It's safe to say the people who dismiss it are the people actually playing the game because it doesn't bother them.
I think *many* people who aren't playing the game don't dismiss that argument... I can tell you for certain that I am not playing the game specifically because it snagged the Elder Scrolls IP and decided to make a game so unlike the IP its based off of that it's borderline stupid.
They might as well have called it World of Scrollcraft for how little it has to do with an Elder Scrolls experience.
Originally posted by Sajman01 I also agree with you OP.
But I will say that there are people out there that can only play 1 game at a time. So for fans of ES and MMOs this is like a holy grail to them. Which there's nothing with that.
But for people like you and me, we can play more than 1 game at a time. So playing Skyrim and another choice MMO is a better option than ESO.
I can play more then one game, but you are right, for those of us who love MMO and ES this game is a dream come true!
That's not to say that we shouldn't be pushing zenimax to go more Skyrim then PVP. I want my single player ES to be 95% of ESO, and I feel I'm a majority in game when I say that.
Anyone who bought the game with the presumption that it was an Elder Scrolls game is justified if the game didn't meet their expectations. The expectations didn't magically appear out of thin air; the expectations arose out of the marketing preceding the release of the game.
The game was hyped... a lot. When issues with the game started surfacing from the Beta team after the NDA was pulled, the hype increased dramatically. The number of shils in all the various forums was, IMHO, unprecedented; I haven't seen this many shils since Vanguard: SoH. The amount of tap-dancing around bugs and design issues by the talking heads of ZOS led a lot of people to believe that the game was more than it turned out to be.
Right before release, when lots of pre-orders were being cancelled as a result of the marketing disaster that the first open Beta caused, everyone was being reassured that ESO was "the second coming". It was Elder Scrolls; it was DAoC reborn; it was everything we all wanted, a skill-based game where crafting produced the best items, etc., etc., etc.
Not.
Hype can be a very bad thing when the product doesn't match up with the marketing. If people bought the game on the basis of what they perceive to be a lot of false promises, then they are perfectly justified in leaving, whatever the reason.
So, "it isn't like Skyrim" is a perfectly valid argument if people bought the game because they thought it was.
ZOS' marketing team is a bunch of amateurs. When you lie to people, you will be found out and the reaction is inevitably anger and lost customers.
Well in Skyrim I open console and ..nope no one talking to me. I go to ESO look in chat.. yeap still no one talking or to me. Very much like skyrim haha
Elder Scrolls is an IP and a lore setting.. it is not a gameplay description or a sub genre of RPGs. Battlespire and Redguard didn't play like the 'main' elder scrolls games either, even less so than ESO. There's not much else to discuss.
If you think Elder Scrolls automatically means a non-linear themepark RPG then you're just plain misinformed. I mean, traditional ES games are single player (except of Battlespire) so why aren't these Skyrim wannabes complaining that it has multiplayer? Damn right it's not like Skyrim, Skyrim was single player!
It's not TESVI, that's still on it's way.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Originally posted by Gravehill I agree 100%. "Well yeah it isn't as good as Skyrim, but it's an MMO so it has to cut corners!!!!!!!"...well then why not go play Skyrim? That argument is completely ridiculous
Hardly. They wanted the ES IP. Then proceeded to make a game that does not contain the heart and soul of that IP. Not just Skyrim either. They made a DAOC/GW2 replacement in an ES Skin, and thought the ES title would carry that as long as it maintained a minimum of tie ins. But totally lost what makes ES, "ES".
That's exactly what I was getting at. I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not >.>
Elder Scrolls is an IP and a lore setting.. it is not a gameplay description or a sub genre of RPGs. Battlespire and Redguard didn't play like the 'main' elder scrolls games either, even less so than ESO. There's not much else to discuss.
If you think Elder Scrolls automatically means a non-linear themepark RPG then you're just plain misinformed.
Elder Scrolls is whatever the individuals experience of it is and since the vast majority of people that have played ES games came in with the last 3 games, the very mention of the first few being different is rather crazy.
