This is a new age of gaming. You can't just throw out 6-10 hours of boring play and expect people to get through it. Its a first look/preview of the early levels of the game. You may not like some of the reports on early game but it is an issue for sure. The big test for this game will be on consoles, if people are not out of the gate having fun then there are other games out there that can fill that need. They should have made the first part of the game more exciting.
Bingo - they need a full redo of the first 10 levels, sadly I don't think there's time left for that.
Hopefully they let players start at lvl 10.
Every MMO starts out slow.... its a learning curve... its fun to see people crying out loud that they dont need that, just to find out 2 centences later that they dont understand the combat system at all, and play the game like its a WoW clone
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
The problem is, unless you're familiar with the game or clicking through all the voice overs 4-6 hours doesn't get you to level 10. Whoever at Zenimax thought it would be a brilliant idea to gate the PvP behind a 10 hour quest grind should probably not still have a job. The critics played a reasonable amount of time and correctly identified that the 1-9 experience was subpar even compared to "unsuccessful" games like SWTOR and gw2.
I think those are two separate issues.
1, the "questing" from 1-10 is not sub par or at least "to my opinion" it is not sub par. I do however agree that there are sections that aren't good but can't go into detail
2, I agree, the pvp should not be behind a level 10 wall. If there are players who do not like pve or do not like ESO's pve then that is a huge issue. You as a beta tester should make your feelings known. I know I will.
edit: general question: does Guild Wars 2 have a level minimum to take part in its pvp?
WvW is accessible in about 10 minutes after character creation.
On paper the ESO quests seem to stack up well against other mmos, and I hate to judge an mmo on how much fun I had, but that was my issue. I've never lost interest in a new quality mmo that fast before, the quest just completely lost all their shine well before level 10. So personally I found 1-10 in gw2 and SWTOR both far more enjoyable.
I cant take any of you guys serious as mmo gamers if you think a review that stops at level 5 - 10 and they dont even leave the noob zone is acceptable.
We all know how this works, we know the noob zone sometimes is shitty, we also know if the game has 50 levels, you need to get at least level 30 before you decide to write a game off. A lot of times shine late game some games shine earlier, but what that is always a pacing issue.
I disregarded every review i read that didnt even include crafting, pvp or dungeons. You are missing 3 key aspects of the game and i am supposed to take your advice, fuck right off.
Im glad you got paid to write a review after playing a game for a few hours but lets look at it from a single player vantage. Its skyrim, review plays up to Helgen and decided to trash skyrim as a horrible game. We all know that guy is an asshole, you mean you made your character, dude the tutorial ran tot he first city, started the main quest and then turned the game off? Well then, youre opinion certainly is valid im sure!
Lol I laughed when I read this because its so dead on accurate. I'm actually enjoying the forum whining going on here right now because I watched some of these very same posters straight up bash and completely disregard the concerns of some regarding SWTOR before it launched. The argument was something like, "you're all just a bunch of bitter SWG vets who are mad you didn't get the game you wanted...blah...blah..blah." No matter the concerns were dead on accurate. You didn't get the game you wanted and now your concerns and complaints have merit? Get the fuck outta here with that shit you hypocritical little bitches.
This is a new age of gaming. You can't just throw out 6-10 hours of boring play and expect people to get through it. Its a first look/preview of the early levels of the game. You may not like some of the reports on early game but it is an issue for sure. The big test for this game will be on consoles, if people are not out of the gate having fun then there are other games out there that can fill that need. They should have made the first part of the game more exciting.
Bingo - they need a full redo of the first 10 levels, sadly I don't think there's time left for that.
Hopefully they let players start at lvl 10.
Every MMO starts out slow.... its a learning curve... its fun to see people crying out loud that they dont need that, just to find out 2 centences later that they dont understand the combat system at all, and play the game like its a WoW clone
Not every mmo, if you have one of the good class stories in SWTOR it grabs your attention right away. The Gw2 opening/starting zone was also be boring or awesome depending on race. The AoC opening was pretty sweet as well, don't recall a lot of people complaining about that. Now the Tera opening was pretty slow and painful, they patched it to go by fast now.
Since almost none of the quests emphasize combat, or crafting, or really anything useful other than sneaking I fail to see why a 10 hour tutorial is needed.
This is a new age of gaming. You can't just throw out 6-10 hours of boring play and expect people to get through it. Its a first look/preview of the early levels of the game. You may not like some of the reports on early game but it is an issue for sure. The big test for this game will be on consoles, if people are not out of the gate having fun then there are other games out there that can fill that need. They should have made the first part of the game more exciting.
Bingo - they need a full redo of the first 10 levels, sadly I don't think there's time left for that.
Hopefully they let players start at lvl 10.
Every MMO starts out slow.... its a learning curve... its fun to see people crying out loud that they dont need that, just to find out 2 centences later that they dont understand the combat system at all, and play the game like its a WoW clone
Not every mmo, if you have one of the good class stories in SWTOR it grabs your attention right away. The Gw2 opening/starting zone was also be boring or awesome depending on race. The AoC opening was pretty sweet as well, don't recall a lot of people complaining about that. Now the Tera opening was pretty slow and painful, they patched it to go by fast now.
