Thing is, nobody should be expecting the freedom of choice that is available in a single player RPG, to exist in an MMORPG.
So yes, reducing the choice's available is, in some ways, brilliant.
Thing is, nobody should be expecting the freedom of choice to be removed in an MMO seeing as how MMOs are aviable that allow such a choice...just like a single player game.
So yes, reducing the choice's available is, in every way, foolish and limting.
You claiming reducing the choice's available is in every way foolish and limiting, is plain wrong.
In TES single player games, you can, if you want to, make the choice to kill every single NPC in the game, permanently.
Now, some people have voiced the opinion that TESO should be the same as singleplayer TES, in every way, even though it is an MMO.
How cool would it be, if once you finished creating your character, you venture out into the world, and find no NPCs at all, because everyone that was faster than you at creating a character, decided it would be fun to kill every NPC they came across, just like they did when they played singleplayer TES.....
There are valid reason's for design decisions that limit the choices players can make, if you cannot see that, or do not like that, fine, leave TESO alone, go play something else.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
There is no path of least resistence here, it's having about having a slight view advantage, FPV is not even a path. If your assessment was true then everyone would play Skyrim in third person view.
Of course there is a path of least resistance, its also called opportunity cost, I described it a couple pages back. And not quite, as Skyrim does not offer a truly 360 fov, the camera is set lower and much more behind the head even when zoomed out. I had to download a new skeleton to fix it as it was super annoying.
It is not a path though, it's a preference. It shouldn't matter if Skyrim offerened a complete 360 FOV, it still has a field advantage over the FPV.
Most of the time only use 3rd person view to check out how your toon looks etc, all combat usually takes place in first person view, combat in 3rd person view is universally rubbish imo, so my prediction is that all the successful cyrodil PVP'ers will be using FPV, with 3rd person view relegated to the odd screenshot for effect, ie. posed.. for those that use the argument that 3rd person view increases your tactical awareness, simply not true, it just helps make up for a lack of it. pretty sure anyone who has ever played games like Planetside (either version) will understand where im coming from here.
LOL, I agree. It's like they think it's impossible to play in FPV. There are many games that only have this view with "enemies appearing behind you". Sure you can't see them but it doesn't mean you don't know they are there. I can't wait for all the youtube videos of 'hardcore' PvPers owning in FPV.
The Paradox of Choice - Why More Is Less is a 2004 book by American psychologistBarry Schwartz. In the book, Schwartz argues that eliminating comsumer choices can greatly reduce anxiety for shoppers.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
It is not just WoW though. As much as you want this to be Skyrim (well in your case Morrowind) Online it will not be. Too much of the "single player experience" does not translate well to group play. There is a reason why the games are designed differently, all the way down to the UI. MMo's for example do not do the "hand thing" for first person because it shows just how low poly their weapons are, not to mention it severely limits them on just how the weapons can be designed. Its why the swords and axes in Skyrim look more like Larp weapons than real counterparts.
It is not a path though, it's a preference. It shouldn't matter if Skyrim offerened a complete 360 FOV, it still has a field advantage over the FPV.
It's not just about the Fov though. It has a lot to do with how the game itself is designed. How animals spawns as zones are generated in Skyrim for example. You will rarely get attacked from the back or sides in the vanilla game. That is due to both how things are spawned and Skyrims pretty natoriously poor Ai.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
It is not just WoW though. As much as you want this to be Skyrim (well in your case Morrowind) Online it will not be. Too much of the "single player experience" does not translate well to group play. There is a reason why the games are designed differently, all the way down to the UI. MMo's for example do not do the "hand thing" for first person because it shows just how low poly their weapons are, not to mention it severely limits them on just how the weapons can be designed. Its why the swords and axes in Skyrim look more like Larp weapons than real counterparts.
What are you even talking about!? This is about comparing FPV and TPV against WoW and previous TES games. You said that everyone who plays a video game will use TPV over FPV because they have a sight advantage. I said look at previous TES games and see that most people played them in FPV (or a mixture of both). You said no one plays FPV in WoW and I said it compares closer to TES than WoW in this instance. We are not even talking about what I want the game to be like, only if FPV will be the minority.
It is not a path though, it's a preference. It shouln't matter if Skyrim offerened a complete 360 FOV, it still has a field advantage over the FPV.
It's not just about the Fov though. It has a lot to do with how the game itself is designed. How animals spawns as zones are generated in Skyrim for example. You will rarely get attacked from the back or sides in the vanilla game. That is due to both how things are spawned and Skyrims pretty natoriously poor Ai.
It is about the FOV in this case because it's the topic at hand. If I refute your comment, you can't suddenly say it's not about the FOV anymore. Just concede that point and then move to the next one
What are you even talking about!? This is about comparing FPV and TPV against WoW and previous TES games. You said that everyone who plays a video game will use TPV over FPV because they have a sight advantage. I said look at previous TES games and see that most people played them in FPV (or a mixture of both). You said no one plays FPV in WoW and I said it compares closer to TES than WoW in this instance. We are not even talking about what I want the game to be like, only if FPV will be the minority.