That's like saying that a GTA online game doesn't need to be like the last few because the first was a top-down view non-3D game.
And your ending comment says it all, you and only your opinion of the IP matters when in fact its a personal experience that cannot be overridden by your beliefs.
This is the kind of crap that comes up when a company uses an existing IP, you have to deal with the fans and their expectations.
Elder Scrolls is an IP and a lore setting.. it is not a gameplay description or a sub genre of RPGs. Battlespire and Redguard didn't play like the 'main' elder scrolls games either, even less so than ESO. There's not much else to discuss.
If you think Elder Scrolls automatically means a non-linear themepark RPG then you're just plain misinformed. I mean, traditional ES games are single player (except of Battlespire) so why aren't these Skyrim wannabes complaining that it has multiplayer? Damn right it's not like Skyrim, Skyrim was single player!
It's not TESVI, that's still on it's way.
When Square-Enix puts out a Final Fantasy game, whether its an MMO or a single player fantasy RPG, you still expect a Final Fantasy experience. The reason Final Fantasy XI and the relaunch of Final Fantasy XIV were so successful is because they do just that: give a Final Fantasy experience. It's also the reason FFXIV initially bombed. It didn't give a Final Fantasy experience - it gave some confused mess between several genres.
Elder Scrolls Online isn't giving an Elder Scrolls experience: it's giving some confused mess of several different genres. That's the problem. In Zenimax's defense, an Elder Scrolls experience is basically the polar opposite of an MMO, so they had their work cut out for them... but they didn't come even remotely close enough IMHO.
They took some of the best IP in the market and made a game that wasn't quite crap. That isn't good enough for me and it's not good enough for people who expected an Elder Scrolls experience.
It depends on how you paly Skyrim. I play both games the same way. I like to quest. In both games, I was lead to a starting point. Given some quests, then I opened the map and just ran around looking for quests.
The difference for me is that ESO is limited to just one zone at a time. But I play that zone by choosing a direction on the map, heading that way and finding quests. I complete them and move on. Often times finding other things like caves, crafting stations, boss spots and so on. I don't just follow each quest one at a time. I do end up doing higher and lower level quests at random, but it is more fun that way.
There is no reason OP to just connect the dots given to you. You can just quest in any order you want. It makes it feel closer to Skyrim for me because that is how I played Skyrim. I got a quest, went to complete it and found other things along the way. Both games are similar IMO if you play it the same.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them? R.A.Salvatore
Originally posted by Gravehill I agree 100%. "Well yeah it isn't as good as Skyrim, but it's an MMO so it has to cut corners!!!!!!!"...well then why not go play Skyrim? That argument is completely ridiculous
Hardly. They wanted the ES IP. Then proceeded to make a game that does not contain the heart and soul of that IP. Not just Skyrim either. They made a DAOC/GW2 replacement in an ES Skin, and thought the ES title would carry that as long as it maintained a minimum of tie ins. But totally lost what makes ES, "ES".
That's exactly what I was getting at. I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not >.>
You know, TESO was being developed before Skyrim. What would you all be saying if Skyrim was not released before ESO?
For one, ESO graphics would have been the best in the series.
Voice overs on every character would still be there.
Questing and adventuring would still be there, and you would have noticed all the Morrowind and Oblivion additions to the game.
I think its unfair to hold up Skyrim as a benchmark for ESO, rather it should be ESO being held up as a benchmark for other MMO's that says "guess what, you can be different then every other wow clone" and still succedd, and I think it holds up just as well as LOTRO did when it was released.
Because it's not called Skyrim online. And very few people said, "Skyrim isn't like Oblivion." or "Oblivion isn't like Morrowind." Even though they're all within the same lore IP, they're all different.
ESO is what Zenimax came up with as an online version of Elder Scrolls. If you don't like it, that's fine, you don't have to like it. But Skyrim has nothing to do with it. Just like when ES V eventually comes out, Skyrim will have nothing to do with that either. It will, once again, be it's own game.
The reason people keep bringing up Skyrim is because it's the first and only ES game they've played. Each ES game has been different, and ESO happens to be the online game of the IP, nothing more, nothing less.
