I'd love a Elder Scrolls MMO if it didn't have the crappy FPS combat. Sure, I guess it adds "immersion" being 1st person but I'll take fun > immersion any day
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I'd love a Elder Scrolls MMO if it didn't have the crappy FPS combat. Sure, I guess it adds "immersion" being 1st person but I'll take fun > immersion any day
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Just as "fun" for me as circle straffing and lag + bad collision detection in melee FPS...
It would just make sense for there to be an ES MMO. I mean remember Sean beans last words in the game? "When the next elder scroll is written...you will be the scribe."
Cant wait.
Morrowind was the best of the ES series by far though. Oblivion was awesome in its own ways, but i didnt like the lack of skills, the damnation of magic combinations, and especially the enemies leveling with you, thus giving you no sense of real accomplishment.
Well I like the idea of an ES MMO, but I don't think perma-death with work. Sure maybe some people might be willing to have that, but most people will not. They would have to have a seperate sever for the perma-death crowd.
To the OP, when you play Oblivion do you start a new game everytime you die?
elder scrolls online? lets see... we lost our best star wars game already due to the series going mmo. if we had elder scrolls online then after after a few years we would have fallout online, gothic online and many others. bye bye singleplayer rpg genre? over my dead body ;p why must everything become a mmo? -.-
I'd love a Elder Scrolls MMO if it didn't have the crappy FPS combat. Sure, I guess it adds "immersion" being 1st person but I'll take fun > immersion any day
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Just as "fun" for me as circle straffing and lag + bad collision detection in melee FPS...
Much prefer tactical combat personally.
I would have to agree with you there, circle strafing and bunny hopping is ridiculous.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
It would just make sense for there to be an ES MMO. I mean remember Sean beans last words in the game? "When the next elder scroll is written...you will be the scribe."
Cant wait.
Morrowind was the best of the ES series by far though. Oblivion was awesome in its own ways, but i didnt like the lack of skills, the damnation of magic combinations, and especially the enemies leveling with you, thus giving you no sense of real accomplishment.
-Jive
What they should have done was have the all the sections of the main storyline cater to certain level ranges, getting higher the fartther into the story you go.
Guards should be of a certain range but somewhat high. Thugs and muggers, goblins, etc should provide a challenge to lower lvl players but run away when the high lvl players approach.
I didn't mind some content leveling because it makes sense that players will want some challenge. But if you are well on your way to being a hero and you are taken out by some thief that waylays you on the road, then that is a bit ridiculous. Especially when they are geared as well as you.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I first experienced The Elder Scrolls with Daggerfall. Absolutely loved that game. I've been playing Oblivion recently and it's rekindled my love of Tamriel. Now I'm just thinking: "How awesome would a Elder Scrolls MMORPG be?" Or should I say, how awesome COULD it be. Surely there's millions of other people thinking along these lines?
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
Well I like the idea of an ES MMO, but I don't think perma-death with work. Sure maybe some people might be willing to have that, but most people will not. They would have to have a seperate sever for the perma-death crowd. To the OP, when you play Oblivion do you start a new game everytime you die?
No, I don't. Although I haven't actually died much, and usually when I have died, I've known I'm getting myself into a situation that will be exceptionally difficult and gone ahead anyway knowing that I can just reload.
Single player games and multiplayer games without serious consequences to death don't encourage the players to take calculated risks and proceed with caution.
However when the consequences of death become more serious, the way a person plays the game changes. Think about games where there are only so many places you can save, or multiplayer games where you have to wait ages to respawn if you die. Gameplay style changes to reflect the imposition of consequences.
That being said, it could be interesting to play Oblivion in that way. Only save when I stop playing for the day and start a new game whenever I die. It would certainly change the way I play the game.
- 8 realms fighting each other like Albion, Midgard and Hibernia in Dark Age of Camelot. If 8 realms are too much just make alliances of kingdoms e.g.: realm a - High Rock, Skyrim, Hammerfell realm b - Black Marsh, Morrowind, realm c - Elsweyr, Valenwood, Summerset Isle
- leveling zones in every "realm"
- fight for border kingdoms and relics. Whoever has relics can fight for dominance in Imperial Province that gives players bonus exp, better prizes (lower taxes), access to special dungeon, etc
or... ust make DAoC 2 in Tamriel :-)
Dark Age Of Camelot - Gareth - Alderienne (keen eldritch)
I'd love a Elder Scrolls MMO if it didn't have the crappy FPS combat. Sure, I guess it adds "immersion" being 1st person but I'll take fun > immersion any day
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Just as "fun" for me as circle straffing and lag + bad collision detection in melee FPS...
