There are rules and there are limitations. In EQ, for example, I was KOS to all other races as an Iksar but I still could explore and travel to their lands. I can only hope that ESO world will be bigger than a shoe box divided in 3 but it's still a good example what happens when devs use a well known IP only to promote their sales.
TES rpgs have always been open world sandbox. TES online wont be, therefore TES online will lack the very thing that made the TES series special. TES will not be special, it will be a generic themepark set on tamriel.
If you are ok with that, go ahead and play it, if you are not and feel it should be better, just complain and hope theyll change it down the line.
You can't even quote me without twisting my words...
What I say = " there is zero reason for races to be faction locked".
What you think I say = "faction lock is not realistic".
Go away troll.
You said and I quote
Originally posted by Maelwydd
What is so unbelievable about each individual being able to join a faction of choice? These wars are not racial. There are idealogical. These fights are not to protect your homeland but to secure the crown. These battles do not take place on your doorstep but in far off Cyrodil.
You arewilling to accept bullshit like every single member of every single race lives in their own little predefined area of the map but are unwilling to see how people might fight for different causes in an idealogical war!!!!!
Sounds like a "this is unrealistic" argument to me.
Originally posted by LhynnSaint
TES rpgs have always been open world sandbox. TES online wont be, therefore TES online will lack the very thing that made the TES series special. TES will not be special, it will be a generic themepark set on tamriel.
If you are ok with that, go ahead and play it, if you are not and feel it should be better, just complain and hope theyll change it down the line.
Looks like you missed Redguard, and to a lesser extent Battlespire.
What is so unbelievable about each individual being able to join a faction of choice? These wars are not racial. There are idealogical. These fights are not to protect your homeland but to secure the crown. These battles do not take place on your doorstep but in far off Cyrodil.
You arewilling to accept bullshit like every single member of every single race lives in their own little predefined area of the map but are unwilling to see how people might fight for different causes in an idealogical war!!!!!
Sounds like a "this is unrealistic" argument to me.
It isn't a realism argument. You WANT it to be about realism, you seem to be obsessed with it as it is all you focus on, no matter what people are talking about.
This is about having race locked faction when there is zero reason, realistic or otherwise, for them to be locked to a faction.
Now kindly go away TROLL as this is the 3rd time I have corrected your mistakes and assumptions and it is obvious you are not getting it on purpose just to get a rise.
What is so unbelievable about each individual being able to join a faction of choice? These wars are not racial. There are idealogical. These fights are not to protect your homeland but to secure the crown. These battles do not take place on your doorstep but in far off Cyrodil.
You arewilling to accept bullshit like every single member of every single race lives in their own little predefined area of the map but are unwilling to see how people might fight for different causes in an idealogical war!!!!!
Sounds like a "this is unrealistic" argument to me.
It isn't a realism argument. You WANT it to be about realism, you seem to be obsessed with it as it is all you focus on, no matter what people are talking about.
This is about having race locked faction when there is zero reason, realistic or otherwise, for them to be locked to a faction.
Now kindly go away TROLL as this is the 3rd time I have corrected your mistakes and assumptions and it is obvious you are not getting it on purpose just to get a rise.
Thats the problem though, that is the only reason you have given for there not to be. Of course there is a reason for them to be faction locked, that is what the devs want because its the game they want to make. But but the lore you say, well that has always taken a back seat to mechanics too. Why is this so hard for you to understand.
Looks like you missed Redguard, and to a lesser extent Battlespire.
Just for reference, how successful and well received were these 2 games?
Redguard appears to have been well received, Battlespire less so. Considering their age its kinda hard to pull up quick reliable data on them. Battlespire in particular was noted to have been full of technical issues, which is not surprising considering it was initially supposed to be an expansion for Daggerfall and was instead shifted into its own game.
Thats the problem though, that is the only reason you have given for there not to be. Of course there is a reason for them to be faction locked, that is what the devs want because its the game they want to make. But but the lore you say, well that has always taken a back seat to mechanics too. Why is this so hard for you to understand.