Since almost none of the quests emphasize combat, or crafting, or really anything useful other than sneaking I fail to see why a 10 hour tutorial is needed.
I agree that the SWTOR starter part was more interesting to me, unfortunately, more interesting didn't stay interesting enough to convince me to play to end level. It appears this game 'might' do the reverse..though it wouldn't hurt to bump things up a little at the beginning.
I cant take any of you guys serious as mmo gamers if you think a review that stops at level 5 - 10 and they dont even leave the noob zone is acceptable.
We all know how this works, we know the noob zone sometimes is shitty, we also know if the game has 50 levels, you need to get at least level 30 before you decide to write a game off. A lot of times shine late game some games shine earlier, but what that is always a pacing issue.
I disregarded every review i read that didnt even include crafting, pvp or dungeons. You are missing 3 key aspects of the game and i am supposed to take your advice, fuck right off.
Im glad you got paid to write a review after playing a game for a few hours but lets look at it from a single player vantage.
Umm... you do know the difference between previews and reviews right?
You realize even in a preveiw, if youre allowed to go up to a certain cap, you hit that cap, the cap was level 15, stopping to reveiw at level 6 is just disingenuous.
Not really as long as it's clearly stated how far they got and that it is just their impressions of those early levels then it's not disingenuous at all.Not everyone has the time to reach cap in the given period.
Of course I've yet to see any proof that any previewer of this game only played briefly and tried to pass it off as a full review of the full game or even the first 15 levels.
You will never see any proof of that because its logically impossible to prove that. You prove positive statements. You can't prove negative statements except by finding a necessarily contradictory psostive statement and proving that.
In other words the reviewers should give you a definitive statement about where they got because without some sort of definitive thing showing their level (statement, picture, etc) you are just pissing in the wind off of unfounded assumptions.
You are thinking about it exactly backwards. It is up to these reviewers to give us real information to prove they are trustworthy. Not we trust them right off the bat. You can't trust them right off the bat because you can't prove they are lying without catching directly in a contradiction. This puts the reader in the worst position possible. It is incumbent upon the reviewer to prove, because he has by far the easiest position TO prove.
Maybe you didn't read the first part of my post you know the stuff about clearly stating how far they got and not trying to pass things off as something it's not?
As for Proof the burden of proof should be on the accuser,but I get your a Guilty till proven innocent kind of guy.
However I'm not advocating trusting any reviewer.As I've often stated reviews should be used intelligently in that you should find reviewers who's tastes and opinions align with your own over a long period of time and only then if you can't try the game for yourself to make a personal judgement.
Attacking reviewers just because they don't share your tastes and opinions is ridiculous as is accusing them of corruption or attention seeking for the same reason.
I cant take any of you guys serious as mmo gamers if you think a review that stops at level 5 - 10 and they dont even leave the noob zone is acceptable.
We all know how this works, we know the noob zone sometimes is shitty, we also know if the game has 50 levels, you need to get at least level 30 before you decide to write a game off. A lot of times shine late game some games shine earlier, but what that is always a pacing issue.
I disregarded every review i read that didnt even include crafting, pvp or dungeons. You are missing 3 key aspects of the game and i am supposed to take your advice, fuck right off.
Im glad you got paid to write a review after playing a game for a few hours but lets look at it from a single player vantage.
Umm... you do know the difference between previews and reviews right?
You realize even in a preveiw, if youre allowed to go up to a certain cap, you hit that cap, the cap was level 15, stopping to reveiw at level 6 is just disingenuous.
Not really as long as it's clearly stated how far they got and that it is just their impressions of those early levels then it's not disingenuous at all.Not everyone has the time to reach cap in the given period.
Of course I've yet to see any proof that any previewer of this game only played briefly and tried to pass it off as a full review of the full game or even the first 15 levels.
You will never see any proof of that because its logically impossible to prove that. You prove positive statements. You can't prove negative statements except by finding a necessarily contradictory psostive statement and proving that.
In other words the reviewers should give you a definitive statement about where they got because without some sort of definitive thing showing their level (statement, picture, etc) you are just pissing in the wind off of unfounded assumptions.
You are thinking about it exactly backwards. It is up to these reviewers to give us real information to prove they are trustworthy. Not we trust them right off the bat. You can't trust them right off the bat because you can't prove they are lying without catching directly in a contradiction. This puts the reader in the worst position possible. It is incumbent upon the reviewer to prove, because he has by far the easiest position TO prove.
Maybe you didn't read the first part of my post you know the stuff about clearly stating how far they got and not trying to pass things off as something it's not?
As for Proof the burden of proof should be on the accuser,but I get your a Guilty till proven innocent kind of guy.
However I'm not advocating trusting any reviewer.As I've often stated reviews should be used intelligently in that you should find reviewers who's tastes and opinions align with your own over a long period of time and only then if you can't try the game for yourself to make a personal judgement.