Much prefer tactical combat personally.
I would have to agree with you there, circle strafing and bunny hopping is ridiculous.
Ahh but you have to remember that people would have fatigue in an Elder Scrolls MMO. If you are constantly running around in circles and jumping, your blows would become gradually less effective due to fatigue.
Secondly, when you are moving, you have a greater chance of getting knocked down by a blow (taking into account your agility stat).
So someone who planted their feet and raised their sheild against a bunny-hopping-circle-strafer would probably take minimal damage from them, and then would just lay in a couple of good blows to knock them off their feet, then lay into them when they're on the ground and keep knocking them around as they're trying to get up.
The only reason why bunny-hopping and circle strafing is such a problem in most FPS's is because the game mechanic allows it. Who can seriously jump nearly their own height whilst loaded down with body armour, serveral guns, and 200 rounds of ammo? No one. That's who.
I'm not sure if it's just me, but the Elder Scrolls series never held my attention for long, starting with Morrowind. I don't know, maybe it's the static world, or the combat, it got too boring before I could finish ES:M. Mount & Blade however, felt way better for me, in pretty much everything, lacks polish but the gameplay was fun and plain addictive.
- sandbox with 1 server only like EVE online - 8 realms fighting each other like Albion, Midgard and Hibernia in Dark Age of Camelot. If 8 realms are too much just make alliances of kingdoms e.g.: realm a - High Rock, Skyrim, Hammerfell realm b - Black Marsh, Morrowind, realm c - Elsweyr, Valenwood, Summerset Isle - leveling zones in every "realm" - fight for border kingdoms and relics. Whoever has relics can fight for dominance in Imperial Province that gives players bonus exp, better prizes (lower taxes), access to special dungeon, etc
The way I envision it, there wouldn't be a set battle going on. No set factions. It would depend on what the players do. Ofcourse, the server moderators can influence things either way, and the players can also do their part in influencing what happens.
Any two regions could be at war with each other at any point in time. Or there could be two regions ganged up on one. Or there could be complete peace across the whole of Tamriel.
Kingdoms could try to break away from the Empire to gain independance, due to say, high taxation from the Empire. Depending on the Emporer of the day, they might just let them break away, they might lower their taxes and agree to give them more services, or they might send an army to replace the King with someone who's more friendly towards the Empire.
I was wondering what you meant by 'levelling zones'?
Oh and 1 server could work, but personally I would prefer 1 server per region. I live in Australia, so the minimum pings I get between here and the US is about 250. If the first person combat of Oblivion is in an MMORPG, I would want a maximum ping of 200, not a minimum ping of 250!
But I agree the fewer servers the better. If they could have a server for North/South America, a continent for Australasian region, a server for Europe, and a server for Asian, that would probably meet demand globally. Ofcourse there'd be nothing stopping you from playing on another regions server if you so choose.
I first experienced The Elder Scrolls with Daggerfall. Absolutely loved that game. I've been playing Oblivion recently and it's rekindled my love of Tamriel. Now I'm just thinking: "How awesome would a Elder Scrolls MMORPG be?" Or should I say, how awesome COULD it be. Surely there's millions of other people thinking along these lines?
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I first experienced The Elder Scrolls with Daggerfall. Absolutely loved that game. I've been playing Oblivion recently and it's rekindled my love of Tamriel. Now I'm just thinking: "How awesome would a Elder Scrolls MMORPG be?" Or should I say, how awesome COULD it be. Surely there's millions of other people thinking along these lines?
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Great. :-) And it wouldn't just be about 'taking and holding' castles. You could probably band together a troop of 20 highly skilled people and stage a coup in the dead of night, killing the guards under the cover of darkness (most of them whilst in their sleep) and assassinating the count. But if you can't hold the seat of power with legitimacy, then the Imperial Legion will take it back the next day. You would actually have to build up political support with high levels of government, and rapport with the citizens of the area, to force a count to abdicate and ascend to his position. You might, for example, need to be a Knight-Errant knighted by another popular count who doesn't quite like the count of the town you're trying to take power in.