It isn't hard to understand. I never said I don't understand why it was done. It just didn't need to be done. It is an uneccessary restriction. It isn't that I hate the game, it isn't that it isn't realistic, it isn't because it is against lore any other bullshit reason you will try and assign to me. It is an uneccessary restriction and TES games to me are about freedom and that is why I don't like it. Full stop, end of point being made.
It isn't hard to understand. I never said I don't understand why it was done. It just didn't need to be done. It is an uneccessary restriction. It isn't that I hate the game, it isn't that it isn't realistic, it isn't because it is against lore any other bullshit reason you will try and assign to me. It is an uneccessary restriction and TES games to me are about freedom and that is why I don't like it. Full stop, end of point being made.
Of course it needed to be done. Every rule changes how the game is experienced and therefore played.
As for the rest, equating Tes with 'Murica is kinda disrespectful don't you think?
It isn't hard to understand. I never said I don't understand why it was done. It just didn't need to be done. It is an uneccessary restriction. It isn't that I hate the game, it isn't that it isn't realistic, it isn't because it is against lore any other bullshit reason you will try and assign to me. It is an uneccessary restriction and TES games to me are about freedom and that is why I don't like it. Full stop, end of point being made.
Of course it needed to be done. Every rule changes how the game is experienced and therefore played.
As for the rest, equating Tes with 'Murica is kinda disrespectful don't you think?
Looks like you missed Redguard, and to a lesser extent Battlespire.
Just for reference, how successful and well received were these 2 games?
those 2 games pretty much disappeared into obscurity due to them being totally rubbish.. and oddly enough, not being seen as being TES games, at least, not by TES fans
Looks like you missed Redguard, and to a lesser extent Battlespire.
Just for reference, how successful and well received were these 2 games?
those 2 games pretty much disappeared into obscurity due to them being totally rubbish.. and oddly enough, not being seen as being TES games, at least, not by TES fans
Redguard appears to have been highly rated, care to show something to the contrary?
When one side is stating their dislike for something and giving reasons why they dislike it you can't exactly counter it with "Its the rules and they are just whiney casuals and shouldn't be listened to".
Well, you can, it's just such a clear and obvious man of straw that the average reader doesn't give it much credit.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I like the idea of factions. Builds a sense of pride, makes me want to make more friends to annihilate those other "dirty" factions. Bring it on!
Me too. I don't care for the major use of phasing in the game, but I have no problem with the idea of factions. My only wish as far as factions goes, is that you could attack other factions' cities like in WoW. Now that was exciting.
OK why link this? Trying to act like you know something cool? Again you are missing the point. This isn't some somantic about if something is a rule or a mechanic.
Is faction locking race the ONLY way you can have faction locked territories?
NO.
So I think their choice is wrong as it removes freedom and exploration from the game which are Huge parts of the TES series.
Yep, there are all kind of rules. Lets look at some that are still on the books in some places.
These are just from Massachusettes.
All men must carry a rifle to church on Sunday.
It is illegal to go to bed without first having a full bath.
A woman can not be on top in sexual activities.
Tattooing and body piercing is illegal. (Repealed in 2000)
Children may smoke, but they may not purchase cigarettes.
Snoring is prohibited unless all bedroom windows are closed and securely locked.
Not all rules are good rules.
Thanks for the off topic rule list and for stating the obvious at the end, but here is the jist of the OP.
"Rules make games fun, without rules there is no game.."
Good grief, that completely flew over your head, didn't it. People aren't asking for a ruleless game, they are asking for different rules. Being able to explore the entire continent is a rule. Being able to choose the faction you want despite your race, is another rule. Not being forced to PvP at end game is yet another rule. All of these choices combine into the game's rule set.
And when you have a new set of rules you have another game. So the OP is asking the devs go back and make a different game? That seems like a silly move after this has been in the works for almost 6 years.
It's in development and the ones doing the requesting are elder scrolls fans asking for elder scrolls mechanics and game design. It's not like they're pulling it out of their collective asses and asking for stuff that has nothing to do with the franchise, but whatever.
Ok here is where you lose. Its 6 years in so the core mechanics are in and almost done. As for who asking for the changes, yes some of you are TES fans. But there are also TES fans like me who are very happy with the game they have made. I have been playing TES sinse they were 8 bit games. Yelling this dose not fit TES model is IMO a fools move for 2 reasons.