There are fans of Morrowind that believe Oblivion and Skyrim are trendy populist trash. What would a Skyrim fan think of that?
Let me help you understand something: "So when they announced an Elder Scrolls MMO, this is exactly what we wanted, we wanted the world to live in, to be this big free open space like the SP games."
It doesn't matter what you wanted. You didn't make the game.
If you like it, fine.
If you hate it, fine.
Either way, it wasn't going to be Skyrim Online.
Speaking as someone who has played ES games since Daggerfall, I agree with this 100%. Morrowind is my favorite. Oblivion was ok. Skyrim was also ok, it just somehow got super popular as it was more readily picked up by the console gamers than the previous 2 were. So far, I'm enjoying ESO, warts (and there are plenty) and all.
Elder Scrolls is an IP and a lore setting.. it is not a gameplay description or a sub genre of RPGs. Battlespire and Redguard didn't play like the 'main' elder scrolls games either, even less so than ESO. There's not much else to discuss.
If you think Elder Scrolls automatically means a non-linear themepark RPG then you're just plain misinformed. I mean, traditional ES games are single player (except of Battlespire) so why aren't these Skyrim wannabes complaining that it has multiplayer? Damn right it's not like Skyrim, Skyrim was single player!
It's not TESVI, that's still on it's way.
When Square-Enix puts out a Final Fantasy game, whether its an MMO or a single player fantasy RPG, you still expect a Final Fantasy experience. The reason Final Fantasy XI and the relaunch of Final Fantasy XIV were so successful is because they do just that: give a Final Fantasy experience. It's also the reason FFXIV initially bombed. It didn't give a Final Fantasy experience - it gave some confused mess between several genres.
Elder Scrolls Online isn't giving an Elder Scrolls experience: it's giving some confused mess of several different genres. That's the problem. In Zenimax's defense, an Elder Scrolls experience is basically the polar opposite of an MMO, so they had their work cut out for them... but they didn't come even remotely close enough IMHO.
They took some of the best IP in the market and made a game that wasn't quite crap. That isn't good enough for me and it's not good enough for people who expected an Elder Scrolls experience.
I don't really see FFXI and/or XIV as being good examples of how mmorpgs should be similar to their single player counterparts; I see it as the opposite even. Those games (FFXI especially) are so totally different from the single player FF titles that all you managed to do with that comparison was strengthen his point. FFXI was a solely group-dependant grinder and FFXIV is pretty much just WoW with an anime skin over it (yeah, that's an exaggeration, but it shares many of the same conventions.)
In other words, ESO is as much an ES game as FFXI (or XIV) is a FF game -- even more so, in my opinion.
Why would people compare an Elder Scrolls game to another Elder Scrolls game... I wonder.
They picked the same name, so people are entitled to compare it with other Elder Scrolls titles they know of (including having expectations that come of the said comparison).
Because Mmorpgs and single player Rpgs are close but not the same genre.
It doesn't take much thinking to realize gameplay and mechanics can't be the same.
The funny thing is that FF XIV (or XI for the matter) didn't have all this trouble of unrealistic expectations, based on single player games of the franchise, neither with fans or so called "professional" critics.
Originally posted by Tbau Awe, why did you edit out the last part I was going to reply to! And to it, Yes, if they are still going to call it that even though it no longer is, I would call them out on it. If you are going to call your product a peperoni pizza and not have peperoni, cheese and pizza sauce on it...call it something else, because it isn't a peperoni pizza!
Good point, but did they really push TESO the same way they pushed Skyrim when all we knew was Oblivion? I'm just wondering if expectations for TESO to be Skyrim Online are overblown....
Cheers,
insanex
first, FYI, from my own perspective I am not comparing it to Skyrim but I know that's the context of the thread.
second, yes they did and even said at one point that TESO is going to be a multi-player TES game and since Skyrim is the latest, most popular and is on everyone mind. Its a given. I actually cringed when TESO was announced because its rare that an existing IP every meets up to expectations by fans of that IP and shouldn't really even be tried.
looking forward to your reply, will be back in an hour, going to go watch last nights Game of Thrones!
