I really like the ideas behind this game so far, I don't know where they got rune-crafting from, but oh well... I like the idea of having a merchant's guild.
Although I really disagree with the PvP system, mostly for the social aspect of it that everyone is basically ex-communicated from 2/3s of the game's community unless you're PvP and the only communication there is with your sword in their face or theirs in yours.
I just hope that when one reaches level 50, that when going to a different alliance region doesn't make oneself a enemy target for players of that alliance that would just be annoying.
As well as the fact that for a lot of TES fans, who have a lot of friends that play TES also, will choose an alliance based of what race they see themselves as. as me being an Argonian and i have a few friends who are Khajitts, we wouldn't be able to play at all together and switching races just for the sake of stupid PvP restrictions would seem to take away a lot of fun from it.
One problem I've heard so far is that PvP sounds like Dark Age of Camelot where it's a realm vs realm vs realm thing. Only Consented style PvP not the style of DarkFall or Ultima Online per say for PvP can start anywhere once you leave a safe zone.
Which is not very Elder Scroll style if they are taking this stance on consented or when I want to PvP.
One problem I've heard so far is that PvP sounds like Dark Age of Camelot where it's a realm vs realm vs realm thing. Only Consented style PvP not the style of DarkFall or Ultima Online per say for PvP can start anywhere once you leave a safe zone.
Which is not very Elder Scroll style if they are taking this stance on consented or when I want to PvP.
Elder Scrolls is a single player game, hence it has no PvP to relate to so in essence any PvP they implement in ESO is going against the norm.
Random Forum Poster: I want an MMO that is different, original and fun.
Me: So you want something like EQN
Them: Nah dude, I want a Holy Trinity, Tab Target combat, Instanced Raiding, and Rigid classes.
Maybe if people complain loudly enough they can add a differentiation between hardcore (single membership only) vs casual (allows multiple guild memberships).
They CAN have both.
Other than that, this game is really shaping up.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
There is not the least urge in me to sympahise with all the stubborn PvE-only-fans, as well as all those who speak against the three realms-system: There have been plenty successful games with these techniques. Dark Age Of Camelot was loved by its fanbase, and its clone "Heroes of Regnum" [earlier "Regnum Online", and "Realms Online"] had me satisfied in every aspect for several years.
How can you possibly want to play an MMO, and not be interested in PvP? It is the essence of a multiplayer RPG to encourage the desire to form alliances and best your opponents - enemies who have become powerful by way of cunning wit, or committed training.
The most important part of the game has been left out in this interview; the character-progression in this game is lovely, which is all I personally need for good immersion. It is also trying to accord to the TES-system, which I simply loved.
The guild issue can be solved by treating one guild as the main guild for raiding, and the others for chat. The way it can encourage that is with the guild bank and guild benefits. So the guild that does the best raiding, will have the most guild benefits relating to raiding, so a raider would be loyal and dedicated to that guild as well.
Any other guild will just be for an alliance sake. I am not going to brainstorm social benefits of having other guilds as part of a person's network, and I leave that to the devs... but the incentives should be in the right place, and having more than one guild can be a fun and interesting thing that makes a person feel more part of the community.
Maybe the guilds can also be NPC guilds as well. However, I doubt being part of a NPC guild would be that useful of the NPC's don't play a role in the open world.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Please ESO do NOT do the multiple guild thing, its a BAD idea. The purpose of a guild is to commit to a set of rules or social atmosphere and player types that you are willing to support in combat, in economy, in war, and in spirit. Giving people the ability to friend the entire world and have FIVE guilds is both redundant and takes away from guild mechanics for the leaders; as well as ruins immersion.
IE (A member of the fighters guild should not be running around as a member of the thieves guild... fundamentally both of these guilds are usually at war with eachother.)
Sounds interesting but my question is can a player learn all the trade skills or just one. IS enchanting going to be like it is in the other games swing a sword a few times and have to spend several soul gems trying to recharge the sword or is it going to be permanent.
The PvP sounds interesting though I foresee the same elite people always being emperor so that is a turn off. but assaulting keeps adds in a new flavor, do you A) go throigh the front door with little damage to the walls or do you Destroy all walls and slaughter everybody and use resources to build all the walls back up which tells me I hope the implement a collective of resources for all the Alliances to use. as in Team one has 1500 resources team b has 2000 and team c has 109, it cost 100 per wall from the collective resource to repair the wall or whatever the case, to force to think what is a better way of taking a fort when besides destroying all walls and having to hunt for resources to build the pool back up.
Originally posted by meddyck Hey an actual mention of AvA! But unfortunately it's all about the boring part that every game does: keeps and sieging.
The boring part?
As a DAoC vet, I respectfully disagree.. Keep sieges and taking towers and control points was a blast, and it sounds like they're going to do it once more, with better class/skill systems, new graphics, and the ES lore.. And now that you have to take each factions home keep, it'll be like Reic Raids all over again!
Very, very excited.. On paper.. We'll see how it performs.
HA I had t laugh at this - every game has siege warfare....so funny it shouldn't even have been replied to but I couldn't help wondering if "Little Honey Boo Boo" had just posted that.