1. This is a 1000 years outside the games. What makes a single player game does not work in a MMO so things need to be added and taken away. TES is not a sandbox game its more themepark then anything. So they picked a awesome themepark game that is the gold standard for PvP. Every PvP game thats been made over the past 10 years and been compaired to DAoC.
2. MMOs need to grow or die. Mario started fixing pipes. When we got super mario brothers we didnt yell what the heck is the side scroller? Then Mario went 3D and is roaming the stars. Warcraft RTS became WoW and is nothing like its start, everyone plays a Hero, WHAT?!?!?! 2 Heros a map thats it, whats this crafting crap? Games grow and become more then their roots. Thats a good thing.
Here's where you lose. The developers have made recent changes to the game based on player feedback. They have shown a willingness to make changes for the benefit of the game and its target audience. There is every reason for them to continue down that path when the requests are based on franchise design philosophy.
Here's where you lose. The developers have made recent changes to the game based on player feedback. They have shown a willingness to make changes for the benefit of the game and its target audience. There is every reason for them to continue down that path when the requests are based on franchise design philosophy.
In defence of Nan's point we have no way of knowing why the changes were made. There is as much chance that their internal Alpha testing feedback prompted the change or even that this was a possible design choice just waiting to be released.
I hope they are willing to change things during the testing phase as that shows good project management and leadership and a flexible design is better then an inflexible one, especially if the inflexible design is not very well liked. But for all we know these forums or the cumilation of threads on all the forums out there might have had zero effect on their development.
So while I may not agree with his point, you can't claim a personal 'victory', only agree that it is good to see the change take place.
Here's where you lose. The developers have made recent changes to the game based on player feedback. They have shown a willingness to make changes for the benefit of the game and its target audience. There is every reason for them to continue down that path when the requests are based on franchise design philosophy.
In defence of Nan's point we have no way of knowing why the changes were made. There is as much chance that their internal Alpha testing feedback prompted the change or even that this was a possible design choice just waiting to be released.
I hope they are willing to change things during the testing phase as that shows good project management and leadership and a flexible design is better then an inflexible one, especially if the inflexible design is not very well liked. But for all we know these forums or the cumilation of threads on all the forums out there might have had zero effect on their development.
So while I may not agree with his point, you can't claim a personal 'victory', only agree that it is good to see the change take place.
He was being facetious and I was merely returning the favor. I was not claiming victory other than to point out the obvious flaws in his argument. If the developers are willing to make the changes, whether they coincide with audience feedback nor not, then his argument is pointless. I get tired of people acting as if feedback forces a developer's hands, when in fact it is an intelligence based decision that is made for many reasons along side player demand. Yes, they can and do make mistakes, but they are professionals who are looking to make money and all of their decisions are made according to their education and experience and financial feasibility and audience feedback.
He was being facetious and I was merely returning the favor. I was not claiming victory other than to point out the obvious flaws in his argument. If the developers are willing to make the changes, whether they coincide with audience feedback nor not, then his argument is pointless. I get tired of people acting as if feedback forces a developer's hands, when in fact it is an intelligence based decision that is made for many reasons along side player demand. Yes, they can and do make mistakes, but they are professionals who are looking to make money and all of their decisions are made according to their education and experience and financial feasibility and audience feedback.
I stand corrected, my appologies. And I do agree that there will be many reasons for potential change during the design process and anyone who thinks the original or core design can't and doesn't change isn't familiar with design or project work. The changes made between the original design brief and when the final product goes live will be many and the reasons for change will also be many. But the changes made will be to make sure the product has the widest appeal and is the best fit for their target audience. Things don't change on a whim.
Yep, there are all kind of rules. Lets look at some that are still on the books in some places.
These are just from Massachusettes.
All men must carry a rifle to church on Sunday.
It is illegal to go to bed without first having a full bath.
A woman can not be on top in sexual activities.
Tattooing and body piercing is illegal. (Repealed in 2000)
Children may smoke, but they may not purchase cigarettes.
Snoring is prohibited unless all bedroom windows are closed and securely locked.
Not all rules are good rules.
Thanks for the off topic rule list and for stating the obvious at the end, but here is the jist of the OP.