It is about the FOV in this case because it's the topic at hand. If I refute your comment, you can't suddenly say it's not about the FOV anymore. Just concede that point and then move to the next one
Both of these boil down to the same point that I am not sure I am not expliaing well enough, or if you really are too dense to understand. A larger Fov gives an advantage. How large of an advantage is due to how the game is designed. Most previous games did not bother "fine tuning" the fpv because its costly and causes a ton of issues when most players will not use it. Some of these problems are mitigated in Tes games by things like how zones spawn, notoriously poor ai, limiting camera control etc. The overall design of the game to promote a certain feel subconsiously leads certain players in certain directions. Look at how CoD is played compared to Spec Ops: the line. Very similar games that are played very differently. Many of those tricks that previous Tes games have utilized, whether on purpose or not, do not make for a good multiplayer experience.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
What are you even talking about!? This is about comparing FPV and TPV against WoW and previous TES games. You said that everyone who plays a video game will use TPV over FPV because they have a sight advantage. I said look at previous TES games and see that most people played them in FPV (or a mixture of both). You said no one plays FPV in WoW and I said it compares closer to TES than WoW in this instance. We are not even talking about what I want the game to be like, only if FPV will be the minority.
It is about the FOV in this case because it's the topic at hand. If I refute your comment, you can't suddenly say it's not about the FOV anymore. Just concede that point and then move to the next one
Both of these boil down to the same point that I am not sure I am not expliaing well enough, or if you really are too dense to understand. A larger Fov gives an advantage. How large of an advantage is due to how the game is designed. Most previous games did not bother "fine tuning" the fpv because its costly and causes a ton of issues when most players will not use it. Some of these problems are mitigated in Tes games by things like how zones spawn, notoriously poor ai, limiting camera control etc. The overall design of the game to promote a certain feel subconsiously leads certain players in certain directions. Look at how CoD is played compared to Spec Ops: the line. Very similar games that are played very differently. Many of those tricks that previous Tes games have utilized, whether on purpose or not, do not make for a good multiplayer experience.
You're calling me dense but the discussion is simple. I keep repeating myself for a reason, it's not about a good multiplayer experience or how CoD is played. It's about you claiming that people who use FPV in ESO will be the minority when we do not know.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
LOL, I'm just trying to keep this guy on topic. He's trying everything he can to change the subject, I didn't even want to open that door.
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
I would honestly like to see what random shit you pull out of your ass to attempt that.
Originally posted by sapphen
You're calling me dense but the discussion is simple. I keep repeating myself for a reason, it's not about a good multiplayer experience or how CoD is played. It's about you claiming that people who use FPV in ESO will be the minority when we do not know.
You keep repeating yourself because you watch way too much Fox News and think that if you keep talking long enough everyone else will shut up. You are quite correct, the discussion is simple. The minority will be in first person because the developers cannot possibly be so stupid as to implement the changes needed to make it on par with third person in an mmo environment. It would kill the game.
I said that TPV does not have a 'huge" advantage over FPV. This has nothing to do with nature or why horses have eyes on the sides of their head. People are able to play just fine in FPS during groups and with multiple enemies. Just because someone can't see you, doesn't mean they don't know you're there.
And again, fps games are designed differently. Most fps games have a rather high Fov built in through camera trickery, and even then ones "spidey sense" does not kick in unless you know the map exceptionally well.
You're calling me dense but the discussion is simple. I keep repeating myself for a reason, it's not about a good multiplayer experience or how CoD is played. It's about you claiming that people who use FPV in ESO will be the minority when we do not know.
You keep repeating yourself because you watch way too much Fox News and think that if you keep talking long enough everyone else will shut up. You are quite correct, the discussion is simple. The minority will be in first person because the developers cannot possibly be so stupid as to implement the changes needed to make it on par with third person in an mmo environment. It would kill the game.
Again, it is an assumption. You can pull as many reasons out of your ass as you want but it doesn't change the fact WE DO NOT KNOW WHO THE MINORITY WILL BE.
I said that TPV does not have a 'huge" advantage over FPV. This has nothing to do with nature or why horses have eyes on the sides of their head. People are able to play just fine in FPS during groups and with multiple enemies. Just because someone can't see you, doesn't mean they don't know you're there.
And again, fps games are designed differently. Most fps games have a rather high Fov built in through camera trickery, and even then ones "spidey sense" does not kick in unless you know the map exceptionally well.
I keep giving you examples that you willfully choose to ignore, claiming that it's is different everytime I prove you wrong. Then you resort to name calling and anger instead of rational discussion.
Originally posted by Byrhofen Originally posted by jtcgsOriginally posted by ByrhofenThing is, nobody should be expecting the freedom of choice that is available in a single player RPG, to exist in an MMORPG.So yes, reducing the choice's available is, in some ways, brilliant.
Thing is, nobody should be expecting the freedom of choice to be removed in an MMO seeing as how MMOs are aviable that allow such a choice...just like a single player game.So yes, reducing the choice's available is, in every way, foolish and limting.You claiming reducing the choice's available is in every way foolish and limiting, is plain wrong.
In TES single player games, you can, if you want to, make the choice to kill every single NPC in the game, permanently.
Now, some people have voiced the opinion that TESO should be the same as singleplayer TES, in every way, even though it is an MMO.
How cool would it be, if once you finished creating your character, you venture out into the world, and find no NPCs at all, because everyone that was faster than you at creating a character, decided it would be fun to kill every NPC they came across, just like they did when they played singleplayer TES.....
There are valid reason's for design decisions that limit the choices players can make, if you cannot see that, or do not like that, fine, leave TESO alone, go play something else.
exactly, people that want this to be exactly like the single player ES games are not being realistic at all and are probably just trolling.
the single player ES games had absolutely no end game content either.
this is an MMO after all, to expect it to have no mmo features and to just be exactly like the single player games is just flat out unrealistic.
then again, most of the whining that goes on, on MMORPG.com is based on unrealistic expectations, so it doesn't surprise me one bit.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
You are dead wrong.