I first experienced The Elder Scrolls with Daggerfall. Absolutely loved that game. I've been playing Oblivion recently and it's rekindled my love of Tamriel. Now I'm just thinking: "How awesome would a Elder Scrolls MMORPG be?" Or should I say, how awesome COULD it be. Surely there's millions of other people thinking along these lines?
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Great. :-) And it wouldn't just be about 'taking and holding' castles. You could probably band together a troop of 20 highly skilled people and stage a coup in the dead of night, killing the guards under the cover of darkness (most of them whilst in their sleep) and assassinating the count. But if you can't hold the seat of power with legitimacy, then the Imperial Legion will take it back the next day. You would actually have to build up political support with high levels of government, and rapport with the citizens of the area, to force a count to abdicate and ascend to his position. You might, for example, need to be a Knight-Errant knighted by another popular count who doesn't quite like the count of the town you're trying to take power in.
I actually don't agree with that. Not that there aren't people who would like it. But that whole "I have to have people on 24/7 in order to make sure I can defend myself" mentality is not to many people's liking. I think Shadowbane was like that.
Because then in the end it becomes a cheap mechanic. There is no real gameplay when you have your enemy out of game and asleep and someone decides to pull a fast one.
i don't believe that hardcore gameplay mechanics work except for the few who are dedicated to them. That goes for things like perma-death, or stealing from someone's house or looting players. Others might like that but I HIGHLY doubt the fanbase for an elder scrolls game would go for it. Especially since there are people who hated the more visceral combat that Oblvion brought. I doubt that Bethesda would even consider it.
Not on board.
I have to also agree with the above point of fatigue on circle strafing. That IS something that should be in all pvp games.
My opinion of course.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I first experienced The Elder Scrolls with Daggerfall. Absolutely loved that game. I've been playing Oblivion recently and it's rekindled my love of Tamriel. Now I'm just thinking: "How awesome would a Elder Scrolls MMORPG be?" Or should I say, how awesome COULD it be. Surely there's millions of other people thinking along these lines?
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Great. :-) And it wouldn't just be about 'taking and holding' castles. You could probably band together a troop of 20 highly skilled people and stage a coup in the dead of night, killing the guards under the cover of darkness (most of them whilst in their sleep) and assassinating the count. But if you can't hold the seat of power with legitimacy, then the Imperial Legion will take it back the next day. You would actually have to build up political support with high levels of government, and rapport with the citizens of the area, to force a count to abdicate and ascend to his position. You might, for example, need to be a Knight-Errant knighted by another popular count who doesn't quite like the count of the town you're trying to take power in.
I actually don't agree with that. Not that there aren't people who would like it. But that whole "I have to have people on 24/7 in order to make sure I can defend myself" mentality is not to many people's liking. I think Shadowbane was like that.
Because then in the end it becomes a cheap mechanic. There is no real gameplay when you have your enemy out of game and asleep and someone decides to pull a fast one.
i don't believe that hardcore gameplay mechanics work except for the few who are dedicated to them. That goes for things like perma-death, or stealing from someone's house or looting players. Others might like that but I HIGHLY doubt the fanbase for an elder scrolls game would go for it. Especially since there are people who hated the more visceral combat that Oblvion brought. I doubt that Bethesda would even consider it.
Not on board.
I have to also agree with the above point of fatigue on circle strafing. That IS something that should be in all pvp games.
My opinion of course.
Well I think that comes with the whole responsibility of being a Count. You would need to be on more than the average player (to hold public audience, and attend to government matters) but it wouldn't be all consuming. Firstly because when you are in the position of count you get a whole regiment guarding you. Secondly, just like any other player, when you go offline you dissappear from the game world, so you wouldn't need to have someone guarding you when you're offline.
Even if someone did manage to take over whilst you were away, the key point is that they will still need to prove their legitimacy as ruler, or have the imperial legion knocking at their door very quickly. If someone attempts to assassinate you, then they would be outlaw for the rest of their characters life.
The key feature I'm looking for in an MMORPG (not just an Elder Scrolls MMORPG) is that decisions should have lasting consequences. If I wanted to play a game where my decisions have no lasting consequences, then I would play a single player game where I can just save and reload so I can see how my decisions play out before committing to them.