Sorry for replying so late! I had just left work after my post yesterday.
I guess I'm just wondering what specifically is missing that if they had included would merit calling TESO a proper TES game. What parts and pieces are are broken or gone that take away from that unmistakable TES/Skyrim and make TESO what I called "bland"? Could they fix it at this point and make it live up to those standards?
You know, TESO was being developed before Skyrim. What would you all be saying if Skyrim was not released before ESO?
For one, ESO graphics would have been the best in the series.
Voice overs on every character would still be there.
Questing and adventuring would still be there, and you would have noticed all the Morrowind and Oblivion additions to the game.
I think its unfair to hold up Skyrim as a benchmark for ESO, rather it should be ESO being held up as a benchmark for other MMO's that says "guess what, you can be different then every other wow clone" and still succedd, and I think it holds up just as well as LOTRO did when it was released.
I like your thoughts on this. That makes a lot of sense to me.
It depends on how you paly Skyrim. I play both games the same way. I like to quest. In both games, I was lead to a starting point. Given some quests, then I opened the map and just ran around looking for quests.
The difference for me is that ESO is limited to just one zone at a time. But I play that zone by choosing a direction on the map, heading that way and finding quests. I complete them and move on. Often times finding other things like caves, crafting stations, boss spots and so on. I don't just follow each quest one at a time. I do end up doing higher and lower level quests at random, but it is more fun that way.
There is no reason OP to just connect the dots given to you. You can just quest in any order you want. It makes it feel closer to Skyrim for me because that is how I played Skyrim. I got a quest, went to complete it and found other things along the way. Both games are similar IMO if you play it the same.
That's very true - you can play Skyrim from quest to quest - but I think many Skyrim fans played it the more "open-world" way. I, for one took off in a completely different direction after I left the starter town. I visited a vacant dragon's perch, snagged a bunch of fast travel locations and even ran a few dungeons - ones I knew had quests that I wasn't on yet - just for the heck of it. Skyrim got something very, very right that many games have failed at: true, gratifying exploration. I think that is the crux for many TES fans who dislike or are disappointed with TESO.
Primary skills start higher and are much easier to level than Major, Minor, or Misc. It is flatly untrue that you could level whatever you wanted to however you wanted to. When you advance enough of the Primary / Major skills you leveled up and your stats went up depending on what category the skills were. Ditto Morrowind, Ditto Oblivion. Daggerfall let you trade off character power against difficulty of leveling, which was removed in Morrowind. There has been a steady winnowing of skills during the series, and stats were dropped in Skyrim (e.g. before you had endurance, etc. which modified health, stamina, magica...) The biggest loss was the ability to create custom spells. Alchemy was very freeform; ESO is close to Morrowind there (poisons came after that.)
In Skyrim you leveled up with a broader pool of skills, but the underlying idea was the same - that your character level was important.
In ESO your skills go up both as you practice things and as a reward for completing quests (books are a secondary source of skillups in all of them.)
This is far, far from some revolutionary difference - the difference from Skyrim to the precursors is actually a lot bigger than the change from ESO to Skyrim.
So people asking for an experience without leveling are asking for something that has never been true in any Elder Scrolls game.
And the pure skillup system had documented pathologies - as in, you had to go and repetitively do silly things to level skills up, like letting a mudcrab hit you over and over to level up armor. ES games had laughably broken economies and are much easier than other single player games because you can create god mode armor, weapons, etc. unless you house-rule things.
So, whatever the "not an Elder Scrolls" crowd is talking about, it isn't actual Elder Scrolls games. And some of the missing things are absolutely improvements (ESO is much more challenging and balanced than any of the SP games ever were, for example.)
ESO is not close to Morrowind. In Morrowind you could level up any skill in the game and it really didn't matter that much which ones you chose as minor and which you chose as major as you could eventually have every single skill. The only difference is that you dinged levels only by leveling up your minor/major skills. But then you could level up indefinitely in Morrowind lol.