Yeah wow made the brand, shit games dont do that. I know i dont like wow, its not for me, but im not an internet meme puppet. I could clearly see how well the game was designed and coded. There is a reason so many people still play that game, and no its not the narcissistic "oh well they are just stupid people while im smart" type of deal.
The game was a stroke of brilliance, i dont blame blizzard for the fact that every developer and their mother try to clone the game resulting in every mmorpg being the same. Also i dont get hung up on the dated character models.
Wow lost its momentum long ago, very long time ago it stopped being the cool game to play, its not the cool game to hate. Yet still every other developer out there tries desperately to hold even a portion of the audience wow has kept happy for like a decade...thats the truth people dont want to hear.
Again games not for me, i didnt like it, but im not a child or a narcissist who thinks my opinion is the only valid one and the truth. I could easily see how well the game was made, despite lacking visual appeal.
So take it from a non wow player, that game is well made, its numbers speak for its self. And no lets not do the lame mcdonalds analogy, theres nothing quick or cheap about the game, and its just as convenient as the others to play...oh i think the bieber anaolgy is another popular "well just cuz people like it doesnt make it good" to that i say: well if more people think something you hate is appealing...well thats why everyone has an opinion...
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
You are dead wrong.
Well of course he is. Just another person trying to make a point by bashing WoW. So what it has dominated for well over 8 years. That longevity is due to poor design, brand name and momentum. Even though that goes against everything that is logical and history proves this to be entirely false.
No one here is to scared to speak the truth. Some people just know the difference between a truth and an opinion.
If ESO allow people to stay neutral, and joing any sides at will " at level 1 or level 100+ ", and have whole map available to explore? no restrictions to anyone, than you'll have all your conflicts solved.
Once you commited to any of the alience? then you're pvp flaged 24/7.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
There is no path of least resistence here, it's having about having a slight view advantage, FPV is not even a path. If your assessment was true then everyone would play Skyrim in third person view.
Of course there is a path of least resistance, its also called opportunity cost, I described it a couple pages back. And not quite, as Skyrim does not offer a truly 360 fov, the camera is set lower and much more behind the head even when zoomed out. I had to download a new skeleton to fix it as it was super annoying.
Originally posted by Vorthanion
That isn't about the path of least resistance. People are willing to grind rep because it nets you a guaranteed reward for your effort. Dungeons are subject to the RNG for drops on top of the RNG when competing with group mates for said drops. There is obviously a greater incentive to do rep grinds as a result. Now, if devs would get a clue and allow everyone in a group to get a drop when doing dungeon runs, then you'd probably find the playing field a lot more even. I really don't see how you can define that scenario as the path of least resistance, which implies laziness on the part of the gamers. How is it lazy to work just as hard doing either rep grinds or dungeon grinds, but one rewards you more often than the other. That isn't laziness, that's intelligent decision making on the player's part.
Nope, its the lesser path to meet a specific end. Skipping the generally enjoyable experience of grouping with ones friends to go run a dungeon to instead grind away solo to get the same peice of gear. Thanks for agreeing with me though!
Originally posted by sapphen
I talked with evolution and it said look in the mirror.
As Elohassa pointed out, you need to go have another chat with evolution because you rather clearly did not understand what it told you.
Heh, how you came to the conclusion that I was agreeing with you goes beyond my logical mind. Incentive will always override the path of least resistance. Incentives will encourage people to do the harder and or more tedious content in order to get the better and or greater quantities of rewards. You obviously don't understand the meaning.
If ESO allow people to stay neutral, and joing any sides at will " at level 1 or level 100+ ", and have whole map available to explore? no restrictions to anyone, than you'll have all your conflicts solved.
Once you commited to any of the alience? then you're pvp flaged 24/7.
It ruins faction pride to be able to join any side at will. Some will stick with one faction, but most will follow the path of least resistance and just hop to whichever faction happens to be winning at that time. In the end you'll have a very few who enjoy the challenge of being the underdog split into two factions, and the massed swarm of people who want an easy win all in one faction.
And if the momentum shifts to another faction? All of those players hop over to their new home for easy wins. Faction lock is really the best hurdle to keep that type of player from destroying the game.
It occurs to me what the real problem is with accepting faction lock with ESO versus a game like DAoC.
In Dark Age, you had 3 distinct worlds based on historical myth: Hibernia (Celtic Lore), Albion (Arthurian Lore), and Midgard (Norse Lore). So going into the game, you picked your faction first, your lore and setting preference, and then chose your race amongst several choices based on that setting. Those were 3 distinct lore types, and all had been completely familiar to us since we'd grown up hearing those stories. Therefore, going into the game we knew which lore style we liked best.
With ESO, they're taking one world, one lore, and breaking it up into three Alliances. We don't have any prior familiarity with these alliances, so the decision is based entirely on what race we'd prefer to play. ZM now has to fight an uphill battle to convince us that our preferred race is in a cool alliance.
I think that's why so many people have issues with the faction lock. It's because they don't know much about the Aldmeri Dominion, but they know they've loved playing as a Khajiit, so now they feel stuck. I can actually understand that.
I still stand by faction lock being the best mechanic for this type of RvR game, and the lore they're usig to back it up, but now I think I understand the other side's complaints a bit better.