Becoming a count would definitely have it's rewards and benefits, but it would come with consequences too. Only with perma-death will those consequences mean something.
But I understand what you mean. Perma-death isn't for everyone. I would like to say, that if would be great if you could have servers for perma-death players and servers for non-permadeath players. But that just splits your audience between servers, and makes it even harder to manage the servers and keep up with player demand.
Comments
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I still play Oblivion with my little archer every once in a while.
While I enjoy this game greatly I have trouble picturing this type of game as a MMO.
Playing: EvE, Ryzom
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Just as "fun" for me as circle straffing and lag + bad collision detection in melee FPS...
Much prefer tactical combat personally.
Your opinion is immaterial.
It would just make sense for there to be an ES MMO. I mean remember Sean beans last words in the game? "When the next elder scroll is written...you will be the scribe."
Cant wait.
Morrowind was the best of the ES series by far though. Oblivion was awesome in its own ways, but i didnt like the lack of skills, the damnation of magic combinations, and especially the enemies leveling with you, thus giving you no sense of real accomplishment.
-Jive
Well I like the idea of an ES MMO, but I don't think perma-death with work. Sure maybe some people might be willing to have that, but most people will not. They would have to have a seperate sever for the perma-death crowd.
To the OP, when you play Oblivion do you start a new game everytime you die?
I enjoyed Oblivion, but if Bethesda were to put out an MMO, I'd rather see the Fallout world
elder scrolls online?
lets see... we lost our best star wars game already due to the series going mmo.
if we had elder scrolls online then after after a few years we would have fallout online, gothic online and many others.
bye bye singleplayer rpg genre? over my dead body ;p
why must everything become a mmo? -.-
Like this www.play-earthrise.com/images/trailer/video/720.wmv
www.play-earthrise.com/
Full sandbox skilled based mmorpg with no intances.
I agree ..come on stream.deepsilver.com/stream/games/risen/en/index2.html
Can't wait till October
New trailer
www.youtube.com/watch
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Just as "fun" for me as circle straffing and lag + bad collision detection in melee FPS...
Much prefer tactical combat personally.
I would have to agree with you there, circle strafing and bunny hopping is ridiculous.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
What they should have done was have the all the sections of the main storyline cater to certain level ranges, getting higher the fartther into the story you go.
Guards should be of a certain range but somewhat high. Thugs and muggers, goblins, etc should provide a challenge to lower lvl players but run away when the high lvl players approach.
I didn't mind some content leveling because it makes sense that players will want some challenge. But if you are well on your way to being a hero and you are taken out by some thief that waylays you on the road, then that is a bit ridiculous. Especially when they are geared as well as you.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
No, I don't. Although I haven't actually died much, and usually when I have died, I've known I'm getting myself into a situation that will be exceptionally difficult and gone ahead anyway knowing that I can just reload.
Single player games and multiplayer games without serious consequences to death don't encourage the players to take calculated risks and proceed with caution.
However when the consequences of death become more serious, the way a person plays the game changes. Think about games where there are only so many places you can save, or multiplayer games where you have to wait ages to respawn if you die. Gameplay style changes to reflect the imposition of consequences.
That being said, it could be interesting to play Oblivion in that way. Only save when I stop playing for the day and start a new game whenever I die. It would certainly change the way I play the game.
Is this game being developed incase Mortal Online fails???
I would also love to see Elder scrolls online:
- sandbox with 1 server only like EVE online
- 8 realms fighting each other like Albion, Midgard and Hibernia in Dark Age of Camelot. If 8 realms are too much just make alliances of kingdoms e.g.: realm a - High Rock, Skyrim, Hammerfell realm b - Black Marsh, Morrowind, realm c - Elsweyr, Valenwood, Summerset Isle
- leveling zones in every "realm"
- fight for border kingdoms and relics. Whoever has relics can fight for dominance in Imperial Province that gives players bonus exp, better prizes (lower taxes), access to special dungeon, etc
or... ust make DAoC 2 in Tamriel :-)
Dark Age Of Camelot - Gareth - Alderienne (keen eldritch)
Well, that's a difference of opinion.
I found it exceptionially fun and probably one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time. Especially since I have a mod that adds to the realism of combat.
Slugging it out on the battlefield, for me, is fun.
Just as "fun" for me as circle straffing and lag + bad collision detection in melee FPS...
Much prefer tactical combat personally.
I would have to agree with you there, circle strafing and bunny hopping is ridiculous.
Ahh but you have to remember that people would have fatigue in an Elder Scrolls MMO. If you are constantly running around in circles and jumping, your blows would become gradually less effective due to fatigue.
Secondly, when you are moving, you have a greater chance of getting knocked down by a blow (taking into account your agility stat).
So someone who planted their feet and raised their sheild against a bunny-hopping-circle-strafer would probably take minimal damage from them, and then would just lay in a couple of good blows to knock them off their feet, then lay into them when they're on the ground and keep knocking them around as they're trying to get up.
The only reason why bunny-hopping and circle strafing is such a problem in most FPS's is because the game mechanic allows it. Who can seriously jump nearly their own height whilst loaded down with body armour, serveral guns, and 200 rounds of ammo? No one. That's who.
I'm not sure if it's just me, but the Elder Scrolls series never held my attention for long, starting with Morrowind. I don't know, maybe it's the static world, or the combat, it got too boring before I could finish ES:M. Mount & Blade however, felt way better for me, in pretty much everything, lacks polish but the gameplay was fun and plain addictive.
The way I envision it, there wouldn't be a set battle going on. No set factions. It would depend on what the players do. Ofcourse, the server moderators can influence things either way, and the players can also do their part in influencing what happens.
Any two regions could be at war with each other at any point in time. Or there could be two regions ganged up on one. Or there could be complete peace across the whole of Tamriel.
Kingdoms could try to break away from the Empire to gain independance, due to say, high taxation from the Empire. Depending on the Emporer of the day, they might just let them break away, they might lower their taxes and agree to give them more services, or they might send an army to replace the King with someone who's more friendly towards the Empire.
I was wondering what you meant by 'levelling zones'?
Oh and 1 server could work, but personally I would prefer 1 server per region. I live in Australia, so the minimum pings I get between here and the US is about 250. If the first person combat of Oblivion is in an MMORPG, I would want a maximum ping of 200, not a minimum ping of 250!
But I agree the fewer servers the better. If they could have a server for North/South America, a continent for Australasian region, a server for Europe, and a server for Asian, that would probably meet demand globally. Ofcourse there'd be nothing stopping you from playing on another regions server if you so choose.
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Great. :-) And it wouldn't just be about 'taking and holding' castles. You could probably band together a troop of 20 highly skilled people and stage a coup in the dead of night, killing the guards under the cover of darkness (most of them whilst in their sleep) and assassinating the count. But if you can't hold the seat of power with legitimacy, then the Imperial Legion will take it back the next day. You would actually have to build up political support with high levels of government, and rapport with the citizens of the area, to force a count to abdicate and ascend to his position. You might, for example, need to be a Knight-Errant knighted by another popular count who doesn't quite like the count of the town you're trying to take power in.
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Great. :-) And it wouldn't just be about 'taking and holding' castles. You could probably band together a troop of 20 highly skilled people and stage a coup in the dead of night, killing the guards under the cover of darkness (most of them whilst in their sleep) and assassinating the count. But if you can't hold the seat of power with legitimacy, then the Imperial Legion will take it back the next day. You would actually have to build up political support with high levels of government, and rapport with the citizens of the area, to force a count to abdicate and ascend to his position. You might, for example, need to be a Knight-Errant knighted by another popular count who doesn't quite like the count of the town you're trying to take power in.
I actually don't agree with that. Not that there aren't people who would like it. But that whole "I have to have people on 24/7 in order to make sure I can defend myself" mentality is not to many people's liking. I think Shadowbane was like that.
Because then in the end it becomes a cheap mechanic. There is no real gameplay when you have your enemy out of game and asleep and someone decides to pull a fast one.
i don't believe that hardcore gameplay mechanics work except for the few who are dedicated to them. That goes for things like perma-death, or stealing from someone's house or looting players. Others might like that but I HIGHLY doubt the fanbase for an elder scrolls game would go for it. Especially since there are people who hated the more visceral combat that Oblvion brought. I doubt that Bethesda would even consider it.
Not on board.
I have to also agree with the above point of fatigue on circle strafing. That IS something that should be in all pvp games.
