I think a lot of comments in thread towards the OP are very immature and uncalled for.
The point the OP is trying to make, is that the game is breaking immersion. I thought it was quite lame when I could only explore the water in the game on a 2d plane. The game barely gives you the ability to jump. It's like the whole Z-axis in this game was an after thought. I've found better quality in free to play Korean grinders.
Agreed. The OP made some very good points about underwater interaction (least of all combat) and it seems to me that 90% of the responses give the vibe that they didn't even read the OP and stopped at the thread title. I personally do not enjoy underwater activities in games, but it doesn't mean I want them stricken as an option from the game entirely.
I think a lot of comments in thread towards the OP are very immature and uncalled for.
The point the OP is trying to make, is that the game is breaking immersion. I thought it was quite lame when I could only explore the water in the game on a 2d plane. The game barely gives you the ability to jump. It's like the whole Z-axis in this game was an after thought. I've found better quality in free to play Korean grinders.
Agreed. The OP made some very good points about underwater interaction (least of all combat) and it seems to me that 90% of the responses give the vibe that they didn't even read the OP and stopped at the thread title. I personally do not enjoy underwater activities in games, but it doesn't mean I want them stricken as an option from the game entirely.
I almost stopped reading when he said this issue is a deal breaker. The complaint is pedantic in the way he presents it.
Had he, for example, said that swimming and exploring underwater zones were the most enjoyable activities that he gets out of an MMO, then I could see how the lack of this feature would force him away. However, he stated that it's not something that he usually does. From the OP:
"Do I spend a lot of time underwater in games? No. Do I care much for underwater combat? No."
If he doesn't care much for underwater combat, and spends little time underwater in games that have that feature, why would this be a gamebreaker for him? It's presented that this is only reason the OP won't be buying this game, and I would call that an overreaction to a minor problem, and reeks of someone desperate to dislike the game.
I think a lot of comments in thread towards the OP are very immature and uncalled for.
The point the OP is trying to make, is that the game is breaking immersion. I thought it was quite lame when I could only explore the water in the game on a 2d plane. The game barely gives you the ability to jump. It's like the whole Z-axis in this game was an after thought. I've found better quality in free to play Korean grinders.
Agreed. The OP made some very good points about underwater interaction (least of all combat) and it seems to me that 90% of the responses give the vibe that they didn't even read the OP and stopped at the thread title. I personally do not enjoy underwater activities in games, but it doesn't mean I want them stricken as an option from the game entirely.
It's one thing to ask for these types of features it's another to create a stir over them, one way or the other. Granted it's not really the OP doing that, it's actually those replying to the thread that are more guilty of that, as they're over-stating the reach of the OP's gripe on both sides. At least that's the way I see it.
As for the OP's points I'm of the opinion that immersion is subjective at least when it comes to source. I really don't find it all that off putting. It had little effect on my immersion. As I said prior; SWG was a joke when thinking about implementing water physics. It never detracted from that game for me either, as they gave some thought to it in terms of gameplay. It put out fire dots and slowed movement.
As for ESO they took the time implementing impact with their water, they just didn't go as far as I'd like to see, still I commend the effort they did put in, which is more than many other titles I've seen.
It's a matter of balance, you have to look at the work they have done when considering what they haven't. They've done a lot in terms of immersion from what I saw. I'd have to see more to really get a good reading on that overall balance though.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
As someone probably said already... Underwater has never been good in MMOs (or even games in general?).
Even GW2 underwater is kinda boring while they obviously spent resources trying to make it fun - but no.
There is no way the guys at ESO could have made underwater fun and so I'd rather have them focusing their efforts on something else.
Made me think of this:
I'm sorry but just for a moment I want to put aside our differences and acknowledge that this is pretty funny....Made me laugh quite a bit. Well done sir!
Originally posted by rygard49 overreaction to a minor problem, and reeks of someone desperate to dislike the game.
