every wow player seems to be unable to do without because healers are lazy) and so far, what we know we like

if it's released when it's done, it will be great

I like this post a lot. Well thought out response with a logical opinion. I'm not getting my hopes up about ESO (kind of "meh" about MMO's these days honestly), but still keeping an eye on it. I hope it's good.

[papajohn4]

DAOC peaked at 250,000 subs. when a game is that small you can do things that today's mmos can't possibly do. they specifically addressed it (and since they have direct ties to DAOC development) and how they wanted that feel.

In Cyrodiil, there will be permanent servers in all but name. Once you join a campaign (AvA server), you're locked in until the season ends or you pay a heavy price (might be in-game money, but as it's basically a server transfer, a real money cost isn't out of the question).

sub numbers have not any impact on what I said about solid community and server reputation as long as the game is separate in servers with x capacity. Take wow for example in vanilla. The big amount of subscribers did not prevent them to create solid server-based communities. Of course when you have a megaserver, then population have an immediate effect on this.

But I don't know how it will work..I heard something called "champion"(not the campaign thing) which from what I have understood it will be like a server inside the megaserver and once you got there is difficult to leave(or you must pay to leave as a service maybe?). Anyway the sure thing is we cannot judge them now, but to me from what I have read/seen until now it feels like another generic RvR for points and gear rather than rule a permanent place. I really wish to succeed though . At least I hope the pve will have lot of depth and good gameplay.

[blackyfrost]

sub numbers have not any impact on what I said about solid community and server reputation as long as the game is separate in servers with x capacity. Take wow for example in vanilla. The big amount of subscribers did not prevent them to create solid server-based communities. Of course when you have a megaserver, then population have an immediate effect on this.

But I don't know how it will work..I heard something called "champion"(not the campaign thing) which from what I have understood it will be like a server inside the megaserver and once you got there is difficult to leave(or you must pay to leave as a service maybe?). Anyway the sure thing is we cannot judge them now, but to me from what I have read/seen until now it feels like another generic RvR for points and gear rather than rule a permanent place. I really wish to succeed though . At least I hope the pve will have lot of depth and good gameplay.

1) the game isn't separate in servers with x capacity

2) in vanilla wow, you had no options but to interact with your server or reroll. sever imbalances made large parts of the game impossible blizz found out that wasn't sustainable if you wanted quick access to instanced content

3) megaserver's intent is to give you 1 huge community without all the lag. still need more details on this. right now it is 100% impossible to have 1 huge BG for a sub base that allows even 1000 people on concurrently, and considering 200,000 concurrent subs is normal, that's YEARS from happening. IF EVER. there will have to be different instances of the same BG, even if they're persistent, to make it possible to play. there is no way around it. nobody has done what TESO is attempting because they're creating the tech to do it, even DAOC did it differently

4) you have already judged them and you haven't read the info that they have already given us, you won't read future info because you don't want to know details, you want to bash a game that isn't wow. you're the plague on gaming right now. you being "disappoint" is probably good for those of us who actually like MMORPGs

the current trend of casualizing the fuck out of EVERYTHING is not good for us

[Tabbycat]

I was hoping for much more event coverage today but perhaps we'll see a bit more trickle out over the weekend. Here is one nice article I've found so far:
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/03...ine-round-two/

Edit to add this one too: http://fronttowardsgamer.com/2013/03...-pax-east-2013

[Poppincaps]

From the interview I watched on Rev3Games it really seems like this is basically Skyrim with Co-Op, which is fine if the game is buy to play like Guild Wars 2, but I just can't see them being able to sustain a subscription based model. I'll keep my eye on this one, but I haven't been blown away yet.

[Loaf Lord]

From the interview I watched on Rev3Games it really seems like this is basically Skyrim with Co-Op, which is fine if the game is buy to play like Guild Wars 2, but I just can't see them being able to sustain a subscription based model. I'll keep my eye on this one, but I haven't been blown away yet.

They said there will be a sub fee?

[Poppincaps]

They said there will be a sub fee?

I don't believe they've said what their business model is yet. I just hope it won't be sub based and will either be F2P or B2P.

[Loaf Lord]

I don't believe they've said what their business model is yet. I just hope it won't be sub based and will either be F2P or B2P.

Oh, good. I'm guessing it will be B2P. If they announce a sub fee I will be VERY suprised.

[blackyfrost]

From the interview I watched on Rev3Games it really seems like this is basically Skyrim with Co-Op, which is fine if the game is buy to play like Guild Wars 2, but I just can't see them being able to sustain a subscription based model. I'll keep my eye on this one, but I haven't been blown away yet.

from the reviews of people who played it, they specifically said it wasn't skyrim, oblivion or morrowind. they said it felt and reminded you of those games without feeling like a port

wish you people would watch/read reviews on it. people are playing it for the second time at pax right now

[Airwaves]

I don't believe they've said what their business model is yet. I just hope it won't be sub based and will either be F2P or B2P.

Please Please don't be F2P. People have no idea how much more they end up costing if you really want to play all the game. Sub is by far the best model if you want constant patches and upgrades. 50c a day isn't a huge amount to pay for hours of entertainment. GW2 might have had a few patches but it will grind to a halt with there B2P model until they have an expansion. And F2P games charge for almost anything from dungeons and raids to groups of quests hell a lot even cost real money to get a mount on ONE player.

"FREE" to play games are far far far from free if you realy want to play the game. F2P are for games that are going down the drain not an ELDER SCROLLS mmo which should give blizz a run for there money it they don't fuck it up. Same could have been said for sw:kotor, how you fuck up star wars is beyond me.

[Remilia]

Please Please don't be F2P. People have no idea how much more they end up costing if you really want to play all the game. Sub is by far the best model if you want constant patches and upgrades. 50c a day isn't a huge about to pay for hours of entertainment. GW2 might have had a few patches but it will grind to a halt with there B2P model until they have an expansion. And F2P games charge for almost anything from dungeons and raids to groups of quests hell a lot even cost real money to get a mount on ONE player.

"FREE" to play games are far far far from free if you realy want to play the game.

/point Tera.
Their F2P model = awesome.

[blackyfrost]

Please Please don't be F2P. People have no idea how much more they end up costing if you really want to play all the game. Sub is by far the best model if you want constant patches and upgrades. 50c a day isn't a huge amount to pay for hours of entertainment. GW2 might have had a few patches but it will grind to a halt with there B2P model until they have an expansion. And F2P games charge for almost anything from dungeons and raids to groups of quests hell a lot even cost real money to get a mount on ONE player.

"FREE" to play games are far far far from free if you realy want to play the game.

gw/gw2 has been proving that wrong for 8 years
b2p is perfectly fine, generates more than enough profit to run the game and you have the option of spending money on vanity items
subs are just a cockblock these days. it's a mentality that people have. they feel they get what they pay for, but you are paying for it either way. b2p, you really do get what you pay for

the way swtor has done it is fucked up and just awful in every way. gw/gw2 did it perfectly

[wombinator04]

I prefer a sub based model. But I can deal with F2P or B2P if their done right(TERA, GW2, Planetside 2, LoL, DnD, ect). Which so far there's only a few games that do it right. I say a few because there's a billion bad F2P games out there.


TESO is gonna need it's own forum when the beta hits and stuff. The hype train is rolling in at full speed.