My opinion of course.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
To be honest I think all of the above. That is what Elder Scrolls is. The problem is that you can't have 200 emperors or 300 nevarines.
No, you can't have 200 emporers. But if you read "A Brief History of the Empire" in Oblivion, you will realise that for most of the 3rd Era, the entire Kingdom was in a constant state of warfare over the rule of the empire. You will realise that the wealthiest people in Tamriel hold positions on the Elder Council.
Then, the Empire is divided into regions, with regional governments, each region has numerous Kingdoms, Duchies, etc.
It would not be impossible then, for a player to rise to one of the positions on th Elder Council, for example. Or to become a Count, or Duke, or just a member of the local council of a small town.
Whilst the government might start off as mainly NPC's, an Elder Scrolls MMORPG could allow players to gradually work their way up in power and influence. So yes, there could only ever be 1 player as emporer. But that player as emporer would have to prove his legitimacy as emporer.
His legitimacy could be challenged by other players, or other players could simply gain more power and influence within the realm to the point where people are willing to go to war to put them on the emporers throne.
This is where the PvP element could arise from.
Not only that, but it could bring significant role-playing opportunities, such as trying to quell political upheavel, or even attempting to start an uprising against a government.
Finally... amist all of this political rivalry, other players who choose to can be doing things less publicly, for example, starting their own daedric cults and subverting the rise to power of other players. This could include attacking the trade ships and caravans of other players, infecting their crops, robbing their businesses.
This is why PvP is almost a neccesity.
That wasn't my point. I was talking about "the emperor" or "the nevarine".
However, if they wanted to adopt a lineage 2 style game in that one can take and hold castles then YES I would be more than for that.
Seriously.
Great. :-) And it wouldn't just be about 'taking and holding' castles. You could probably band together a troop of 20 highly skilled people and stage a coup in the dead of night, killing the guards under the cover of darkness (most of them whilst in their sleep) and assassinating the count. But if you can't hold the seat of power with legitimacy, then the Imperial Legion will take it back the next day. You would actually have to build up political support with high levels of government, and rapport with the citizens of the area, to force a count to abdicate and ascend to his position. You might, for example, need to be a Knight-Errant knighted by another popular count who doesn't quite like the count of the town you're trying to take power in.
I actually don't agree with that. Not that there aren't people who would like it. But that whole "I have to have people on 24/7 in order to make sure I can defend myself" mentality is not to many people's liking. I think Shadowbane was like that.
Because then in the end it becomes a cheap mechanic. There is no real gameplay when you have your enemy out of game and asleep and someone decides to pull a fast one.
i don't believe that hardcore gameplay mechanics work except for the few who are dedicated to them. That goes for things like perma-death, or stealing from someone's house or looting players. Others might like that but I HIGHLY doubt the fanbase for an elder scrolls game would go for it. Especially since there are people who hated the more visceral combat that Oblvion brought. I doubt that Bethesda would even consider it.
Not on board.
I have to also agree with the above point of fatigue on circle strafing. That IS something that should be in all pvp games.
My opinion of course.
Well I think that comes with the whole responsibility of being a Count. You would need to be on more than the average player (to hold public audience, and attend to government matters) but it wouldn't be all consuming. Firstly because when you are in the position of count you get a whole regiment guarding you. Secondly, just like any other player, when you go offline you dissappear from the game world, so you wouldn't need to have someone guarding you when you're offline.
Even if someone did manage to take over whilst you were away, the key point is that they will still need to prove their legitimacy as ruler, or have the imperial legion knocking at their door very quickly. If someone attempts to assassinate you, then they would be outlaw for the rest of their characters life.
The key feature I'm looking for in an MMORPG (not just an Elder Scrolls MMORPG) is that decisions should have lasting consequences. If I wanted to play a game where my decisions have no lasting consequences, then I would play a single player game where I can just save and reload so I can see how my decisions play out before committing to them.
Becoming a count would definitely have it's rewards and benefits, but it would come with consequences too. Only with perma-death will those consequences mean something.
But I understand what you mean. Perma-death isn't for everyone. I would like to say, that if would be great if you could have servers for perma-death players and servers for non-permadeath players. But that just splits your audience between servers, and makes it even harder to manage the servers and keep up with player demand.