Attacking reviewers just because they don't share your tastes and opinions is ridiculous as is accusing them of corruption or attention seeking for the same reason.
The reviewer is the accuser. The reader is the jury. You have the relationships misidentified. I am not the accuser in the case. I am a member of the jury who thinks the accuser (and all of his ilk) is an incompetent wanker.
edit:
My attacks on reviewers have nothing to do with my tastes and everything to do with them being piss poor at their jobs. In fact I don't disagree with most the reviewers for this game but I do find them completely lacking in their abilities to give me any solid reason to take what they say seriously and complete doubt they have any idea how to actually support an argument much less even make one.
Ok, yeah. But the #1 reason it had a rough launch is that EVERYBODY was trying to play it at once because everybody was raving over how great it was (except the folks in the EQ2 crowd). Little different story here.
By the way, the title of this is as political as it gets. I'm neither an advocate or critic, but the guy is a bit delusional in his defense of the game and his attacks on the critics. This video shames nobody. He's trying to be a rallying point for the minority (unfortunately) that are supporting the game.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
so, a game that took 4+ years to develop is so bad that another company can put out a better version in mere months???
This ^.
Also, what's prevents people from these super express MMO companies from participating in the beta and seeing all the groundbreaking new idea's for themselves? Or reading about them in the numerous previews which aren't covered by NDA? Or hearing about them in the developer interviews, marketing campaigns etc...
And I must ask, what new ideas are in ESO worth copying? I honestly can't think of any... it just feels like your generic MMO #937 to me.
/shrug
1 - EVERYBODY has to agree to NDA. EVERYBODY.
2 - Not making a better game, stealing ideas and concept art and everything else.
3 - I'm not stupid enough to break NDA. So i'm not telling anything about the game. (nice try)
Also why are you still here? You don't like the game. So it seems to me your trolling. Go take part in other forums for games you like.
so, a game that took 4+ years to develop is so bad that another company can put out a better version in mere months???
This ^.
Also, what's prevents people from these super express MMO companies from participating in the beta and seeing all the groundbreaking new idea's for themselves? Or reading about them in the numerous previews which aren't covered by NDA? Or hearing about them in the developer interviews, marketing campaigns etc...
And I must ask, what new ideas are in ESO worth copying? I honestly can't think of any... it just feels like your generic MMO #937 to me.
/shrug
1 - EVERYBODY has to agree to NDA. EVERYBODY.
2 - Not making a better game, stealing ideas and concept art and everything else.
3 - I'm not stupid enough to break NDA. So i'm not telling anything about the game. (nice try)
Also why are you still here? You don't like the game. So it seems to me your trolling. Go take part in other forums for games you like.
This is a new age of gaming. You can't just throw out 6-10 hours of boring play and expect people to get through it. Its a first look/preview of the early levels of the game. You may not like some of the reports on early game but it is an issue for sure. The big test for this game will be on consoles, if people are not out of the gate having fun then there are other games out there that can fill that need. They should have made the first part of the game more exciting.
Bingo - they need a full redo of the first 10 levels, sadly I don't think there's time left for that.
Hopefully they let players start at lvl 10.
Every MMO starts out slow.... its a learning curve... its fun to see people crying out loud that they dont need that, just to find out 2 centences later that they dont understand the combat system at all, and play the game like its a WoW clone
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
The second guy sounds like someone, that should go RE RE RE all the way to guild wars 2.
Luckily third poster is the charm, you are one smart person, and make a great point.
Is it that hard to understand? Yes I poke fun at GW2, but in all seriousness I understand, some people like that non structure quest style of play (events) and non content. Good for them. I don't, doesn't make GW2 bad, I just personally hate it.
But reversed, some people like questing slowly and story. Starting off slow, becoming immersed. Not racing to end game, and focusing on gear. I know it's not for everyone, but what is?
Also don't think the people who hate this game, speak for the majority of gamers simply because they spew hate on here.
You can't go to any forum, without tons of WoW hate for 9 years, and last time I checked, they still have plenty of subs and making tons of money.
I personally wish I could take all these cry babies tears involving ESO, bottle them and make a soda. So I could enjoy drinking it, while playing my Imperial Edition of ESO. A ESO a day keeps the gaming Hobos away.
Guess I will have to settle for most of the haters, cry babies, trolls and hobos on here, not being in the game I enjoy lol.
so, a game that took 4+ years to develop is so bad that another company can put out a better version in mere months???
This ^.
Also, what's prevents people from these super express MMO companies from participating in the beta and seeing all the groundbreaking new idea's for themselves? Or reading about them in the numerous previews which aren't covered by NDA? Or hearing about them in the developer interviews, marketing campaigns etc...
And I must ask, what new ideas are in ESO worth copying? I honestly can't think of any... it just feels like your generic MMO #937 to me.
/shrug
1 - EVERYBODY has to agree to NDA. EVERYBODY.
2 - Not making a better game, stealing ideas and concept art and everything else.
3 - I'm not stupid enough to break NDA. So i'm not telling anything about the game. (nice try)
Also why are you still here? You don't like the game. So it seems to me your trolling. Go take part in other forums for games you like.