"Rules make games fun, without rules there is no game.."
Good grief, that completely flew over your head, didn't it. People aren't asking for a ruleless game, they are asking for different rules. Being able to explore the entire continent is a rule. Being able to choose the faction you want despite your race, is another rule. Not being forced to PvP at end game is yet another rule. All of these choices combine into the game's rule set.
And when you have a new set of rules you have another game. So the OP is asking the devs go back and make a different game? That seems like a silly move after this has been in the works for almost 6 years.
It's in development and the ones doing the requesting are elder scrolls fans asking for elder scrolls mechanics and game design. It's not like they're pulling it out of their collective asses and asking for stuff that has nothing to do with the franchise, but whatever.
Ok here is where you lose. Its 6 years in so the core mechanics are in and almost done. As for who asking for the changes, yes some of you are TES fans. But there are also TES fans like me who are very happy with the game they have made. I have been playing TES sinse they were 8 bit games. Yelling this dose not fit TES model is IMO a fools move for 2 reasons.
1. This is a 1000 years outside the games. What makes a single player game does not work in a MMO so things need to be added and taken away. TES is not a sandbox game its more themepark then anything. So they picked a awesome themepark game that is the gold standard for PvP. Every PvP game thats been made over the past 10 years and been compaired to DAoC.
2. MMOs need to grow or die. Mario started fixing pipes. When we got super mario brothers we didnt yell what the heck is the side scroller? Then Mario went 3D and is roaming the stars. Warcraft RTS became WoW and is nothing like its start, everyone plays a Hero, WHAT?!?!?! 2 Heros a map thats it, whats this crafting crap? Games grow and become more then their roots. Thats a good thing.
Here's where you lose. The developers have made recent changes to the game based on player feedback. They have shown a willingness to make changes for the benefit of the game and its target audience. There is every reason for them to continue down that path when the requests are based on franchise design philosophy.
Your right they did add changes but if you look close to the changes it did not touch the 3 faction war. Faction lock still in place and the 3 factions are not playing together. This is a change that works just fine for not breaking the core design of the game. Other another note, I also am part the target audience. TES fan and have been playing them from the day when they were 8 bit games. Want changes? Then make suggestions that wont break the core of the game it was designed from groud up on. Why? Because you have a much better chance of getting what you want. If its the core game you dont like then I suggest you find one you do.
I already asked if you want me to remove the quote. If you want it removed then just ask. The reason for the quote is to point out the flaw in the design of TESO not to in anyway insult you. If you want me to remove your name happy to do that, if you want it all gone happy to do that too.
But please, just ask first rather then follow suite and insult me in defence of someone else insulting me.
Comments
TES rpgs have always been open world sandbox. TES online wont be, therefore TES online will lack the very thing that made the TES series special. TES will not be special, it will be a generic themepark set on tamriel.
If you are ok with that, go ahead and play it, if you are not and feel it should be better, just complain and hope theyll change it down the line.
You said and I quote
Sounds like a "this is unrealistic" argument to me.
Looks like you missed Redguard, and to a lesser extent Battlespire.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
It isn't a realism argument. You WANT it to be about realism, you seem to be obsessed with it as it is all you focus on, no matter what people are talking about.
This is about having race locked faction when there is zero reason, realistic or otherwise, for them to be locked to a faction.
Now kindly go away TROLL as this is the 3rd time I have corrected your mistakes and assumptions and it is obvious you are not getting it on purpose just to get a rise.
Just for reference, how successful and well received were these 2 games?
Thats the problem though, that is the only reason you have given for there not to be. Of course there is a reason for them to be faction locked, that is what the devs want because its the game they want to make. But but the lore you say, well that has always taken a back seat to mechanics too. Why is this so hard for you to understand.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Redguard appears to have been well received, Battlespire less so. Considering their age its kinda hard to pull up quick reliable data on them. Battlespire in particular was noted to have been full of technical issues, which is not surprising considering it was initially supposed to be an expansion for Daggerfall and was instead shifted into its own game.