What kind of game are you wanting that WoW would be a better measurement of the playerbase than an actual Elder Scrolls game?
Good ones? Whether you detest the route Wow has taken, to say its a bad game would be epically stupid on your part.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
You are dead wrong.
What WoW tries to be, an MMORPG, it is bad at. It has bad PvP, bad crafting, bad questing systems, a bad class system, a bad econ, and pretty average raiding.
It's crafting is shallow. It's PvE is all solo instanced/phasing. It has quest based leveling, so there are 10 shit quests to ever 1 passable one, and they all blend together and tell you exactly where to go. The PvP is a laughable joke, there's no consequence for failure or victory, it has no bearing on the story or the rest of the game. A MOBA could do what WoW does but better, and for free. And it has one of the least inspired and limited class systems, with some of the most boring classes in any RPG I've ever played.
And its raids are just EQ raids, but made 100 times easier. There is no risk vs reward in the entire game design. No death penalty. No depth.
It got where it was because it was the first MMO developed by a huge well known company with legions of fans, and the first company to put millions of dollars into a year long ad campaign long before the game came out.
It occurs to me what the real problem is with accepting faction lock with ESO versus a game like DAoC.
In Dark Age, you had 3 distinct worlds based on historical myth: Hibernia (Celtic Lore), Albion (Arthurian Lore), and Midgard (Norse Lore). So going into the game, you picked your faction first, your lore and setting preference, and then chose your race amongst several choices based on that setting. Those were 3 distinct lore types, and all had been completely familiar to us since we'd grown up hearing those stories. Therefore, going into the game we knew which lore style we liked best.
With ESO, they're taking one world, one lore, and breaking it up into three Alliances. We don't have any prior familiarity with these alliances, so the decision is based entirely on what race we'd prefer to play. ZM now has to fight an uphill battle to convince us that our preferred race is in a cool alliance.
I think that's why so many people have issues with the faction lock. It's because they don't know much about the Aldmeri Dominion, but they know they've loved playing as a Khajiit, so now they feel stuck. I can actually understand that.
I still stand by faction lock being the best mechanic for this type of RvR game, and the lore they're usig to back it up, but now I think I understand the other side's complaints a bit better.
Yes, I believe that is exactly what people have issues with. You have put it into words very nicely
Btw, why don't we try to think of some solutions to the issue instead of having the camps go at each other's throat? I think we can all agree on the fact, that no matter what stance one has on this issue, we all want to have a game at the end that we can enjoy. If noone cared about the game we wouldn't have these heated discussions. It happens though, gaming is a passionate hobby after all
So, what about that mega server technology? They have something that gives you a sort of survey where you can tell the game what gaming preferences you have. So...then the game puts you into a world/shard/instance with people that share the same interest. So why not employ this technology for those who want the complete pvE experience, maybe for RP reasons, maybe because they don't care for the PvP part at all.
I mean, from what I heard they could use that preference system to tailor your gaming experience in a very specific way. So why not use it to have "RP servers" or "PvE Only Servers" where there is no faction lock and friends can play together without any restrictions.
If ESO allow people to stay neutral, and joing any sides at will " at level 1 or level 100+ ", and have whole map available to explore? no restrictions to anyone, than you'll have all your conflicts solved.
Once you commited to any of the alience? then you're pvp flaged 24/7.
It ruins faction pride to be able to join any side at will. Some will stick with one faction, but most will follow the path of least resistance and just hop to whichever faction happens to be winning at that time. In the end you'll have a very few who enjoy the challenge of being the underdog split into two factions, and the massed swarm of people who want an easy win all in one faction.
And if the momentum shifts to another faction? All of those players hop over to their new home for easy wins. Faction lock is really the best hurdle to keep that type of player from destroying the game.
If faction choice was final whold that satisfy you? I.E. you are not part of a faction but throughout your PvE gaming experience you are made aware of the war, what each side fights for and who you would need to speak to if you wanted to join a side. Think how Skyrim does it with the faction choice to join the Imperials or the Stormcloaks. The war is all about you but until you decide to join the fight you are a civillian.
Then, should you wish to join a faction you head to that factions holdings (as it is that would be the same 3 racial regions per faction), meet the recruiter, complete a series of faction quests then make your final choice. Once you make that choice you can then enter the warzone in Cyrodil, till then you are just a normal civillian.
That to me would 100% satisfy me. Exploration is available in all parts of the map, choice of race and faction are independent so you are not forced into a faction just because the designers say that race must be that faction, once the choice is made you fight for your faction because that is who you want to fight for not just because you have no other choice, 3 faction PvP in Cyrodil remails untouched, PvP remains in Cyrodil...
The only argument I really hear is that of faction pride but as I tried to point out before in other posts your faction is the one you belong to and it is much better to fight because you choose to do so then because that is the only option available for your race.
And I don't see a problem with people of other races wandering around the world. 'outsider races' can be treated liek 2nd class citizens for all I care but rest assured there will be NPC's of otehr races in your faction land, there will probably be traders, pilgrims, people fleeing the war, people trying to make money off the war and all sorts of people doing things that normally take place during war times.
It occurs to me what the real problem is with accepting faction lock with ESO versus a game like DAoC.
In Dark Age, you had 3 distinct worlds based on historical myth: Hibernia (Celtic Lore), Albion (Arthurian Lore), and Midgard (Norse Lore). So going into the game, you picked your faction first, your lore and setting preference, and then chose your race amongst several choices based on that setting. Those were 3 distinct lore types, and all had been completely familiar to us since we'd grown up hearing those stories. Therefore, going into the game we knew which lore style we liked best.
