[Megathread] Elder Scrolls Online

[Deleted]

My point exactly. You make a new character, step out into the world, and (for now at least) nothing happens. Now, of course I know that TES has always been very sandbox-y, but I also know that for most new players, the starting experience is VERY crucial. Heck, even Skyrim had some action right off the bat, with that dragon attack!

Now, there is of course the persistent argument of "this is a TES game, that's how TES games are" - and let me say that while this game is definitely TES, it does add another letter. MMOs work differently from single player games, and they attract a wider range of people. You can't just port over a game concept 1:1 from SP and expect it to work in MP.

But again, the usual caveat: we don't know a whole lot, and the video may well have misrepresented. So far though, derpy play and out-dated graphics aside, there just isn't anything interesting to be seen that makes me want to play the game.

This is not the starting experience. There's a whole zone/storyline that takes place before you wake up on that ship but it's just not being tested at the moment.

[Deleted]

My point exactly. You make a new character, step out into the world, and (for now at least) nothing happens. Now, of course I know that TES has always been very sandbox-y, but I also know that for most new players, the starting experience is VERY crucial. Heck, even Skyrim had some action right off the bat, with that dragon attack!

Now, there is of course the persistent argument of "this is a TES game, that's how TES games are" - and let me say that while this game is definitely TES, it does add another letter. MMOs work differently from single player games, and they attract a wider range of people. You can't just port over a game concept 1:1 from SP and expect it to work in MP.

But again, the usual caveat: we don't know a whole lot, and the video may well have misrepresented. So far though, derpy play and out-dated graphics aside, there just isn't anything interesting to be seen that makes me want to play the game.

There is an entire tutorial area to set the story and get familiar with the controls before the faction specific 'starting zone'.

The way they have organised the beta is to have testers limited to only the areas they are focusing on during that event, they may even have stripped back most of the advanced graphical options (although not the UI options) and high res textures to minimise the download size since they are testing the balance, questing experience etc

[Biomega]

Well, that's good to know, then.

[RoninaThorstone]

Now, there is of course the persistent argument of "this is a TES game, that's how TES games are" - and let me say that while this game is definitely TES, it does add another letter. MMOs work differently from single player games, and they attract a wider range of people. You can't just port over a game concept 1:1 from SP and expect it to work in MP.

And group quest, raiding, and RVR have been imported to make it more MMOy.

We don't need some george lucas wanna-bes JarJar binksing up the TES franchise to sate some inane demographic.
If you bastardize TESO you won't have the TES fanbase and the MMO tourist will only stick around for a few months. If you lose both of those crowds you end up with a pretty empty game. Hell, you are going to lose the MMO tourists. Period. So might as well keep the TES fan base.

[Tackhisis]

Well here it is just an experience cost, other games it is a monetary one.

The experience is sacred. You don't mess with it unless it some Korean anime crap. Valuing the player time is a sign of respect.

[RoninaThorstone]

The experience is sacred. You don't mess with it unless it some Korean anime crap. Valuing the player time is a sign of respect.

So d2, Poe, and DAoC were disrespectful?

Are you posting this for the lulz?

[Edge-]

The experience is sacred. You don't mess with it unless it some Korean anime crap. Valuing the player time is a sign of respect.

Everquest would like a word with you.

If you fuck up and die, you pay for it. Solution: Don't fuck up and die.

[Elim Garak]

Everquest would like a word with you.

If you fuck up and die, you pay for it. Solution: Don't fuck up and die.

And that led to the success of WoW.

[OrcsRLame]

And that led to the success of WoW.

Uh, no. The success of wow had to do with EQ2 and the timing of both of them coming out. It had very little, if anything, to do with some kind of differentiation between EQ1 and wow's leveling mechanics.

[Elim Garak]

Uh, no. The success of wow had to do with EQ2 and the timing of both of them coming out. It had very little, if anything, to do with some kind of differentiation between EQ1 and wow's leveling mechanics.

I was talking about death penalties in said games, not particular game.
A lot of people who tried said games went for WoW after all, because they were fed up with death penalties.