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
It isn't hard to understand. I never said I don't understand why it was done. It just didn't need to be done. It is an uneccessary restriction. It isn't that I hate the game, it isn't that it isn't realistic, it isn't because it is against lore any other bullshit reason you will try and assign to me. It is an uneccessary restriction and TES games to me are about freedom and that is why I don't like it. Full stop, end of point being made.
Of course it needed to be done. Every rule changes how the game is experienced and therefore played.
As for the rest, equating Tes with 'Murica is kinda disrespectful don't you think?
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
I don't agree. So move on.
And who or what is Murcia?
those 2 games pretty much disappeared into obscurity due to them being totally rubbish.. and oddly enough, not being seen as being TES games, at least, not by TES fans
http://www.raphkoster.com/2011/12/13/rules-versus-mechanics/
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=murica
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Redguard appears to have been highly rated, care to show something to the contrary?
http://www.allgame.com/game.php?id=14858&tab=review
http://www.gamespot.com/the-elder-scrolls-adventures-redguard/reviews/the-elder-scrolls-adventures-redguard-review-2532772/
http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Redguard:Review
This one being the worst, which by those standards is even then not so "terrible".
www.ign.com/games/the-elder-scrolls-adventures-redguard/pc-10576
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Well, you can, it's just such a clear and obvious man of straw that the average reader doesn't give it much credit.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Me too. I don't care for the major use of phasing in the game, but I have no problem with the idea of factions. My only wish as far as factions goes, is that you could attack other factions' cities like in WoW. Now that was exciting.
OK why link this? Trying to act like you know something cool? Again you are missing the point. This isn't some somantic about if something is a rule or a mechanic.
Is faction locking race the ONLY way you can have faction locked territories?
NO.
So I think their choice is wrong as it removes freedom and exploration from the game which are Huge parts of the TES series.
The argument isn't any deeper then that.
Still don't really get your point. Is it to insult me? Don't get your point.
Here's where you lose. The developers have made recent changes to the game based on player feedback. They have shown a willingness to make changes for the benefit of the game and its target audience. There is every reason for them to continue down that path when the requests are based on franchise design philosophy.
In defence of Nan's point we have no way of knowing why the changes were made. There is as much chance that their internal Alpha testing feedback prompted the change or even that this was a possible design choice just waiting to be released.
I hope they are willing to change things during the testing phase as that shows good project management and leadership and a flexible design is better then an inflexible one, especially if the inflexible design is not very well liked. But for all we know these forums or the cumilation of threads on all the forums out there might have had zero effect on their development.
So while I may not agree with his point, you can't claim a personal 'victory', only agree that it is good to see the change take place.
He was being facetious and I was merely returning the favor. I was not claiming victory other than to point out the obvious flaws in his argument. If the developers are willing to make the changes, whether they coincide with audience feedback nor not, then his argument is pointless. I get tired of people acting as if feedback forces a developer's hands, when in fact it is an intelligence based decision that is made for many reasons along side player demand. Yes, they can and do make mistakes, but they are professionals who are looking to make money and all of their decisions are made according to their education and experience and financial feasibility and audience feedback.
I stand corrected, my appologies. And I do agree that there will be many reasons for potential change during the design process and anyone who thinks the original or core design can't and doesn't change isn't familiar with design or project work. The changes made between the original design brief and when the final product goes live will be many and the reasons for change will also be many. But the changes made will be to make sure the product has the widest appeal and is the best fit for their target audience. Things don't change on a whim.
Your right they did add changes but if you look close to the changes it did not touch the 3 faction war. Faction lock still in place and the 3 factions are not playing together. This is a change that works just fine for not breaking the core design of the game. Other another note, I also am part the target audience. TES fan and have been playing them from the day when they were 8 bit games. Want changes? Then make suggestions that wont break the core of the game it was designed from groud up on. Why? Because you have a much better chance of getting what you want. If its the core game you dont like then I suggest you find one you do.
I already asked if you want me to remove the quote. If you want it removed then just ask. The reason for the quote is to point out the flaw in the design of TESO not to in anyway insult you. If you want me to remove your name happy to do that, if you want it all gone happy to do that too.
But please, just ask first rather then follow suite and insult me in defence of someone else insulting me.
see it this way: if you want to twink, you have 3 different areas and races, instead of grinding the same sht all over again. :>