With ESO, they're taking one world, one lore, and breaking it up into three Alliances. We don't have any prior familiarity with these alliances, so the decision is based entirely on what race we'd prefer to play. ZM now has to fight an uphill battle to convince us that our preferred race is in a cool alliance.
I think that's why so many people have issues with the faction lock. It's because they don't know much about the Aldmeri Dominion, but they know they've loved playing as a Khajiit, so now they feel stuck. I can actually understand that.
I still stand by faction lock being the best mechanic for this type of RvR game, and the lore they're usig to back it up, but now I think I understand the other side's complaints a bit better.
Yes, I believe that is exactly what people have issues with. You have put it into words very nicely
Btw, why don't we try to think of some solutions to the issue instead of having the camps go at each other's throat? I think we can all agree on the fact, that no matter what stance one has on this issue, we all want to have a game at the end that we can enjoy. If noone cared about the game we wouldn't have these heated discussions. It happens though, gaming is a passionate hobby after all
So, what about that mega server technology? They have something that gives you a sort of survey where you can tell the game what gaming preferences you have. So...then the game puts you into a world/shard/instance with people that share the same interest. So why not employ this technology for those who want the complete pvE experience, maybe for RP reasons, maybe because they don't care for the PvP part at all.
I mean, from what I heard they could use that preference system to tailor your gaming experience in a very specific way. So why not use it to have "RP servers" or "PvE Only Servers" where there is no faction lock and friends can play together without any restrictions.
Agree with both posts above in essence. One of the characters I was hoping to make was an Orc mercenary who fled his homelands due to the conflict between the Orcs and the Bretons/Redguards. Hoping someday to get strong, return home and kill some of his sworns enemy. When faction locks and what that ment became clear I realised that it was just too restrictive, too narrow minded a design (Personal opinion of course).
As mentioned I also just don't get how they went about it. They design this megaserver idea that basically means you can come up with all sorts of combinations of playstyle and have a 'world' for each of them. Then the block off the worlds with physical barriers and hard code race and factions to really restrict the freedom to play how you want. It is like they dangled this really big "Megaserver gives you total freedom to play how you want with who you want" Then shoved a massive spike through the middle and said "but just make suer you play how we want and with who we want you to play with'.
You would have thought with such an open system idea as the megaserver they wouldn't make it totally pointless by putting in barriers to make the idea pointless but they did and here we are.
It occurs to me what the real problem is with accepting faction lock with ESO versus a game like DAoC.
In Dark Age, you had 3 distinct worlds based on historical myth: Hibernia (Celtic Lore), Albion (Arthurian Lore), and Midgard (Norse Lore). So going into the game, you picked your faction first, your lore and setting preference, and then chose your race amongst several choices based on that setting. Those were 3 distinct lore types, and all had been completely familiar to us since we'd grown up hearing those stories. Therefore, going into the game we knew which lore style we liked best.
With ESO, they're taking one world, one lore, and breaking it up into three Alliances. We don't have any prior familiarity with these alliances, so the decision is based entirely on what race we'd prefer to play. ZM now has to fight an uphill battle to convince us that our preferred race is in a cool alliance.
I think that's why so many people have issues with the faction lock. It's because they don't know much about the Aldmeri Dominion, but they know they've loved playing as a Khajiit, so now they feel stuck. I can actually understand that.
I still stand by faction lock being the best mechanic for this type of RvR game, and the lore they're usig to back it up, but now I think I understand the other side's complaints a bit better.
Yes, I believe that is exactly what people have issues with. You have put it into words very nicely
Btw, why don't we try to think of some solutions to the issue instead of having the camps go at each other's throat? I think we can all agree on the fact, that no matter what stance one has on this issue, we all want to have a game at the end that we can enjoy. If noone cared about the game we wouldn't have these heated discussions. It happens though, gaming is a passionate hobby after all
So, what about that mega server technology? They have something that gives you a sort of survey where you can tell the game what gaming preferences you have. So...then the game puts you into a world/shard/instance with people that share the same interest. So why not employ this technology for those who want the complete pvE experience, maybe for RP reasons, maybe because they don't care for the PvP part at all.
I mean, from what I heard they could use that preference system to tailor your gaming experience in a very specific way. So why not use it to have "RP servers" or "PvE Only Servers" where there is no faction lock and friends can play together without any restrictions.
That would work...but only if the PvE-Only servers had a blank void where Cyrodiil is in the AvA servers Or, kidding aside, they develop a totally different versions of Cyrodiil complete with NPC dialogue and quests that make sense in a non-AvA war environment for the PvE-Only servers.
RP is a different matter. RP+PvP or RP without PvP are equally attractive options although, as an RP PvPer, I know it's a small minority of the player base.
I keep harping on the same point, not because I'm obstinate (there's enough obstinacy in this forum without me adding to it lol) but because I think that having a consistent story that makes sense throughout the whole fantasy world in the MMO is a key core concept.
Grouping, chatting and "guilding" with people from factions that you are at war with in the current AvA-only model is nonsensical. It would take a total redesign to an MMO environment without a 3-way war for that to make sense. In the current design model for this particular time in the history Tamriel, keeping the 3 factions apart in the areas where the war hasn't reached (yet) makes sense. Fantasy wars in MMOs are modeled based on our own human experience. When significantly large wars break-out between nations, there is just a natural amount of hate and fear directed at those other aliens. Some sort of racial locking would have to exist. Some argue that they want to play a renegade...nice idea... good RP potential, but that would have to be the rare exception--not something that everyone could do willy-nilly.