In Morrowind you had a HUGE number of spells, ESO doesn't even have a fraction of them. If I want to make a fire mage in ESO, ooh wait, the sorceror doesn't even have fire spells!
ES games can't have broken economies cause they are singleplayer games lol. Are you getting confused or something?
What exactly is challenging about ESO? Not falling asleep because of the boring combat/quests etc.?
People were asking for skill based progression without classes not level-less system. Besides in Elder Scrolls game even at low levels you could travel pretty much anywhere. Especially true in Oblivion where they had scaling.
Another huge disappointment is all the zoning in ESO. There are waaaay too many loading screens. Why didn't they do a seamless world? World of Warcraft was a seamless world in 2004 with only 1 loading screen, when you were travelling between continents or teleporting.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Interesting thread even if I do not play TESO. I have played many of the other ES games though. There are definitely some things that need changing to make a successful MMORPG out of ES games. When is an MMO a successful port of a single player game?
I am thinking of course of another MMORPG whose game series started out as single player and that is ToR. Is that a successful KoToR-like game? Does it feel like KoToR? If yes, then how is it different from TESO with respect to the single player ES games? If you felt that ToR is faithful to the KoToR series, then why? There is really little similarity in many ways. For example KoToR's game mechanics are based on the D20 system and ToR's is more traditionally MMOish. Yet I have come across so many players saying that ToR is just like the MMO version of KoToR.
Even though I have not played TESO, what I have read about it makes me think that it actually sounds like a proper ES game to be honest. Of course some things would have to be changed to make it a playable MMORPG, such as the UI. That does not mean that a Skyrim fan should automatically like TESO... I like the ES series but hated Oblivion and did not finish playing it. Even though Skyrim is pretty different, I still like it along with Daggerfall and Morrowind.
I think that games can play differently and still be from the same "universe", just like I find ToR and KoToR to be cut from the same cloth despite many, many differences.
And no, not planning to play TESO really. Unlike a lot of people posting in this thread, I actually like the single player ES games a lot because I am the hero(ine) of the epic story and I can't really be that in an MMORPG.
ESO is not close to Morrowind. In Morrowind you could level up any skill in the game and it really didn't matter that much which ones you chose as minor and which you chose as major as you could eventually have every single skill. The only difference is that you dinged levels only by leveling up your minor/major skills. But then you could level up indefinitely in Morrowind lol.
In Morrowind you had a HUGE number of spells, ESO doesn't even have a fraction of them. If I want to make a fire mage in ESO, ooh wait, the sorceror doesn't even have fire spells!
ES games can't have broken economies cause they are singleplayer games lol. Are you getting confused or something?
What exactly is challenging about ESO? Not falling asleep because of the boring combat/quests etc.?
People were asking for skill based progression without classes not level-less system. Besides in Elder Scrolls game even at low levels you could travel pretty much anywhere. Especially true in Oblivion where they had scaling.
Another huge disappointment is all the zoning in ESO. There are waaaay too many loading screens. Why didn't they do a seamless world? World of Warcraft was a seamless world in 2004 with only 1 loading screen, when you were travelling between continents or teleporting.
This is a huge disappointment in most recent games I have tried and I would love to know the answer as well. TESO is not the only one.
It depends on how you paly Skyrim. I play both games the same way. I like to quest. In both games, I was lead to a starting point. Given some quests, then I opened the map and just ran around looking for quests.
The difference for me is that ESO is limited to just one zone at a time. But I play that zone by choosing a direction on the map, heading that way and finding quests. I complete them and move on. Often times finding other things like caves, crafting stations, boss spots and so on. I don't just follow each quest one at a time. I do end up doing higher and lower level quests at random, but it is more fun that way.
There is no reason OP to just connect the dots given to you. You can just quest in any order you want. It makes it feel closer to Skyrim for me because that is how I played Skyrim. I got a quest, went to complete it and found other things along the way. Both games are similar IMO if you play it the same.