[Edge-]

And that led to the success of WoW.

I'd hardly place the entire, or even a noticeable, part of WoW's success on, "No experience penalty on death." There are about a dozen other factors that count for WoW's explosion of popularity.

[Elim Garak]

I'd hardly place the entire, or even a noticeable, part of WoW's success on, "No experience penalty on death." There are about a dozen other factors that count for WoW's explosion of popularity.

Well it wasn't the only driving force, but it was a major one. Just imagine a new player tries different MMO's experiences death penalty in say EverQuest, and decides to stick with WoW.

[RoninaThorstone]

Really? We are going to pin WoWs success on death penalty?

My palm just broke my nose.

[Elim Garak]

Really? We are going to pin WoWs success on death penalty?

My palm just broke my nose.

Yes, WoW did many things differently from then current MMO's that was the reason of its success.

[Luko]

Really? We are going to pin WoWs success on death penalty?

My palm just broke my nose.

Let's not play the semantics game, please.

I was a Linkshell leader for a decently successful "raiding" guild in FFXI for years. About 6 months into WoW's release, we lost tons of players from our LS and server to things like the death penalty. Was it the "Only" reason? God no, but he also didn't say that. Was it a reason commonly heard among people choosing WoW over XI? Yup. Almost every single "goodbye" post on the Allakazham forums had it listed as a reason.

I'll admit, as hardcore as we viewed ourselves back then, loosing 90+ minutes of grinding time just because you decided to go explore an area and your Chocobo ran off was a little ridiculous. It's solid reasoning and it's a pretty outdated concept, I'll admit, even though I'm not totally against its implementation.

[Matheren]

I'd hardly place the entire, or even a noticeable, part of WoW's success on, "No experience penalty on death." There are about a dozen other factors that count for WoW's explosion of popularity.

Dozens of others including quest-based leveling instead of mob-grind leveling, far less time to max level, far less difficulty to max level, instanced dungeons instead of shared dungeons with waits for camps..

All of which go right back to the point of WoW showing more "value" for people's time than EQ did. And the lack of death penalty was absolutely included in that.

[Archangel Tyrael]

Dozens of others including quest-based leveling instead of mob-grind leveling, far less time to max level, far less difficulty to max level, instanced dungeons instead of shared dungeons with waits for camps..

All of which go right back to the point of WoW showing more "value" for people's time than EQ did. And the lack of death penalty was absolutely included in that.

the name seems a bit obvious but... what are shared dungeons?

[Deleted]

the name seems a bit obvious but... what are shared dungeons?

Basically a (dungeon) zone where all groups entering share the monsters. Unlike instances, a new dungeon is not created just for your group.

To this day, they are still present in some MMORPG games like Runes of Magic, Darkfall and Dark Age of Camelot.

[vizzle]

We're talking about "value of time" in a game where they didn't have quests for people level 50+, so they had to grind mobs over and over and over and over again to get to 60, right? We're talking about VALUE OF TIME in a game where you spent hours and hours gathering 40 people to raid, gathering items from all around the world to get ready for the raid, and then running back and forth in giant raids like AQ40?

Stop being ridiculous. WoW did succeed over EQ, but it's not because of things like taking away experience penalty. Get some perspective -- value of time when talking about Vanilla WoW, where people nostalgia fap over the giant timesinks. Maybe it was better than EQ when it came to value of time, I don't know, but that difference must've been like saying how 2 is closer than 1 when you're going to 1,000,000 (bad analogy but I'm groggy right now).

[Fencers]

Even at it's most extreme classic World of Warcraft was a remarkably faster, easier and less obtuse MMO than Everquest 1, FF11 or Anarchy Online. There is like one MMO I can recall moving at the speed of WoW; Asheron's Call.

I don't particularly like WoW, personally. But Blizzard did design one hell of an accessible game in it's time.

Also plenty of games kept a steep death penalty post-WoW and remained/found success(ful). Since MMOs rarely die, many are still running and current. Even receiving expansions as of this year.

There is nothing a developer can't do in game design by some cosmic edict. No divine bovines in gaming.