The former may be arguable in a certain context, but the latter really makes no sense. I can't see much incentive to support such a motive. Who "wants to dislike" a game? I'd believe he's a paid off shill before I'd believe that. I'm thinking he was just trying to make an obscure point. Something along the lines of immersion being important. Which it is for many, but as I said in my last post, it's a matter of taking notice of the balance the devs achieved between game and immersive world.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I gave the beta a try this weekend and let me tell you: I actually found that they did a lot of things right in this game. Props to the devs for all the work they put in. I'm especially impressed how successful they've been in their implementation of mass pvp. I would go into more detail of all the little things I found that were well designed in this game except I found that they took out one often ignored feature that made me decide that this is NOT a world that I want to settle in: the inability to dive underwater.
I'm sorry but this is gamebreaking for me. Do I spend a lot of time underwater in games? No. Do I care much for underwater combat? No. Do I think you should be able to hold your breath alot and swim underwater forever? No (I actually like how it works in Skyrim and Oblivion). But it's just something you "do" in virtual worlds. It's a little interaction with the world that has existed for a long time now and I see no reason to take it out (especially when your gameworld has so much water). It's just as important to me as jumping or emotes; I don't spend much time doing either of those things but take it out and the gameworld just doesn't feel "right". There's so many kinds of adventures and exploration that a player can never have now because they chose to not allow underwater swimming in any form; very disappointing.
Now before this devolves into an argument about whether or not they intend to keep diving out of the game, I just want to point out that there have been numerous forums posts about this and there has been no indication that they intend to change this. On the contrary they actually use your inability to dive and fight underwater as a wall mechanic to zones i.e. you get eaten by slaughterfish that you can't fight back against if you try to swim too far out to sea. I'm assuming for all intents and purposes that this design decision is here to stay, and I cannot abide it.
no one cares if you buy or not . go back to your wow or gw2.
For others who can see deeper into ESO, its an amazing mmo.
I agree with OP that they should open up the water just as in TES games from Morrowind to Skyrim. For me, it is also a great reason to roll an Argonian with a racial underwater breathing benefit.
But I will still play the game, because there are too many other things I like about it. I do hope they do an underwater revamp in future, though.
I like somewhat a bit of realism in medieval style games, fromt he armour to the weps and buildings, GW2 underwater was crap, and even a mage in heavy robes would drown in the water lol, so plate aint happening either, i like that they did not make a GW2 gimmik.
Water combat a deal breaker, really? The worst part of every MMO I've ever played, water combat, intentionally left out of ESO, is why you wont be playing. Sorry I just cant help but laugh.
Some developers want to sell you a game. Some want to sell you a world. Some want to sell you a story. Some want to sell you activities.
The OP sounds like he wants a 'world' while ESO is a 'game.' Which is legit. However, what is not is assuming that developers that are selling a game are somehow 'doing you wrong' by making a game, and not what you personally want, a world. Feel free to not buy it, your reasons are your own. And their reasons are theirs.
But you are not telling them 'you won't get away with this!' or 'I won't pay for cut corners!' or anything else by not buying. All you are saying is 'I am not your intended audience.' And if their market projections were any good, they already knew that.
Good luck finding your world, OP.
I agree, I am not the intended audience. Yours is probably the most logical "against" argument I've heard. If it sounds like I'm saying they are "doing me wrong" it's because of the franchise. TES is a franchise that was literally built upon and succeeded by letting you "do more" . And that's exactly the kind of player I am, the kind that wants to "do more". I know that this is Zenimax and not Bethesda but this is why I am disappointed, because I expected more out of this franchise and out of this genre. That is the only reason I'm upset about it. I have no problem waiting and paying for games that cater to me though, I just felt obligated to give my opinion about this subject because of the franchise that this game is based upon.
Interesting interpretation.
I have always found the Elder Scrolls series to be nothing more than well made Open World RPGs, in the same vein as Fallout made by the same company and Fable. And RPGs have always been about stories. Theirs. Yours. Both. They sell lore, settings, characters, events in a tale.
Not worlds.
Funny you should claim it succeeded on 'doing more' when with each iteration, the series has both grown more popular and lets you do LESS. Teleporting. Acrobatics. Spell Forging. Did you expect those in ESO as well? Looting, clearing dungeons, crafting, these are all things it shares with other RPGs and offers little beyond it. Just 'more' of doing the same things.