Same here. I often lose track of where I was going if I am on a quest, perhaps I see something interesting in the background and want to see what it is even if it's in the oposite direction I was going. Overall just like other ES games.
Main problem I think many experiance is that a certain type of player for some reason wants to pursuit that quest and will not let anything get in the way.
I even see people saying they are ES fan's yet when you read their complaints it's like they let ESO hold their hands instead of playing it like they would play other ES games. I know even if you have 100 people all playing a ES game you still will notice that out of those 100 people most play the game very differently.
Same with ESO, I play how I choose, my highest toon lvl 12 Dragonknight when I looked at my journal I saw having quests ranging from lvl 8 till lvl 15. So not really sure how people can be zoned locked when it's obvious you can travel anywhere and luckely the game doesn't scale else you could travel every where and fight everything. Atleast this way I still have plenty to look forward to if I get beating by something higher leveled then me.
Comments
It's safe to say the people who dismiss it are the people actually playing the game because it doesn't bother them.
I think *many* people who aren't playing the game don't dismiss that argument... I can tell you for certain that I am not playing the game specifically because it snagged the Elder Scrolls IP and decided to make a game so unlike the IP its based off of that it's borderline stupid.
They might as well have called it World of Scrollcraft for how little it has to do with an Elder Scrolls experience.
I can play more then one game, but you are right, for those of us who love MMO and ES this game is a dream come true!
That's not to say that we shouldn't be pushing zenimax to go more Skyrim then PVP. I want my single player ES to be 95% of ESO, and I feel I'm a majority in game when I say that.
Anyone who bought the game with the presumption that it was an Elder Scrolls game is justified if the game didn't meet their expectations. The expectations didn't magically appear out of thin air; the expectations arose out of the marketing preceding the release of the game.
The game was hyped... a lot. When issues with the game started surfacing from the Beta team after the NDA was pulled, the hype increased dramatically. The number of shils in all the various forums was, IMHO, unprecedented; I haven't seen this many shils since Vanguard: SoH. The amount of tap-dancing around bugs and design issues by the talking heads of ZOS led a lot of people to believe that the game was more than it turned out to be.
Right before release, when lots of pre-orders were being cancelled as a result of the marketing disaster that the first open Beta caused, everyone was being reassured that ESO was "the second coming". It was Elder Scrolls; it was DAoC reborn; it was everything we all wanted, a skill-based game where crafting produced the best items, etc., etc., etc.
Not.
Hype can be a very bad thing when the product doesn't match up with the marketing. If people bought the game on the basis of what they perceive to be a lot of false promises, then they are perfectly justified in leaving, whatever the reason.
So, "it isn't like Skyrim" is a perfectly valid argument if people bought the game because they thought it was.
ZOS' marketing team is a bunch of amateurs. When you lie to people, you will be found out and the reaction is inevitably anger and lost customers.
"not like skyrim"
Well in Skyrim I open console and ..nope no one talking to me. I go to ESO look in chat.. yeap still no one talking or to me. Very much like skyrim haha
Elder Scrolls is an IP and a lore setting.. it is not a gameplay description or a sub genre of RPGs. Battlespire and Redguard didn't play like the 'main' elder scrolls games either, even less so than ESO. There's not much else to discuss.
If you think Elder Scrolls automatically means a non-linear themepark RPG then you're just plain misinformed. I mean, traditional ES games are single player (except of Battlespire) so why aren't these Skyrim wannabes complaining that it has multiplayer? Damn right it's not like Skyrim, Skyrim was single player!
It's not TESVI, that's still on it's way.
We'll just leave it that I misunderstood you.
.......sorry
Elder Scrolls is whatever the individuals experience of it is and since the vast majority of people that have played ES games came in with the last 3 games, the very mention of the first few being different is rather crazy.
That's like saying that a GTA online game doesn't need to be like the last few because the first was a top-down view non-3D game.
And your ending comment says it all, you and only your opinion of the IP matters when in fact its a personal experience that cannot be overridden by your beliefs.
This is the kind of crap that comes up when a company uses an existing IP, you have to deal with the fans and their expectations.