I understand that this 3-sided war is a big change for single player TES fans to adjust to and is unlike the stories they have seen before in this world where, typically, there is an internal group of bad-guy conspirators or feuding lords that drive the main plot. All I can say about that is that some people seem to adjust to change better than others.
As to DAoC... as I said in an earlier post now Sapphened into obscurity due to lack of voluminous repetition, I can also conceive of a single player DAoC franchise where there was no 3 sided wars and the different races mixed in PvE ways...maybe even banded together to fight a common greater enemy. That, would also have been a large change for those who had only ever played the MMO version of DAoC but I don't see anything implausible about peace breaking out.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Comments
You claiming reducing the choice's available is in every way foolish and limiting, is plain wrong.
In TES single player games, you can, if you want to, make the choice to kill every single NPC in the game, permanently.
Now, some people have voiced the opinion that TESO should be the same as singleplayer TES, in every way, even though it is an MMO.
How cool would it be, if once you finished creating your character, you venture out into the world, and find no NPCs at all, because everyone that was faster than you at creating a character, decided it would be fun to kill every NPC they came across, just like they did when they played singleplayer TES.....
There are valid reason's for design decisions that limit the choices players can make, if you cannot see that, or do not like that, fine, leave TESO alone, go play something else.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
I didn't say it was a bad game, only that TES should be a more suitable measurement than WoW. ESO may be a MMO but it is also a TES game. WoW doesn't even have a proper FPV.
It is not a path though, it's a preference. It shouldn't matter if Skyrim offerened a complete 360 FOV, it still has a field advantage over the FPV.
[mod edit]
LOL, I agree. It's like they think it's impossible to play in FPV. There are many games that only have this view with "enemies appearing behind you". Sure you can't see them but it doesn't mean you don't know they are there. I can't wait for all the youtube videos of 'hardcore' PvPers owning in FPV.
More choices are not always better...
The Paradox of Choice - Why More Is Less is a 2004 book by American psychologist Barry Schwartz. In the book, Schwartz argues that eliminating comsumer choices can greatly reduce anxiety for shoppers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less
Primate example, Path of Exile
PS: Don't forget to scan the whole thing. Hold left mouse button down and move around like you would on a map.
http://www.pathofexile.com/passive-skill-tree
Just look at that cluster ****. How can anyone say that looks like good design or appealing?
It is not just WoW though. As much as you want this to be Skyrim (well in your case Morrowind) Online it will not be. Too much of the "single player experience" does not translate well to group play. There is a reason why the games are designed differently, all the way down to the UI. MMo's for example do not do the "hand thing" for first person because it shows just how low poly their weapons are, not to mention it severely limits them on just how the weapons can be designed. Its why the swords and axes in Skyrim look more like Larp weapons than real counterparts.
It's not just about the Fov though. It has a lot to do with how the game itself is designed. How animals spawns as zones are generated in Skyrim for example. You will rarely get attacked from the back or sides in the vanilla game. That is due to both how things are spawned and Skyrims pretty natoriously poor Ai.
[mod edit]
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
What are you even talking about!? This is about comparing FPV and TPV against WoW and previous TES games. You said that everyone who plays a video game will use TPV over FPV because they have a sight advantage. I said look at previous TES games and see that most people played them in FPV (or a mixture of both). You said no one plays FPV in WoW and I said it compares closer to TES than WoW in this instance. We are not even talking about what I want the game to be like, only if FPV will be the minority.
It is about the FOV in this case because it's the topic at hand. If I refute your comment, you can't suddenly say it's not about the FOV anymore. Just concede that point and then move to the next one
[mod edit]
Both of these boil down to the same point that I am not sure I am not expliaing well enough, or if you really are too dense to understand. A larger Fov gives an advantage. How large of an advantage is due to how the game is designed. Most previous games did not bother "fine tuning" the fpv because its costly and causes a ton of issues when most players will not use it. Some of these problems are mitigated in Tes games by things like how zones spawn, notoriously poor ai, limiting camera control etc. The overall design of the game to promote a certain feel subconsiously leads certain players in certain directions. Look at how CoD is played compared to Spec Ops: the line. Very similar games that are played very differently. Many of those tricks that previous Tes games have utilized, whether on purpose or not, do not make for a good multiplayer experience.
[mod edit]
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
I'll say it, if you're too scared to speak the truth. WoW is outright a bad game. Poorly designed and only kept alive through brand name and momentum. I will defend that.
You're calling me dense but the discussion is simple. I keep repeating myself for a reason, it's not about a good multiplayer experience or how CoD is played. It's about you claiming that people who use FPV in ESO will be the minority when we do not know.
[mod edit]LOL, I'm just trying to keep this guy on topic. He's trying everything he can to change the subject, I didn't even want to open that door.
I would honestly like to see what random shit you pull out of your ass to attempt that.
You keep repeating yourself because you watch way too much Fox News and think that if you keep talking long enough everyone else will shut up. You are quite correct, the discussion is simple. The minority will be in first person because the developers cannot possibly be so stupid as to implement the changes needed to make it on par with third person in an mmo environment. It would kill the game.