I cant take any of you guys serious as mmo gamers if you think a review that stops at level 5 - 10 and they dont even leave the noob zone is acceptable.
We all know how this works, we know the noob zone sometimes is shitty, we also know if the game has 50 levels, you need to get at least level 30 before you decide to write a game off. A lot of times shine late game some games shine earlier, but what that is always a pacing issue.
I disregarded every review i read that didnt even include crafting, pvp or dungeons. You are missing 3 key aspects of the game and i am supposed to take your advice, fuck right off.
Im glad you got paid to write a review after playing a game for a few hours but lets look at it from a single player vantage. Its skyrim, review plays up to Helgen and decided to trash skyrim as a horrible game. We all know that guy is an asshole, you mean you made your character, dude the tutorial ran tot he first city, started the main quest and then turned the game off? Well then, youre opinion certainly is valid im sure!
Lol I laughed when I read this because its so dead on accurate. I'm actually enjoying the forum whining going on here right now because I watched some of these very same posters straight up bash and completely disregard the concerns of some regarding SWTOR before it launched. The argument was something like, "you're all just a bunch of bitter SWG vets who are mad you didn't get the game you wanted...blah...blah..blah." No matter the concerns were dead on accurate. You didn't get the game you wanted and now your concerns and complaints have merit? Get the fuck outta here with that shit you hypocritical little bitches.
Well there is two problems there. First, When TOR came out, most people on the forums were bashing the hell out of it and dry humping guild wars 2. You know the game that was supposed to be a savior to MMOs and spare us from these sub par games, not to mention taking our grind away? *fart noise*
Second, TOR is doing quite well money wise and has more subscriptions the SWG ever did. I may not like the game, but it certainly didn't fail, it just didn't live up to what some people wanted it to be.
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
Its probably especially true for console players, they might not have the patience to wade through 5+ hours of what for them, might well be fairly boring gameplay, given that the casual player might only play for up to 2 hours of a day, and possibly in smaller sessions than that even, then it would be a bit of a 'big ask' to expect them to continue playing through anything up to 5 days of boring gameplay, they might even begin to think that it represents the rest of the game, and tbh, unless there is a bit more 'proof' to give them some hope that the game is going to get more exciting, then the game could easily end up being left in a draw and forgotten about.
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
I agree, the majority of press previews on the starting area, said that it's boring. But that doesn't matter much if I loved it and already pre ordered the Imperial edition after sinking about 100 hours into the beta as a whole.
I know I will get twice that time out of ESO, so it's well worth the money for me. Also a fallout game is next, and I'm not a fan.
So that likely means, we won't see another Elder Scrolls single player game, for maybe three to six years. So I will take ESO gladly lore wise, to fill that gap as a Elder Scrolls fan until such time.
I don't think Zenimax should do anything to make new players experience as exciting as possible. Because that shouldn't be their demographic IMO. Last thing I want is a bunch of Michael Bay crap in ESO. Action should make sense.
I can't say much, other than, they could have did things in such a way, to keep the current plot theme, but put action in that made sense.
I love the game, but there were some glaring issues, I agree. It's annoying that I can't talk about them, but yes, they are there.
I will give you a hint, UI.
However never played a MMO and or a Beta, that didn't have it's problems.
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
Its probably especially true for console players, they might not have the patience to wade through 5+ hours of what for them, might well be fairly boring gameplay, given that the casual player might only play for up to 2 hours of a day, and possibly in smaller sessions than that even, then it would be a bit of a 'big ask' to expect them to continue playing through anything up to 5 days of boring gameplay, they might even begin to think that it represents the rest of the game, and tbh, unless there is a bit more 'proof' to give them some hope that the game is going to get more exciting, then the game could easily end up being left in a draw and forgotten about.
You say that, like not impressing the console ADD nursery is a bad thing.
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
I agree, the majority of press previews on the starting area, said that it's boring. But that doesn't matter much if I loved it and already pre ordered the Imperial edition after sinking about 100 hours into the beta as a whole.
I know I will get twice that time out of ESO, so it's well worth the money for me. Also a fallout game is next, and I'm not a fan.
So that likely means, we won't see another Elder Scrolls single player game, for maybe three to six years. So I will take ESO gladly lore wise, to fill that gap as a Elder Scrolls fan until such time.
I don't think Zenimax should do anything to make new players experience as exciting as possible. Because that shouldn't be their demographic IMO. Last thing I want is a bunch of Michael Bay crap in ESO. Action should make sense.
I can't say much, other than, they could have did things in such a way, to keep the current plot theme, but put action in that made sense.
I love the game, but there were some glaring issues, I agree. It's annoying that I can't talk about them, but yes, they are there.
I will give you a hint, UI.
However never played a MMO and or a Beta, that didn't have it's problems.
Think have to bear in mind that no matter what happens with ESO, it won't have any effect on the single player games that Bethesda make in the TES universe, seperate entities, different dev teams etc. Although i think it would be fair to say that Bethesda might well be influenced by whatever happens to ESO over the long term.