They've been streamlining the experience, the game and have reached a larger audience because of it. They know what kind of audience they want. Skyrim barely justified going underwater at all. I am not at all surprised that going underwater ended up being one of those things Bethesda decided wasn't worth the development time or money for an Elder Scrolls game. You may have thought you were part of their audience, maybe you were once.
I have always found the Elder Scrolls series to be nothing more than well made Open World RPGs, in the same vein as Fallout made by the same company and Fable. And RPGs have always been about stories. Theirs. Yours. Both. They sell lore, settings, characters, events in a tale.
Not worlds.
Funny you should claim it succeeded on 'doing more' when with each iteration, the series has both grown more popular and lets you do LESS. Teleporting. Acrobatics. Spell Forging. Did you expect those in ESO as well? Looting, clearing dungeons, crafting, these are all things it shares with other RPGs and offers little beyond it. Just 'more' of doing the same things.
They've been streamlining the experience, the game and have reached a larger audience because of it. They know what kind of audience they want. Skyrim barely justified going underwater at all. I am not at all surprised that going underwater ended up being one of those things Bethesda decided wasn't worth the development time or money for an Elder Scrolls game. You may have thought you were part of their audience, maybe you were once.
But I don't think you are anymore.
Harsh, but you may have a point. Hopefully someone else will pick up their mantle if you are right. Otherwise I and players like me are screwed.
I found it suprising and bit bizzare to not include this feature. Especially since they have an race like Argonians which you can even spec talent points for improved swimming. (Whats the point if you can't go under the water?) Anyhow it won't stop me from playing this game because I am too much of an Elder Scrolls fan!
I'll admit it did bother me, but would never keep me from playing a game. I do wish it was part of the game as exploring and/or viewing scenery can be at it's best underwater. Being able to swim underwater just makes the world bigger, and thats never a bad thing (seems like a cheap way to do it too in some cases if you just add a deep lake/sea/etc.). They didn't add it, owell, I still I like the game enough to move past it.
I agree with the OP in spirit. I find it immersion breaking if basic things such as swimming, diving underwater, sitting on a stool, etc cannot be done. All the little things is what makes people fall in love with a game. the big stuff such as gear, raids, PvP ... fleeting as people who focus on those often move onto other games far more often.
Originally posted by seacow1gIt's a matter of principle. I'm voting with my wallet. I may not care about making much use of diving but them deciding that it's ok to allow less interaction in our virtual worlds is not something I want to support. It's disappointing to see how the voices of real MMORPG players have been drowned out in this sea of nouveau MMO recruits who don't really understand or care about the principles that brought this genre to life. And no I'm not being a conservative or with rose-tinted glasses. Unlike all the other arguments regarding old vs new, I can see merit in all kinds of perspectives, but when it comes to interacting with the world you can't convince me that less is better. An MMORPG is a virtual world for me; not being able to run, jump, sit, swim, dive, dance, walk, smile, laugh, wave, sleep etc. is not something I can settle on. Some interactions restrict gameplay and those I can accept being left out, but interactions that actually ENHANCE gameplay potential and whose absence actually cripples the potential of the game? I can't support it.Also from reading some of these posts it occurred to me that maybe the point of contention is actually a philosophical one about what an MMORPG is to me or you. For me it's a virtual world. I play MMORPG's for a breadth of experience and group play outside the scope of single player games. For me its that wide scope that justifies the demand for a subscription (since the game can essentially serve to replace all other games while I'm playing it). Without that wide scope I can't even see how the game can be worth a subscription (maybe that's why subscription MMO's are on the decline). If single player or local multiplayer games are offering me more breadth of play than the genre that DEFINED for me what I consider to be wide scope of gameplay then I'll just support those games instead. If you see the MMORPG genre as something less grand and don't care much about it realizing its potential then of course you wouldn't agree with me.
I completely agree with everything you wrote.Favorite part:"It's disappointing to see how the voices of real MMORPG players have been drowned out in this sea of nouveau MMO recruits who don't really understand or care about the principles that brought this genre to life. "
Hmmm. "[R]eal MMORPG players". You know what the "real MMORPG players" did? They paid money to play games they liked. They didn't create an art form, they didn't pave the way for future generations to do anything. They aren't any different from the people who paid to play Mario, except there are far fewer of them, and the people who played Mario are a lot less smug. They paid money to play video games. Which is exactly what the "nouveau MMO recruits" are doing.