As a DAoC vet here as well, let's remember that most of the gaming community has been fed garbage for over a decade. This is as close to DAoC 2 as we will get (perhaps a bit from Camelot Unchained someday) ...and siege warfare in a truly developed PvP model like ESO is nothing - NOTHING like what you are used to folks.
Realm pride, for the win - a term most don't understand yet - but soon will.
Comments
I really like the ideas behind this game so far, I don't know where they got rune-crafting from, but oh well... I like the idea of having a merchant's guild.
Although I really disagree with the PvP system, mostly for the social aspect of it that everyone is basically ex-communicated from 2/3s of the game's community unless you're PvP and the only communication there is with your sword in their face or theirs in yours.
I just hope that when one reaches level 50, that when going to a different alliance region doesn't make oneself a enemy target for players of that alliance that would just be annoying.
As well as the fact that for a lot of TES fans, who have a lot of friends that play TES also, will choose an alliance based of what race they see themselves as. as me being an Argonian and i have a few friends who are Khajitts, we wouldn't be able to play at all together and switching races just for the sake of stupid PvP restrictions would seem to take away a lot of fun from it.
One problem I've heard so far is that PvP sounds like Dark Age of Camelot where it's a realm vs realm vs realm thing. Only Consented style PvP not the style of DarkFall or Ultima Online per say for PvP can start anywhere once you leave a safe zone.
Which is not very Elder Scroll style if they are taking this stance on consented or when I want to PvP.
Elder Scrolls is a single player game, hence it has no PvP to relate to so in essence any PvP they implement in ESO is going against the norm.
Random Forum Poster: I want an MMO that is different, original and fun.
Me: So you want something like EQN
Them: Nah dude, I want a Holy Trinity, Tab Target combat, Instanced Raiding, and Rigid classes.
Me: Double Facepalm.
Maybe if people complain loudly enough they can add a differentiation between hardcore (single membership only) vs casual (allows multiple guild memberships).
They CAN have both.
Other than that, this game is really shaping up.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
There have been plenty successful games with these techniques. Dark Age Of Camelot was loved by its fanbase, and its clone "Heroes of Regnum" [earlier "Regnum Online", and "Realms Online"] had me satisfied in every aspect for several years.
How can you possibly want to play an MMO, and not be interested in PvP? It is the essence of a multiplayer RPG to encourage the desire to form alliances and best your opponents - enemies who have become powerful by way of cunning wit, or committed training.
The most important part of the game has been left out in this interview; the character-progression in this game is lovely, which is all I personally need for good immersion. It is also trying to accord to the TES-system, which I simply loved.
I must say, I love where this game is going.
The guild issue can be solved by treating one guild as the main guild for raiding, and the others for chat. The way it can encourage that is with the guild bank and guild benefits. So the guild that does the best raiding, will have the most guild benefits relating to raiding, so a raider would be loyal and dedicated to that guild as well.
Any other guild will just be for an alliance sake. I am not going to brainstorm social benefits of having other guilds as part of a person's network, and I leave that to the devs... but the incentives should be in the right place, and having more than one guild can be a fun and interesting thing that makes a person feel more part of the community.
Maybe the guilds can also be NPC guilds as well. However, I doubt being part of a NPC guild would be that useful of the NPC's don't play a role in the open world.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Please ESO do NOT do the multiple guild thing, its a BAD idea. The purpose of a guild is to commit to a set of rules or social atmosphere and player types that you are willing to support in combat, in economy, in war, and in spirit. Giving people the ability to friend the entire world and have FIVE guilds is both redundant and takes away from guild mechanics for the leaders; as well as ruins immersion.
IE (A member of the fighters guild should not be running around as a member of the thieves guild... fundamentally both of these guilds are usually at war with eachother.)
Same concept with social guilds.
Sounds interesting but my question is can a player learn all the trade skills or just one. IS enchanting going to be like it is in the other games swing a sword a few times and have to spend several soul gems trying to recharge the sword or is it going to be permanent.
The PvP sounds interesting though I foresee the same elite people always being emperor so that is a turn off. but assaulting keeps adds in a new flavor, do you A) go throigh the front door with little damage to the walls or do you
Destroy all walls and slaughter everybody and use resources to build all the walls back up which tells me I hope the implement a collective of resources for all the Alliances to use. as in Team one has 1500 resources team b has 2000 and team c has 109, it cost 100 per wall from the collective resource to repair the wall or whatever the case, to force to think what is a better way of taking a fort when besides destroying all walls and having to hunt for resources to build the pool back up.
HA I had t laugh at this - every game has siege warfare....so funny it shouldn't even have been replied to but I couldn't help wondering if "Little Honey Boo Boo" had just posted that.
As a DAoC vet here as well, let's remember that most of the gaming community has been fed garbage for over a decade. This is as close to DAoC 2 as we will get (perhaps a bit from Camelot Unchained someday) ...and siege warfare in a truly developed PvP model like ESO is nothing - NOTHING like what you are used to folks.
Realm pride, for the win - a term most don't understand yet - but soon will.