And again, fps games are designed differently. Most fps games have a rather high Fov built in through camera trickery, and even then ones "spidey sense" does not kick in unless you know the map exceptionally well.
[mod edit]
http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/
Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!
Again, it is an assumption. You can pull as many reasons out of your ass as you want but it doesn't change the fact WE DO NOT KNOW WHO THE MINORITY WILL BE.
I keep giving you examples that you willfully choose to ignore, claiming that it's is different everytime I prove you wrong. Then you resort to name calling and anger instead of rational discussion.
[mod edit]
You claiming reducing the choice's available is in every way foolish and limiting, is plain wrong.
In TES single player games, you can, if you want to, make the choice to kill every single NPC in the game, permanently.
Now, some people have voiced the opinion that TESO should be the same as singleplayer TES, in every way, even though it is an MMO.
How cool would it be, if once you finished creating your character, you venture out into the world, and find no NPCs at all, because everyone that was faster than you at creating a character, decided it would be fun to kill every NPC they came across, just like they did when they played singleplayer TES.....
There are valid reason's for design decisions that limit the choices players can make, if you cannot see that, or do not like that, fine, leave TESO alone, go play something else.
exactly, people that want this to be exactly like the single player ES games are not being realistic at all and are probably just trolling.
the single player ES games had absolutely no end game content either.
this is an MMO after all, to expect it to have no mmo features and to just be exactly like the single player games is just flat out unrealistic.
then again, most of the whining that goes on, on MMORPG.com is based on unrealistic expectations, so it doesn't surprise me one bit.
You are dead wrong.
Yeah wow made the brand, shit games dont do that. I know i dont like wow, its not for me, but im not an internet meme puppet. I could clearly see how well the game was designed and coded. There is a reason so many people still play that game, and no its not the narcissistic "oh well they are just stupid people while im smart" type of deal.
The game was a stroke of brilliance, i dont blame blizzard for the fact that every developer and their mother try to clone the game resulting in every mmorpg being the same. Also i dont get hung up on the dated character models.
Wow lost its momentum long ago, very long time ago it stopped being the cool game to play, its not the cool game to hate. Yet still every other developer out there tries desperately to hold even a portion of the audience wow has kept happy for like a decade...thats the truth people dont want to hear.
Again games not for me, i didnt like it, but im not a child or a narcissist who thinks my opinion is the only valid one and the truth. I could easily see how well the game was made, despite lacking visual appeal.
So take it from a non wow player, that game is well made, its numbers speak for its self. And no lets not do the lame mcdonalds analogy, theres nothing quick or cheap about the game, and its just as convenient as the others to play...oh i think the bieber anaolgy is another popular "well just cuz people like it doesnt make it good" to that i say: well if more people think something you hate is appealing...well thats why everyone has an opinion...
Well of course he is. Just another person trying to make a point by bashing WoW. So what it has dominated for well over 8 years. That longevity is due to poor design, brand name and momentum. Even though that goes against everything that is logical and history proves this to be entirely false.
No one here is to scared to speak the truth. Some people just know the difference between a truth and an opinion.
If ESO allow people to stay neutral, and joing any sides at will " at level 1 or level 100+ ", and have whole map available to explore? no restrictions to anyone, than you'll have all your conflicts solved.
Once you commited to any of the alience? then you're pvp flaged 24/7.
Heh, how you came to the conclusion that I was agreeing with you goes beyond my logical mind. Incentive will always override the path of least resistance. Incentives will encourage people to do the harder and or more tedious content in order to get the better and or greater quantities of rewards. You obviously don't understand the meaning.
It ruins faction pride to be able to join any side at will. Some will stick with one faction, but most will follow the path of least resistance and just hop to whichever faction happens to be winning at that time. In the end you'll have a very few who enjoy the challenge of being the underdog split into two factions, and the massed swarm of people who want an easy win all in one faction.
And if the momentum shifts to another faction? All of those players hop over to their new home for easy wins. Faction lock is really the best hurdle to keep that type of player from destroying the game.
It occurs to me what the real problem is with accepting faction lock with ESO versus a game like DAoC.
In Dark Age, you had 3 distinct worlds based on historical myth: Hibernia (Celtic Lore), Albion (Arthurian Lore), and Midgard (Norse Lore). So going into the game, you picked your faction first, your lore and setting preference, and then chose your race amongst several choices based on that setting. Those were 3 distinct lore types, and all had been completely familiar to us since we'd grown up hearing those stories. Therefore, going into the game we knew which lore style we liked best.
With ESO, they're taking one world, one lore, and breaking it up into three Alliances. We don't have any prior familiarity with these alliances, so the decision is based entirely on what race we'd prefer to play. ZM now has to fight an uphill battle to convince us that our preferred race is in a cool alliance.
I think that's why so many people have issues with the faction lock. It's because they don't know much about the Aldmeri Dominion, but they know they've loved playing as a Khajiit, so now they feel stuck. I can actually understand that.
I still stand by faction lock being the best mechanic for this type of RvR game, and the lore they're usig to back it up, but now I think I understand the other side's complaints a bit better.
What WoW tries to be, an MMORPG, it is bad at. It has bad PvP, bad crafting, bad questing systems, a bad class system, a bad econ, and pretty average raiding.
It's crafting is shallow. It's PvE is all solo instanced/phasing. It has quest based leveling, so there are 10 shit quests to ever 1 passable one, and they all blend together and tell you exactly where to go. The PvP is a laughable joke, there's no consequence for failure or victory, it has no bearing on the story or the rest of the game. A MOBA could do what WoW does but better, and for free. And it has one of the least inspired and limited class systems, with some of the most boring classes in any RPG I've ever played.