You guys should have a sixty foot neon sign over your heads at all times that reads, "I AM A SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE* Because I paid money to play a video game that I liked"
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I have always found the Elder Scrolls series to be nothing more than well made Open World RPGs, in the same vein as Fallout made by the same company and Fable. And RPGs have always been about stories. Theirs. Yours. Both. They sell lore, settings, characters, events in a tale.
Not worlds.
Funny you should claim it succeeded on 'doing more' when with each iteration, the series has both grown more popular and lets you do LESS. Teleporting. Acrobatics. Spell Forging. Did you expect those in ESO as well? Looting, clearing dungeons, crafting, these are all things it shares with other RPGs and offers little beyond it. Just 'more' of doing the same things.
They've been streamlining the experience, the game and have reached a larger audience because of it. They know what kind of audience they want. Skyrim barely justified going underwater at all. I am not at all surprised that going underwater ended up being one of those things Bethesda decided wasn't worth the development time or money for an Elder Scrolls game. You may have thought you were part of their audience, maybe you were once.
But I don't think you are anymore.
Harsh, but you may have a point. Hopefully someone else will pick up their mantle if you are right. Otherwise I and players like me are screwed.
I doubt there's another player like you. That's because the rest of us don't sweat the really, really small stuff and agonise over it.
Yeah, sure, we can have underwater combat. Would it be immersion breaking if we were instantely able to switch and have a whole different set of items ala GW2. For some reason when you jump in you insta have a spear snorkle, rubby ducky etc?
First Point: Water combat is lame anyways. Its mainly people trying to get away in pvp and los to avoid getting hit
Its not as if this was ESO: The Jacque Cousteau chronicles. And its not as if, people are like, HEY! Lets go pvp in the water for fun! Its just a lame getaway function when you are getting beat down. Big deal, find another way to escape.
Second Point: They could add it later, so stop complaining.
Third Point: Just because the other games had it, doesn't mean this one has to. That's up for debate.
IMPORTANT: Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING. Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally. If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead. I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING. Thank you.
Comments
Agreed. The OP made some very good points about underwater interaction (least of all combat) and it seems to me that 90% of the responses give the vibe that they didn't even read the OP and stopped at the thread title. I personally do not enjoy underwater activities in games, but it doesn't mean I want them stricken as an option from the game entirely.
As someone probably said already... Underwater has never been good in MMOs (or even games in general?).
Even GW2 underwater is kinda boring while they obviously spent resources trying to make it fun - but no.
There is no way the guys at ESO could have made underwater fun and so I'd rather have them focusing their efforts on something else.
I almost stopped reading when he said this issue is a deal breaker. The complaint is pedantic in the way he presents it.
Had he, for example, said that swimming and exploring underwater zones were the most enjoyable activities that he gets out of an MMO, then I could see how the lack of this feature would force him away. However, he stated that it's not something that he usually does. From the OP:
"Do I spend a lot of time underwater in games? No. Do I care much for underwater combat? No."
If he doesn't care much for underwater combat, and spends little time underwater in games that have that feature, why would this be a gamebreaker for him? It's presented that this is only reason the OP won't be buying this game, and I would call that an overreaction to a minor problem, and reeks of someone desperate to dislike the game.
It's one thing to ask for these types of features it's another to create a stir over them, one way or the other. Granted it's not really the OP doing that, it's actually those replying to the thread that are more guilty of that, as they're over-stating the reach of the OP's gripe on both sides. At least that's the way I see it.
As for the OP's points I'm of the opinion that immersion is subjective at least when it comes to source. I really don't find it all that off putting. It had little effect on my immersion. As I said prior; SWG was a joke when thinking about implementing water physics. It never detracted from that game for me either, as they gave some thought to it in terms of gameplay. It put out fire dots and slowed movement.
As for ESO they took the time implementing impact with their water, they just didn't go as far as I'd like to see, still I commend the effort they did put in, which is more than many other titles I've seen.
It's a matter of balance, you have to look at the work they have done when considering what they haven't. They've done a lot in terms of immersion from what I saw. I'd have to see more to really get a good reading on that overall balance though.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Made me think of this:
I'm sorry but just for a moment I want to put aside our differences and acknowledge that this is pretty funny....Made me laugh quite a bit. Well done sir!
The former may be arguable in a certain context, but the latter really makes no sense. I can't see much incentive to support such a motive. Who "wants to dislike" a game? I'd believe he's a paid off shill before I'd believe that. I'm thinking he was just trying to make an obscure point. Something along the lines of immersion being important. Which it is for many, but as I said in my last post, it's a matter of taking notice of the balance the devs achieved between game and immersive world.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
no one cares if you buy or not . go back to your wow or gw2.
For others who can see deeper into ESO, its an amazing mmo.
Totally agree
<InvalidTag type="text/javascript" src="http://www.gamebreaker.tv/cce/e.js"></script><div class="cce_pane" content-slug="which-world-of-warcraft-villain-are-you" ctype="quiz" d="http://www.gamebreaker.tv"></div>;
I'm still waiting for overwater combat. 650 MMO games in this site and not one of them have overwater combat. I’m fuming.
I agree with OP that they should open up the water just as in TES games from Morrowind to Skyrim. For me, it is also a great reason to roll an Argonian with a racial underwater breathing benefit.
But I will still play the game, because there are too many other things I like about it. I do hope they do an underwater revamp in future, though.
In Oblivion with a high acrobatics skill you could jump on the surface of water. But, you know...mmo...too hard 'n stuff...
Well there was PotBS...
Interesting interpretation.
I have always found the Elder Scrolls series to be nothing more than well made Open World RPGs, in the same vein as Fallout made by the same company and Fable. And RPGs have always been about stories. Theirs. Yours. Both. They sell lore, settings, characters, events in a tale.
Not worlds.
Funny you should claim it succeeded on 'doing more' when with each iteration, the series has both grown more popular and lets you do LESS. Teleporting. Acrobatics. Spell Forging. Did you expect those in ESO as well? Looting, clearing dungeons, crafting, these are all things it shares with other RPGs and offers little beyond it. Just 'more' of doing the same things.
They've been streamlining the experience, the game and have reached a larger audience because of it. They know what kind of audience they want. Skyrim barely justified going underwater at all. I am not at all surprised that going underwater ended up being one of those things Bethesda decided wasn't worth the development time or money for an Elder Scrolls game. You may have thought you were part of their audience, maybe you were once.
But I don't think you are anymore.
Harsh, but you may have a point. Hopefully someone else will pick up their mantle if you are right. Otherwise I and players like me are screwed.
Hmmm. "[R]eal MMORPG players". You know what the "real MMORPG players" did? They paid money to play games they liked. They didn't create an art form, they didn't pave the way for future generations to do anything. They aren't any different from the people who paid to play Mario, except there are far fewer of them, and the people who played Mario are a lot less smug. They paid money to play video games. Which is exactly what the "nouveau MMO recruits" are doing.
You guys should have a sixty foot neon sign over your heads at all times that reads,
"I AM A SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE*
Because I paid money to play a video game that I liked"
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I doubt there's another player like you. That's because the rest of us don't sweat the really, really small stuff and agonise over it.
O_o o_O
No Underwater Swimming Or Combat? Ya...Definitely Not Buying This
So you could say you where out of your depth here.......
Yeah, sure, we can have underwater combat. Would it be immersion breaking if we were instantely able to switch and have a whole different set of items ala GW2. For some reason when you jump in you insta have a spear snorkle, rubby ducky etc?
First Point: Water combat is lame anyways. Its mainly people trying to get away in pvp and los to avoid getting hit
Its not as if this was ESO: The Jacque Cousteau chronicles. And its not as if, people are like, HEY! Lets go pvp in the water for fun! Its just a lame getaway function when you are getting beat down. Big deal, find another way to escape.
Second Point: They could add it later, so stop complaining.
Third Point: Just because the other games had it, doesn't mean this one has to. That's up for debate.