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
Its probably especially true for console players, they might not have the patience to wade through 5+ hours of what for them, might well be fairly boring gameplay, given that the casual player might only play for up to 2 hours of a day, and possibly in smaller sessions than that even, then it would be a bit of a 'big ask' to expect them to continue playing through anything up to 5 days of boring gameplay, they might even begin to think that it represents the rest of the game, and tbh, unless there is a bit more 'proof' to give them some hope that the game is going to get more exciting, then the game could easily end up being left in a draw and forgotten about.
You say that, like not impressing the console ADD nursery is a bad thing.
the point is, is that if Zenimax want to sell this game to the console crowd, then they need to make things happen faster, i'm not suggesting that console players are ADD, but given that consoles have to be plugged into a TV to work, for many of the, ah, 'younger' players, play time is probably fairly restricted, and for older players too who have a family to contend with, snatching the odd 30 mins - 1 hour to play a game is probably the best they can manage, for basement players, their probably more into FPS games where they can shout things at each other
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
Agreed; it absolutley *would* be in best interest for Zenimax to take that particular concern seriously.
Not necessarily in my best interest, as I kind of like the effect that kind of early filtering process has on the community. But that's my problem, not theirs.
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
I agree, the majority of press previews on the starting area, said that it's boring. But that doesn't matter much if I loved it and already pre ordered the Imperial edition after sinking about 100 hours into the beta as a whole.
I know I will get twice that time out of ESO, so it's well worth the money for me. Also a fallout game is next, and I'm not a fan.
So that likely means, we won't see another Elder Scrolls single player game, for maybe three to six years. So I will take ESO gladly lore wise, to fill that gap as a Elder Scrolls fan until such time.
I don't think Zenimax should do anything to make new players experience as exciting as possible. Because that shouldn't be their demographic IMO. Last thing I want is a bunch of Michael Bay crap in ESO. Action should make sense.
I can't say much, other than, they could have did things in such a way, to keep the current plot theme, but put action in that made sense.
I love the game, but there were some glaring issues, I agree. It's annoying that I can't talk about them, but yes, they are there.
I will give you a hint, UI.
However never played a MMO and or a Beta, that didn't have it's problems.
Think have to bear in mind that no matter what happens with ESO, it won't have any effect on the single player games that Bethesda make in the TES universe, seperate entities, different dev teams etc. Although i think it would be fair to say that Bethesda might well be influenced by whatever happens to ESO over the long term.
Todd Howard is a consult to the lore, in fact that is how they came up with, and did most of it.
I'm sure his writers gave the Zenimax team a outline, and they call him when they have questions to make sure it adds up.
That is why I consider it all linked.
Bethesda, can make a sometimes broken, glitch fest game, that fans love regardless. I think they won't be influenced by ESO at all, how it does.
They know they can make any Elder Scrolls game, and sell over 15 million copies at worst, especially after the success of Skyrim, making fans out of younger players and selling 20 million copies on all platforms.
Also consider this, if only 10-15% of all the people that bought Skyrim, like and subscribe to ESO? It will be successful. It isn't a stretch to consider that a possibility.
Also consider, if only 10-15% of all MMO players, like a subscribe to ESO? It will be very successful. Again, not a stretch to think.
When I look and read through all the press previews of ESO, I don't see a bad preview. I really have not read anyone flat out say the game is bad or any of that. Even I don't think the game is bad.
The only thing I have seen the press mentioning is some of the major flaws they came across while playing. Getting bored between levels 1- 10 is bad game design. A game shouldn't take 6- 8 hours to begin getting fun. Anyone who thinks that is ok is an idiot.
Now I do realize these things are to be expect as many games in the MMO genre do start out boring. However, don't you think it's up to the developers to change that? Why on earth would you willingly keep a large portion of your game boring. Levels 1 - 10 is not a small portion.
Excuses of 1 -10 being the tutorial area is just ridiculous. What is up with this tutorial area crap that MMOs have now? It doesn't take "that" long to learn how to play a game .. .at least not for me. >.> It's not like they introduced anything majorly new that would require some sort of large learning curve. This isn't freaking Kerbal Space Program XD.
Can you imagine if every FPS started off with an 4 hour tutorial? Screw that. I am not a retard for crying out loud lol.
The other issue for some of the negative feedback from the press is the double dipping. Putting a standard race behind a pay gate was such a stupid choice. Why intentionally piss people off? I do realize some people are ok with the CE, which ya, great that is fine, it's your money. The issue is, if they had not included the imperial, non of this would have happened. Both sides would at least be contempt with what is offered.
Last but not least, it's this NDA. Why is it even still active? What moron thought it was smart to keep the NDA up this long? I can tell you it's certainly not helping.
Oh .. but wait .. there is more actually. Those who said it isn't worth the price at which it currently is at, I entirely agree with them. I personally believe they should have gone B2P with Expansion / DLC releases now and then. Do I believe it should have started F2P ... no. I certainly don't think it's worth an $80 box price along with a $15 sub. ($80 box price because the standard edition is not the full game)
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
Majority of press previews on the starting area said that it's boring - so there's more to it than just my theory.
It's an opinion, yes - not all will agree of course.
Many MMORPG players are a fickle bunch, if the game doesn't strike them as good in the first 30min - it's a /won't_play_this_again for many.
It would be in best intrest for Zenimax to make the noob experience as exciting as possible - as it stands right now - again in opinion of many press previews (that I happen to agree with) - it's dull and boring.
I agree, the majority of press previews on the starting area, said that it's boring. But that doesn't matter much if I loved it and already pre ordered the Imperial edition after sinking about 100 hours into the beta as a whole.
I know I will get twice that time out of ESO, so it's well worth the money for me. Also a fallout game is next, and I'm not a fan.
So that likely means, we won't see another Elder Scrolls single player game, for maybe three to six years. So I will take ESO gladly lore wise, to fill that gap as a Elder Scrolls fan until such time.
I don't think Zenimax should do anything to make new players experience as exciting as possible. Because that shouldn't be their demographic IMO. Last thing I want is a bunch of Michael Bay crap in ESO. Action should make sense.
I can't say much, other than, they could have did things in such a way, to keep the current plot theme, but put action in that made sense.
I love the game, but there were some glaring issues, I agree. It's annoying that I can't talk about them, but yes, they are there.
I will give you a hint, UI.
However never played a MMO and or a Beta, that didn't have it's problems.
Think have to bear in mind that no matter what happens with ESO, it won't have any effect on the single player games that Bethesda make in the TES universe, seperate entities, different dev teams etc. Although i think it would be fair to say that Bethesda might well be influenced by whatever happens to ESO over the long term.
Todd Howard is a consult to the lore, in fact that is how they came up with, and did most of it.
I'm sure his writers gave the Zenimax team a outline, and they call him when they have questions to make sure it adds up.
That is why I consider it all linked.
Bethesda, can make a sometimes broken, glitch fest game, that fans love regardless. I think they won't be influenced by ESO at all, how it does.
They know they can make any Elder Scrolls game, and sell over 15 million copies at worst, especially after the success of Skyrim, making fans out of younger players and selling 20 million copies on all platforms.
Also consider this, if only 10-15% of all the people that bought Skyrim, like and subscribe to ESO? It will be successful. It isn't a stretch to consider that a possibility.
Also consider, if only 10-15% of all MMO players, like a subscribe to ESO? It will be very successful. Again, not a stretch to think.
I don't doubt for one minute that they will shift a lot of boxes, just on the strength of the IP, the only question really is how many will stick with it and actually subscribe, that is something that will be affected by the first 5- 10 hours of gameplay. Will it be compared to the single player games? i think its inevitable that it will, its just as well that the modding community is only on the PC version of the game, which has always been a huge part of TES. It means that TES games tend to cast a huge shadow, and ESO may well look pretty small and possibly boring in that shadow.
Originally posted by Randayn I truly think this game will definitely have the most lovers and haters for a MMO in a while...won't be any middle. It's just that type of game. Im just sick of critics, reviewers and people stating that it doesnt live up to Elder Scrolls style/standards....that's a bogus statement.
I have to agree. Whether you liked the game or not, that is not a really informative statement when reviewing the game. What if I've never played an ES game? I would have no idea what you're even talking about. A review should be informative about the game and then give an opinion about said information. That kind of statement tells me very little about the game, can they at least explain WHY it doesn't live up to the ES style/standards and cite specific instances/examples in the game rather than "I don't like the questing or combat" or something?
I really have not read anyone flat out say the game is bad or any of that. Even I don't think the game is bad.
The only thing I have seen the press mentioning is some of the major flaws they came across while playing. Getting bored between levels 1- 10 is bad game design. A game shouldn't take 6- 8 hours to begin getting fun.
i had the same impressions
many reviews not saying it was bad -- but saying ESO was a generic mmo and didnt stand out from the sea of existing mmos
Comments
Every MMO starts out slow.... its a learning curve... its fun to see people crying out loud that they dont need that, just to find out 2 centences later that they dont understand the combat system at all, and play the game like its a WoW clone
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
WvW is accessible in about 10 minutes after character creation.
On paper the ESO quests seem to stack up well against other mmos, and I hate to judge an mmo on how much fun I had, but that was my issue. I've never lost interest in a new quality mmo that fast before, the quest just completely lost all their shine well before level 10. So personally I found 1-10 in gw2 and SWTOR both far more enjoyable.
Lol I laughed when I read this because its so dead on accurate. I'm actually enjoying the forum whining going on here right now because I watched some of these very same posters straight up bash and completely disregard the concerns of some regarding SWTOR before it launched. The argument was something like, "you're all just a bunch of bitter SWG vets who are mad you didn't get the game you wanted...blah...blah..blah." No matter the concerns were dead on accurate. You didn't get the game you wanted and now your concerns and complaints have merit? Get the fuck outta here with that shit you hypocritical little bitches.
Not every mmo, if you have one of the good class stories in SWTOR it grabs your attention right away. The Gw2 opening/starting zone was also be boring or awesome depending on race. The AoC opening was pretty sweet as well, don't recall a lot of people complaining about that. Now the Tera opening was pretty slow and painful, they patched it to go by fast now.
Since almost none of the quests emphasize combat, or crafting, or really anything useful other than sneaking I fail to see why a 10 hour tutorial is needed.
I agree that the SWTOR starter part was more interesting to me, unfortunately, more interesting didn't stay interesting enough to convince me to play to end level. It appears this game 'might' do the reverse..though it wouldn't hurt to bump things up a little at the beginning.
There Is Always Hope!
Maybe you didn't read the first part of my post you know the stuff about clearly stating how far they got and not trying to pass things off as something it's not?
As for Proof the burden of proof should be on the accuser,but I get your a Guilty till proven innocent kind of guy.
However I'm not advocating trusting any reviewer.As I've often stated reviews should be used intelligently in that you should find reviewers who's tastes and opinions align with your own over a long period of time and only then if you can't try the game for yourself to make a personal judgement.
Attacking reviewers just because they don't share your tastes and opinions is ridiculous as is accusing them of corruption or attention seeking for the same reason.
The reviewer is the accuser. The reader is the jury. You have the relationships misidentified. I am not the accuser in the case. I am a member of the jury who thinks the accuser (and all of his ilk) is an incompetent wanker.
edit:
My attacks on reviewers have nothing to do with my tastes and everything to do with them being piss poor at their jobs. In fact I don't disagree with most the reviewers for this game but I do find them completely lacking in their abilities to give me any solid reason to take what they say seriously and complete doubt they have any idea how to actually support an argument much less even make one.
Ok, yeah. But the #1 reason it had a rough launch is that EVERYBODY was trying to play it at once because everybody was raving over how great it was (except the folks in the EQ2 crowd). Little different story here.
By the way, the title of this is as political as it gets. I'm neither an advocate or critic, but the guy is a bit delusional in his defense of the game and his attacks on the critics. This video shames nobody. He's trying to be a rallying point for the minority (unfortunately) that are supporting the game.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
I do believe that you forgot to change accounts before quoting and agreeing with yourself.
lmao
Lets see the first person saying the first 6-10 hours are boring, sounds like my friend Obsessed with GW2, who talked at the time about how bad Skyrim is... I'm sure if that game was in beta and not released yet, he would say, how it was going to fail horribly too.
The second guy sounds like someone, that should go RE RE RE all the way to guild wars 2.
Luckily third poster is the charm, you are one smart person, and make a great point.
Is it that hard to understand? Yes I poke fun at GW2, but in all seriousness I understand, some people like that non structure quest style of play (events) and non content. Good for them. I don't, doesn't make GW2 bad, I just personally hate it.
But reversed, some people like questing slowly and story. Starting off slow, becoming immersed. Not racing to end game, and focusing on gear. I know it's not for everyone, but what is?
Also don't think the people who hate this game, speak for the majority of gamers simply because they spew hate on here.
You can't go to any forum, without tons of WoW hate for 9 years, and last time I checked, they still have plenty of subs and making tons of money.
I personally wish I could take all these cry babies tears involving ESO, bottle them and make a soda. So I could enjoy drinking it, while playing my Imperial Edition of ESO. A ESO a day keeps the gaming Hobos away.
Guess I will have to settle for most of the haters, cry babies, trolls and hobos on here, not being in the game I enjoy lol.
"What tastes like purple?"
well at least we know he agrees with his own opinions
Well there is two problems there. First, When TOR came out, most people on the forums were bashing the hell out of it and dry humping guild wars 2. You know the game that was supposed to be a savior to MMOs and spare us from these sub par games, not to mention taking our grind away? *fart noise*
Second, TOR is doing quite well money wise and has more subscriptions the SWG ever did. I may not like the game, but it certainly didn't fail, it just didn't live up to what some people wanted it to be.
"What tastes like purple?"
Its probably especially true for console players, they might not have the patience to wade through 5+ hours of what for them, might well be fairly boring gameplay, given that the casual player might only play for up to 2 hours of a day, and possibly in smaller sessions than that even, then it would be a bit of a 'big ask' to expect them to continue playing through anything up to 5 days of boring gameplay, they might even begin to think that it represents the rest of the game, and tbh, unless there is a bit more 'proof' to give them some hope that the game is going to get more exciting, then the game could easily end up being left in a draw and forgotten about.
I agree, the majority of press previews on the starting area, said that it's boring. But that doesn't matter much if I loved it and already pre ordered the Imperial edition after sinking about 100 hours into the beta as a whole.
I know I will get twice that time out of ESO, so it's well worth the money for me. Also a fallout game is next, and I'm not a fan.
So that likely means, we won't see another Elder Scrolls single player game, for maybe three to six years. So I will take ESO gladly lore wise, to fill that gap as a Elder Scrolls fan until such time.
I don't think Zenimax should do anything to make new players experience as exciting as possible. Because that shouldn't be their demographic IMO. Last thing I want is a bunch of Michael Bay crap in ESO. Action should make sense.
I can't say much, other than, they could have did things in such a way, to keep the current plot theme, but put action in that made sense.
I love the game, but there were some glaring issues, I agree. It's annoying that I can't talk about them, but yes, they are there.
I will give you a hint, UI.
However never played a MMO and or a Beta, that didn't have it's problems.
"What tastes like purple?"
You say that, like not impressing the console ADD nursery is a bad thing.
"What tastes like purple?"
Think have to bear in mind that no matter what happens with ESO, it won't have any effect on the single player games that Bethesda make in the TES universe, seperate entities, different dev teams etc. Although i think it would be fair to say that Bethesda might well be influenced by whatever happens to ESO over the long term.
the point is, is that if Zenimax want to sell this game to the console crowd, then they need to make things happen faster, i'm not suggesting that console players are ADD, but given that consoles have to be plugged into a TV to work, for many of the, ah, 'younger' players, play time is probably fairly restricted, and for older players too who have a family to contend with, snatching the odd 30 mins - 1 hour to play a game is probably the best they can manage, for basement players, their probably more into FPS games where they can shout things at each other
Agreed; it absolutley *would* be in best interest for Zenimax to take that particular concern seriously.
Not necessarily in my best interest, as I kind of like the effect that kind of early filtering process has on the community. But that's my problem, not theirs.
Todd Howard is a consult to the lore, in fact that is how they came up with, and did most of it.
I'm sure his writers gave the Zenimax team a outline, and they call him when they have questions to make sure it adds up.
That is why I consider it all linked.
Bethesda, can make a sometimes broken, glitch fest game, that fans love regardless. I think they won't be influenced by ESO at all, how it does.
They know they can make any Elder Scrolls game, and sell over 15 million copies at worst, especially after the success of Skyrim, making fans out of younger players and selling 20 million copies on all platforms.
Also consider this, if only 10-15% of all the people that bought Skyrim, like and subscribe to ESO? It will be successful. It isn't a stretch to consider that a possibility.
Also consider, if only 10-15% of all MMO players, like a subscribe to ESO? It will be very successful. Again, not a stretch to think.
"What tastes like purple?"
When I look and read through all the press previews of ESO, I don't see a bad preview. I really have not read anyone flat out say the game is bad or any of that. Even I don't think the game is bad.
The only thing I have seen the press mentioning is some of the major flaws they came across while playing. Getting bored between levels 1- 10 is bad game design. A game shouldn't take 6- 8 hours to begin getting fun. Anyone who thinks that is ok is an idiot.
Now I do realize these things are to be expect as many games in the MMO genre do start out boring. However, don't you think it's up to the developers to change that? Why on earth would you willingly keep a large portion of your game boring. Levels 1 - 10 is not a small portion.
Excuses of 1 -10 being the tutorial area is just ridiculous. What is up with this tutorial area crap that MMOs have now? It doesn't take "that" long to learn how to play a game .. .at least not for me. >.> It's not like they introduced anything majorly new that would require some sort of large learning curve. This isn't freaking Kerbal Space Program XD.
Can you imagine if every FPS started off with an 4 hour tutorial? Screw that. I am not a retard for crying out loud lol.
The other issue for some of the negative feedback from the press is the double dipping. Putting a standard race behind a pay gate was such a stupid choice. Why intentionally piss people off? I do realize some people are ok with the CE, which ya, great that is fine, it's your money. The issue is, if they had not included the imperial, non of this would have happened. Both sides would at least be contempt with what is offered.
Last but not least, it's this NDA. Why is it even still active? What moron thought it was smart to keep the NDA up this long? I can tell you it's certainly not helping.
Oh .. but wait .. there is more actually. Those who said it isn't worth the price at which it currently is at, I entirely agree with them. I personally believe they should have gone B2P with Expansion / DLC releases now and then. Do I believe it should have started F2P ... no. I certainly don't think it's worth an $80 box price along with a $15 sub. ($80 box price because the standard edition is not the full game)
I don't doubt for one minute that they will shift a lot of boxes, just on the strength of the IP, the only question really is how many will stick with it and actually subscribe, that is something that will be affected by the first 5- 10 hours of gameplay. Will it be compared to the single player games? i think its inevitable that it will, its just as well that the modding community is only on the PC version of the game, which has always been a huge part of TES. It means that TES games tend to cast a huge shadow, and ESO may well look pretty small and possibly boring in that shadow.
Brr I came here for more than what was offered.
Lift NDA then we can truly hear more of the "real" on whats going down in the ESO.
I have to agree. Whether you liked the game or not, that is not a really informative statement when reviewing the game. What if I've never played an ES game? I would have no idea what you're even talking about. A review should be informative about the game and then give an opinion about said information. That kind of statement tells me very little about the game, can they at least explain WHY it doesn't live up to the ES style/standards and cite specific instances/examples in the game rather than "I don't like the questing or combat" or something?
i had the same impressions
many reviews not saying it was bad -- but saying ESO was a generic mmo and didnt stand out from the sea of existing mmos
EQ2 fan sites