When Square-Enix puts out a Final Fantasy game, whether its an MMO or a single player fantasy RPG, you still expect a Final Fantasy experience. The reason Final Fantasy XI and the relaunch of Final Fantasy XIV were so successful is because they do just that: give a Final Fantasy experience. It's also the reason FFXIV initially bombed. It didn't give a Final Fantasy experience - it gave some confused mess between several genres.
Elder Scrolls Online isn't giving an Elder Scrolls experience: it's giving some confused mess of several different genres. That's the problem. In Zenimax's defense, an Elder Scrolls experience is basically the polar opposite of an MMO, so they had their work cut out for them... but they didn't come even remotely close enough IMHO.
They took some of the best IP in the market and made a game that wasn't quite crap. That isn't good enough for me and it's not good enough for people who expected an Elder Scrolls experience.
It depends on how you paly Skyrim. I play both games the same way. I like to quest. In both games, I was lead to a starting point. Given some quests, then I opened the map and just ran around looking for quests.
The difference for me is that ESO is limited to just one zone at a time. But I play that zone by choosing a direction on the map, heading that way and finding quests. I complete them and move on. Often times finding other things like caves, crafting stations, boss spots and so on. I don't just follow each quest one at a time. I do end up doing higher and lower level quests at random, but it is more fun that way.
There is no reason OP to just connect the dots given to you. You can just quest in any order you want. It makes it feel closer to Skyrim for me because that is how I played Skyrim. I got a quest, went to complete it and found other things along the way. Both games are similar IMO if you play it the same.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
No problem :P my post was worded awkwardly
You know, TESO was being developed before Skyrim. What would you all be saying if Skyrim was not released before ESO?
For one, ESO graphics would have been the best in the series.
Voice overs on every character would still be there.
Questing and adventuring would still be there, and you would have noticed all the Morrowind and Oblivion additions to the game.
I think its unfair to hold up Skyrim as a benchmark for ESO, rather it should be ESO being held up as a benchmark for other MMO's that says "guess what, you can be different then every other wow clone" and still succedd, and I think it holds up just as well as LOTRO did when it was released.
Speaking as someone who has played ES games since Daggerfall, I agree with this 100%. Morrowind is my favorite. Oblivion was ok. Skyrim was also ok, it just somehow got super popular as it was more readily picked up by the console gamers than the previous 2 were. So far, I'm enjoying ESO, warts (and there are plenty) and all.
When it comes to ES .. Morrowind comes to mind first for me, so ESO in no way suggested to me it was an online version of Skyrim
^Most honest..at least to me.
When it comes to ES.....Skyrim is closest to an MMO for me. But From Morrowind on could be considered an MMO if they did it right.
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
I don't really see FFXI and/or XIV as being good examples of how mmorpgs should be similar to their single player counterparts; I see it as the opposite even. Those games (FFXI especially) are so totally different from the single player FF titles that all you managed to do with that comparison was strengthen his point. FFXI was a solely group-dependant grinder and FFXIV is pretty much just WoW with an anime skin over it (yeah, that's an exaggeration, but it shares many of the same conventions.)
In other words, ESO is as much an ES game as FFXI (or XIV) is a FF game -- even more so, in my opinion.
Why would people compare an Elder Scrolls game to another Elder Scrolls game... I wonder.
They picked the same name, so people are entitled to compare it with other Elder Scrolls titles they know of (including having expectations that come of the said comparison).
Likewise
Because Mmorpgs and single player Rpgs are close but not the same genre.
It doesn't take much thinking to realize gameplay and mechanics can't be the same.
The funny thing is that FF XIV (or XI for the matter) didn't have all this trouble of unrealistic expectations, based on single player games of the franchise, neither with fans or so called "professional" critics.
Edit: grammar.
Sorry for replying so late! I had just left work after my post yesterday.
I guess I'm just wondering what specifically is missing that if they had included would merit calling TESO a proper TES game. What parts and pieces are are broken or gone that take away from that unmistakable TES/Skyrim and make TESO what I called "bland"? Could they fix it at this point and make it live up to those standards?
Cheers,
insanex
I like your thoughts on this. That makes a lot of sense to me.
Cheers,
insanex
That's very true - you can play Skyrim from quest to quest - but I think many Skyrim fans played it the more "open-world" way. I, for one took off in a completely different direction after I left the starter town. I visited a vacant dragon's perch, snagged a bunch of fast travel locations and even ran a few dungeons - ones I knew had quests that I wasn't on yet - just for the heck of it. Skyrim got something very, very right that many games have failed at: true, gratifying exploration. I think that is the crux for many TES fans who dislike or are disappointed with TESO.
Cheers,
insanex
ESO is not close to Morrowind. In Morrowind you could level up any skill in the game and it really didn't matter that much which ones you chose as minor and which you chose as major as you could eventually have every single skill. The only difference is that you dinged levels only by leveling up your minor/major skills. But then you could level up indefinitely in Morrowind lol.
In Morrowind you had a HUGE number of spells, ESO doesn't even have a fraction of them. If I want to make a fire mage in ESO, ooh wait, the sorceror doesn't even have fire spells!
ES games can't have broken economies cause they are singleplayer games lol. Are you getting confused or something?
What exactly is challenging about ESO? Not falling asleep because of the boring combat/quests etc.?
People were asking for skill based progression without classes not level-less system. Besides in Elder Scrolls game even at low levels you could travel pretty much anywhere. Especially true in Oblivion where they had scaling.
Another huge disappointment is all the zoning in ESO. There are waaaay too many loading screens. Why didn't they do a seamless world? World of Warcraft was a seamless world in 2004 with only 1 loading screen, when you were travelling between continents or teleporting.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Interesting thread even if I do not play TESO. I have played many of the other ES games though. There are definitely some things that need changing to make a successful MMORPG out of ES games. When is an MMO a successful port of a single player game?
I am thinking of course of another MMORPG whose game series started out as single player and that is ToR. Is that a successful KoToR-like game? Does it feel like KoToR? If yes, then how is it different from TESO with respect to the single player ES games? If you felt that ToR is faithful to the KoToR series, then why? There is really little similarity in many ways. For example KoToR's game mechanics are based on the D20 system and ToR's is more traditionally MMOish. Yet I have come across so many players saying that ToR is just like the MMO version of KoToR.
Even though I have not played TESO, what I have read about it makes me think that it actually sounds like a proper ES game to be honest. Of course some things would have to be changed to make it a playable MMORPG, such as the UI. That does not mean that a Skyrim fan should automatically like TESO... I like the ES series but hated Oblivion and did not finish playing it. Even though Skyrim is pretty different, I still like it along with Daggerfall and Morrowind.
I think that games can play differently and still be from the same "universe", just like I find ToR and KoToR to be cut from the same cloth despite many, many differences.
And no, not planning to play TESO really. Unlike a lot of people posting in this thread, I actually like the single player ES games a lot because I am the hero(ine) of the epic story and I can't really be that in an MMORPG.
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
This is a huge disappointment in most recent games I have tried and I would love to know the answer as well. TESO is not the only one.
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
Same here. I often lose track of where I was going if I am on a quest, perhaps I see something interesting in the background and want to see what it is even if it's in the oposite direction I was going. Overall just like other ES games.
Main problem I think many experiance is that a certain type of player for some reason wants to pursuit that quest and will not let anything get in the way.
I even see people saying they are ES fan's yet when you read their complaints it's like they let ESO hold their hands instead of playing it like they would play other ES games. I know even if you have 100 people all playing a ES game you still will notice that out of those 100 people most play the game very differently.
Same with ESO, I play how I choose, my highest toon lvl 12 Dragonknight when I looked at my journal I saw having quests ranging from lvl 8 till lvl 15. So not really sure how people can be zoned locked when it's obvious you can travel anywhere and luckely the game doesn't scale else you could travel every where and fight everything. Atleast this way I still have plenty to look forward to if I get beating by something higher leveled then me.