And its raids are just EQ raids, but made 100 times easier. There is no risk vs reward in the entire game design. No death penalty. No depth.
It got where it was because it was the first MMO developed by a huge well known company with legions of fans, and the first company to put millions of dollars into a year long ad campaign long before the game came out.
Yes, I believe that is exactly what people have issues with. You have put it into words very nicely
Btw, why don't we try to think of some solutions to the issue instead of having the camps go at each other's throat? I think we can all agree on the fact, that no matter what stance one has on this issue, we all want to have a game at the end that we can enjoy. If noone cared about the game we wouldn't have these heated discussions. It happens though, gaming is a passionate hobby after all
So, what about that mega server technology? They have something that gives you a sort of survey where you can tell the game what gaming preferences you have. So...then the game puts you into a world/shard/instance with people that share the same interest. So why not employ this technology for those who want the complete pvE experience, maybe for RP reasons, maybe because they don't care for the PvP part at all.
I mean, from what I heard they could use that preference system to tailor your gaming experience in a very specific way. So why not use it to have "RP servers" or "PvE Only Servers" where there is no faction lock and friends can play together without any restrictions.
If faction choice was final whold that satisfy you? I.E. you are not part of a faction but throughout your PvE gaming experience you are made aware of the war, what each side fights for and who you would need to speak to if you wanted to join a side. Think how Skyrim does it with the faction choice to join the Imperials or the Stormcloaks. The war is all about you but until you decide to join the fight you are a civillian.
Then, should you wish to join a faction you head to that factions holdings (as it is that would be the same 3 racial regions per faction), meet the recruiter, complete a series of faction quests then make your final choice. Once you make that choice you can then enter the warzone in Cyrodil, till then you are just a normal civillian.
That to me would 100% satisfy me. Exploration is available in all parts of the map, choice of race and faction are independent so you are not forced into a faction just because the designers say that race must be that faction, once the choice is made you fight for your faction because that is who you want to fight for not just because you have no other choice, 3 faction PvP in Cyrodil remails untouched, PvP remains in Cyrodil...
The only argument I really hear is that of faction pride but as I tried to point out before in other posts your faction is the one you belong to and it is much better to fight because you choose to do so then because that is the only option available for your race.
And I don't see a problem with people of other races wandering around the world. 'outsider races' can be treated liek 2nd class citizens for all I care but rest assured there will be NPC's of otehr races in your faction land, there will probably be traders, pilgrims, people fleeing the war, people trying to make money off the war and all sorts of people doing things that normally take place during war times.
Agree with both posts above in essence. One of the characters I was hoping to make was an Orc mercenary who fled his homelands due to the conflict between the Orcs and the Bretons/Redguards. Hoping someday to get strong, return home and kill some of his sworns enemy. When faction locks and what that ment became clear I realised that it was just too restrictive, too narrow minded a design (Personal opinion of course).
As mentioned I also just don't get how they went about it. They design this megaserver idea that basically means you can come up with all sorts of combinations of playstyle and have a 'world' for each of them. Then the block off the worlds with physical barriers and hard code race and factions to really restrict the freedom to play how you want. It is like they dangled this really big "Megaserver gives you total freedom to play how you want with who you want" Then shoved a massive spike through the middle and said "but just make suer you play how we want and with who we want you to play with'.
You would have thought with such an open system idea as the megaserver they wouldn't make it totally pointless by putting in barriers to make the idea pointless but they did and here we are.
That would work...but only if the PvE-Only servers had a blank void where Cyrodiil is in the AvA servers
Or, kidding aside, they develop a totally different versions of Cyrodiil complete with NPC dialogue and quests that make sense in a non-AvA war environment for the PvE-Only servers.
RP is a different matter. RP+PvP or RP without PvP are equally attractive options although, as an RP PvPer, I know it's a small minority of the player base.
I keep harping on the same point, not because I'm obstinate (there's enough obstinacy in this forum without me adding to it lol) but because I think that having a consistent story that makes sense throughout the whole fantasy world in the MMO is a key core concept.
Grouping, chatting and "guilding" with people from factions that you are at war with in the current AvA-only model is nonsensical. It would take a total redesign to an MMO environment without a 3-way war for that to make sense. In the current design model for this particular time in the history Tamriel, keeping the 3 factions apart in the areas where the war hasn't reached (yet) makes sense. Fantasy wars in MMOs are modeled based on our own human experience. When significantly large wars break-out between nations, there is just a natural amount of hate and fear directed at those other aliens. Some sort of racial locking would have to exist. Some argue that they want to play a renegade...nice idea... good RP potential, but that would have to be the rare exception--not something that everyone could do willy-nilly.
I understand that this 3-sided war is a big change for single player TES fans to adjust to and is unlike the stories they have seen before in this world where, typically, there is an internal group of bad-guy conspirators or feuding lords that drive the main plot. All I can say about that is that some people seem to adjust to change better than others.
As to DAoC... as I said in an earlier post now Sapphened into obscurity due to lack of voluminous repetition, I can also conceive of a single player DAoC franchise where there was no 3 sided wars and the different races mixed in PvE ways...maybe even banded together to fight a common greater enemy. That, would also have been a large change for those who had only ever played the MMO version of DAoC but I don't see anything implausible about peace breaking out.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED