The Elder Scrolls Online

Bruman

Golden Squire
1,154
0
It's not just that though - anyone who says anything other than "this game is utter shit" you go on the offensive about. I relayed a comment from a friend who said they enjoyed the way the targeting system worked, and you somehow claimed her opinion was wrong...which still just makes no sense to me. I don't see how that's promoting a lie or anything.

It'd be different if you'd played it yourself, and you said that you found it un-enjoyable because of X, Y, and Z. But that's not the case. Instead we got another attack on someone's opinion about how it's impossible to enjoy any aspect whatsoever because of how you've heard the current state of the game is.

Always being on the offensive isn't conductive to any worthwhile discussion.
 

Utnayan

F16 patrolling Rajaah until he plays DS3
<Gold Donor>
16,314
12,080
Bruman,

As stated when I replied to Khalid, and I think you didn't see it...

I took this to inherently mean the combat system. Which sucks so much blow hole right now (And most likely will never be able to be fixed at this point) that one would have to be outright full of shit or have their quality standards so low that SWTOR was the only other MMORPG they played when gauging combat responsiveness. Which would make sense since both will suffer the same combat problems as they are both native to hero engine. No matter how many other systems have been broken up on top.
It is physically impossible to like combat at this moment. Impossible. Responsiveness is working on .5-.9 second response time with GCD/Animation hitches that plagued SWTOR.

It's SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE to weigh that opinion in the state of the beta right now. Which is why I said what I did. She either has ZERO experience in playing responsive MMORPG's or quite honestly hasn't played WoW.

As I said, and you can play one now for free, play SWTOR, than play WOW and compare the combat responsiveness. Even more crucial when you interject action staged combat systems.

You know I would welcome a positive opinion if it wasn't some contrived post about fluff or honestly coming in here and saying how happy they are with ZO marketing.

Come on. You people are better than that and you know it.
 

axeman_sl

shitlord
592
0
I disagree with the conclusion that you need raid content. You DO need progression though. I'd like to see a game try a group-based progression without delving into any raids, would be interesting and hasnt been done I think.
The reason it hasn't been done is because it can't be done. PvE content on such a small scale just can't have the sort of difficulty and depth that it takes for it to provide meaningful long-term progression. 90% of the difficulty of a raid encounter comes from having to get a large number of people to play correctly and master the mechanics that are possible with that format. Anything under 10 participants and it just isn't possible to have the kind of complexity that makes for a meaningful guild activity, it just becomes a dungeon and it can't be made difficult enough to challenge guilds for weeks/months while remaining actually doable. Some of the hardest single-group content in MMORPG history was the on-launch Cataclysm heroics and people were farming them after a few days. You simply cannot give that sort of content the difficulty curve, mechanical complexity and length of relevancy to really qualify as progression. It would also miss a huge part of what it is people want from a progression endgame, i.e. the community and cooperation of a guild and the atmosphere you get during a raid. Even if you were to somehow make a game where the endgame is a retardedly huge dungeon with thirty bosses (it would have to be that way in order to last more than a week), most people would get bored because it's still just dungeon running.
 

Utnayan

F16 patrolling Rajaah until he plays DS3
<Gold Donor>
16,314
12,080
Ut, go outside and enjoy the most likely crappy Minnesota weather. Have a smoke and relax.
It's going to be 36 degrees tonight
frown.png
 

Blackwulf

N00b
999
18
Well, busy day, so I didn't get to respond when a response was pertinent. I don't want to continue some sort of flame war so I'll just reply to a couple of personal attacks:

1. I haven't lied about anything; everything I say is based off info I've gotten from credible sources, or from my own experiences. I wouldn't defend a game that I knew to be shit. End of story.

2. Most hurtful of all, my writing was disparaged. Granted, work I've done over at Junkies Nation isn't up to par with my short story writing or my dissertations on logic from college, but it seems wholly adequate based on my current pay! Why, I even go so far as to correct my grammar and spelling, and I make sure I'm not using redundant or repetitive phrases!

Now, my honor defended, I shall retire to a glass ofFrey Cabernet(non-organic wine gives me headaches.) Enjoy the evening, gents and ladies.
 

Abefroman

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,588
11,904
Ut you have done your job. This thread is dead as fuck for an upcoming mmo. Please go outside and shovel the snow or something.
 

krysanth

Golden Knight of the Realm
242
161
I don't care what the naysayers or the fanboys on this forum say. I'll buy the game and try it myself. The ideas they present have potential. Besides, its something to play until EQ Next....only thing I've reall touched recently was the BF4 beta. I think I'll buy that and play for a bit too!
 

DMK_sl

shitlord
1,600
0
I don't care what the naysayers or the fanboys on this forum say. I'll buy the game and try it myself. The ideas they present have potential. Besides, its something to play until EQ Next....only thing I've reall touched recently was the BF4 beta. I think I'll buy that and play for a bit too!
It's a watered down/heavily instanced multi player Skyrim. Totally cool if you enjoy that but I'm not really sure what 'ideas' have potential. We have seen the full potential of every feature they have announced in games before it. There are no new idea's. And that's totally fine but just sayin...
 

Miele

Lord Nagafen Raider
916
48
Some of the hardest single-group content in MMORPG history was the on-launch Cataclysm heroics and people were farming them after a few days. You simply cannot give that sort of content the difficulty curve, mechanical complexity and length of relevancy to really qualify as progression.
No.
Cata heroics were a fucking joke for anybody with two arms, don't fool yourself. Vanilla WoW was a lot harder (in relevant gear of course) because of a simple thing: the tools given to the player. Warriors (the only real tanks back then) didn't have any single ability to control threat AoE and had to juggle sunder armor, demo shout and battle shout to get a bit of AE threat, CC was useful in the heat of battle because few things were AE'ed down to pieces on pull and dps classes couldn't self heal nor take more than a couple hits before eating dust, save for defensive skills being available and correctly timed.

Yes, you could use a bear druid to swipe three (3!!!!) targets at once, but that was it and it took a whole lot more damage than a warrior of equal gear (assuming you managed to find decent agi gear for tanking).

Let's move on a bit: Rift had challenging dungeons at the beginning, so did LotRo, even if most of the challenge came from stupidly high healing threat and shitty healing spells in this case. EQ2 had several very challenging dungeons in its history, I played for example through Nizara and Castle Mistmoore where you needed flawless execution to compensate for lack of gear (CM was a bitch without raid gear to be honest).

What makes MMO content "challenging" is the number of hoops you have to jump through, while doing your job of tank/heal/dps. These hoops can be, not necessarily in this order:

- resource management (mana/energy/whatever)
- number of adds
- special effects every defined unit of time (floor burning)
- mob(s) AoE
- debuff on tank
- debuff on healer
- stupidly high damage on tank
- stupidly high damage on everybody
- must-kite adds
- must cc adds (when CC wasn't just limited to a single mob per player it was even harder)
- "bring this add here to be killed so it triggers event X or removes buff Y" mechanic
- coordinating multiple things listed above
- more and more according to the designer fantasy

Of course if you make a 4 people party (SWtoR) it's going to be difficult to ask for many of these things to happen at once, with five (WoW) it's a bit better and with six (EQ-EQ2) in my opinion it'd be pretty much perfect.

EQ was a pretty easy game in its day to day group-hunting sessions, except when trained hard or when a respawn/overpull/glitch happened and suddenly you had anywhere from 6 to 8 mobs in the middle of your ranks. EQ allowed for good players to shine and save the day, through a combo of CC, tank responsiveness, cleric using root/barriers to survive long enough and stabilize the situation, enchanter/shaman slowing and again enchanter CC'ing, necro/ranger kiting stuff, etc. A shitty pull in EQ used to be quite entertaining (admittely you had time to think, because every action took quite a while compared to modern games where you're more likely to be GCD locked more than anything else).

What I'm saying is that nobody made a successful end game with 1 group content because nobody ever tried. I'm not saying they would have to, after all MMO are also about socialization (something a lot of devs forgot on the road I guess) and large raids help forming large guilds that promote this socialization.

LFR-like activities are honestly junk and should be deleted because they are not fun, in fact they almost always generate opposite feelings, frustration and anger, but people suck hard dick for shiny purples that are good for nothing but to face the next rank of frustration and anger.
Flex raiding (I never used it as I don't play WoW anymore) is what guilds asked from 2005 onwards, and should be used and even improved. It promotes coordination and effort at least, instead of cruising semi-afk to loot. So if you can Flex above 10, you can likely flex a bit below 10 as well. Groups of 8, 7 and 6 should be challenged by the same stuff that challenges 10 people.
 

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,380
276
I'll answer you what I know, cause I'm a glutton for punishment I guess: Because there is only one giant server, they have to break Cyrodiil up into many PERSISTENT instances. Every time you go to Cyrodiil, it will be the same instance with the same enemies and allies. You can change what instance you are assigned to, but it will be costly and timered.

Each instance will have campaigns that keep track of winners and losers and crown an emperor at the end. Then the campaign resets, but the instance does NOT. Keeps retain ownership and people in the instance stay the same.

Really, Cyrodiil instances are more like virtual servers than what you imagine based on instances from other games.

I can say, from experience, that it is nothing like FPS PVP ("consolized pvp".)
Both this and Ut's zealous rebuttal sound similar to GW2 WvW zones. Even if keep control doesnt reset at the end of the campaign like it does in GW2, how hard is it to take them? Switching at will even with some limits, playing in several campaigns, easily joining your friends, all that takes away the persistance they claim to have.
 

Blackwulf

N00b
999
18
Both this and Ut's zealous rebuttal sound similar to GW2 WvW zones. Even if keep control doesnt reset at the end of the campaign like it does in GW2, how hard is it to take them? Switching at will even with some limits, playing in several campaigns, easily joining your friends, all that takes away the persistance they claim to have.
Yeah, I can agree with this concern. We're gonna have to see how it gets implemented to really judge how it feels, imo.
 

Antarius

Lord Nagafen Raider
1,828
15
Miele, you forgot a number of interesting mechanics from WoW that Do increase in difficulty dependent upon the number of players in the raid, maybe you didn't play as a DPS class, so you never noticed them? Many strategies relied on tanks/healers ignoring them or positioning so that tanks and healers don't have to move as much.

Examples: Baron bomb from molten core, "deposit a player on a platform" ala the first boss in TBC, player creates wall of flame ala the dragon in sun well or the gong boss in Cata, players spread beneficial dot ala lich king, players spread negative debuffs on a timer like the mad dr in ICC or fire at brutallus, basic clump and spread mechanics, starting with meteor in AQ. Chain lightning starting with c'thun, but combined with void zones/rotating tornados like the wind boss in Cata. I'd argue that each and every single encounter I named was more interesting in its 40 or 25 person version than its smaller group equivalent having done both.

Sorry formatting, cell phone typing.
 

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,380
276
Like i said in the first post about "raid-less endgame", you'd need a group size of 6 or more for some mechanics. Maybe it needs 10, who knows, but I think a game designed for such an endgame can get away with 6-8. Are 10 players a must-have for 10mans in WoW now? Back in Kara when it was fresh we lifted some parts with 8 or 9 players sometimes.

Anyway if a design team puts effort into making a real progression for groups of 6-7 players, without having to consider superior gear from other sources, they should be able to tackle that. At the same time class design for that game could also take into account the main goal of group-based progression. It wouldnt work as well if you just retooled an existing MMO for it, but that's a given.

Edit: Antarius, sure some raid concepts dont work with 8 people or are less "epic" ... even without a ton of DDR mechanics Emperor Ssra or The Rathe scaled down to 8 people wouldnt be exciting. But that doesnt make the whole idea flat-out impossible. It would just be a different game for a different audience then the people that enjoy large scale raids with 40ish people.