The devs know full well thery may alienate alot of players but they do this knowing the gameplay elements they are going for are far more important then the revenue lost and for this I applaud the F**K for them because not many game studios nowadays pass up potential revenue for the sake of keeping their game pure and immaculate.
There is a reason why not many game studio's take a known IP and change the core concepts and founding principles of the game. I will leave you to work out what that might be though....
Mael Yes hence its ongoing success despite being run by ea clowns
Hence the excitement for cu
Hence the two most successful new mmos of last year being heavily influenced by it. Gw2 is basicly a "my first daoc" Ps2 obviously influenced by ps1 which was based upon daoc and unreal tournament.
TES is stepping in the MMO realm anyways. There not a single IP who's game went from a different genre in the MMO genre and it's gameplay remained anyhing similar to it's roots.
I actually tried to think of a title of a game that was a single player game and became an MMO but couldn't. Perhaps some examples might help us look at the issues more clearly.
Originally posted by ShakyMo There's one group of players who thought tes would be like a fantasy eve or a big budget darkfall, to be honest that's what I thought it would be like.
You've got another group who thought it would be a 99% pve game like EQ or swg.
They can't satisfy both camps.
So what do they do. Well they could go with camp 1 but they wouldn't sell that much and would be looking at eve levels of players, which given the budget wouldn't be acceptable.
Or they could go pure pve and have even less players (remember vanguard)
The majority of players like both pve and pvp, but don't like pvp interfering with their pve.
So they have to have pvp, but not "forced" pvp. That leaves them 2 options, take a wow style approach and ghetto pvp off in meaningless mini games, which would really piss off the first group, and well the last thing we need in the mmo space is yet another bloody wow clone.
Or they take a daoc approach, which at least has some emergent behaviour in pvp so would annoy the first camp less and the second camp can still completely avoid pvp.
But history shows if you go the daoc approach you need hard factions, you can't have wooly "soloutions" where people can be chums in pve - tsw, Ao, Aoc culture servers even gw2 sort of. Or where people can have alts on the same server of differing factions - swtor, wow, rift, war after bioware takeover, where you get xfaction cheating running rife.. The only games that got it truly right - daoc itself, both planetsides, early war went very hard on faction lock.
It's a price they pay to make the game work.
Of course what they should do is copy daoc more and have coop servers with no pvp where you can go anywhere and group / guild with anyone, and ffa pvp servers where guilds claim keeps.
Nicey stated and I agree I wish there were several ruleset servers and those would not effect the balance of development nor would it be possible for players to transfer to or off them.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by ShakyMo Mael Yes hence its ongoing success despite being run by ea clowns
Hence the excitement for cu
Hence the two most successful new mmos of last year being heavily influenced by it. Gw2 is basicly a "my first daoc" Ps2 obviously influenced by ps1 which was based upon daoc and unreal tournament.
Is DAOC still running? LOL ok
Forgive me if I am wrong but...isn't CU all PvP and no PvE? Isn't the excitement a little premature?
If GW2 was influenced by DOAC that explains a lot. I played PS2 for a few hours...round and round we go, no point to it. rather play a proper PvP game. The PvP in both GW2 and PS2 were both...souless.
Sorry but I know some might agree with you thinking DAOC was a better game to emulate then TES for a TESO game but I don't. But having 3 factions fighting isn't the problem. Losing my ability to explore the world with my character and being forced into a faction by race is.
Whatever you say, these 2 things mean it is not a TES game, in any format, to me.
Originally posted by ShakyMo WOW is a mmo.based on a single player game Ultima online is a mmo.based on single player game
What game was WOW based on?
UO...yeah that is a good one. So what changes were made to UO from the SPG? I mean, the world is the same, could go anywhere...what did they have to lose to make it work in an MMO format?
because the games lead designers are stuck in the past and cannot come up with any new ideas. They have on rose colored glasses and actually believe the game they are basing it off of was great...so great it seems they think it will apply successfully to anything even though history proves them wrong.
::sigh:: Tamriel is huge, and there are lots of places a person can travel and explore, but we're going to be forbidden to explore the land becuase the developers want to recreate DAoC? This maybe the one reason I will not even look at this game now. Stupid.
you'll just need to make more than one character. think of it as 3 ES games in one.
Or we could look at it for what it is, a game being made by designers choosing to use old outdated piss poor game design.
Why should we settle for crap when we know full well an MMORPG can be made open world and allow us to chose the faction WE WANT TO CHOSE, WITH THE RACE WE WANT TO PLAY and be able to go where we want, when we want? Especially when they are using an IP that IS MADE JUST LIKE THAT!
This! QFT.
I make spreadsheets at work - I don't want to make them for the games I play.
Originally posted by ShakyMo I can think of 3 mmos that are based on single player prior games, uo, wow & swtor.
One stuck hard to the original formula, the other two made mmos radically different to the single player games.
Which one was the greatest financial disaster in gaming history?
UO stuck to the same basic game design as the ultima series, may be wrrng never really got to try UO but from looking at the crappy youtube stuff then it certainly looks the same.
WOW - Totally changed direction in their game design. Went from a RTS to MMO. Appealed to an entirely new audience and there really was no comparrison at all because the different franchises.
SWTOR You could argue it tried to emulate the story driven KOTOR game but to behonest, if they had done taht it might have been more successful. Problem was, people were expecting KOTORO and didn't get it.
So yes, SWTOR faied because it deviated from the fanbases expectations too much while remaining in pretty much the same genre to try and capture more players, losing their exisiting fanbase and not securing enough from the 'other' category.
So...
Using an IP, remaining in the same genre but changing large portions of gameplay to fit online mode = failure.
Using an IP, keeping the basic structure of the game = Success.
Using an IP, creating a totally new market in a completly unrelated genre = Success.
Originally posted by ShakyMo I can think of 3 mmos that are based on single player prior games, uo, wow & swtor.
One stuck hard to the original formula, the other two made mmos radically different to the single player games.
Which one was the greatest financial disaster in gaming history?
UO stuck to the same basic game design as the ultima series, may be wrrng never really got to try UO but from looking at the crappy youtube stuff then it certainly looks the same.
WOW - Totally changed direction in their game design. Went from a RTS to MMO. Appealed to an entirely new audience and there really was no comparrison at all because the different franchises.
SWTOR You could argue it tried to emulate the story driven KOTOR game but to behonest, if they had done taht it might have been more successful. Problem was, people were expecting KOTORO and didn't get it.
So yes, SWTOR faied because it deviated from the fanbases expectations too much while remaining in pretty much the same genre to try and capture more players, losing their exisiting fanbase and not securing enough from the 'other' category.
So...
Using an IP, remaining in the same genre but changing large portions of gameplay to fit online mode = failure.
Using an IP, keeping the basic structure of the game = Success.
Using an IP, creating a totally new market in a completly unrelated genre = Success.
Which is TESO again?
The mass complained that SWTOR played TOO much like a single player game and not an MMO. What was the major difference in game play? Remember all the SWTOR is a CORPG threads? The game was frowned up because they stated it was an MMO, but had few MMO elements. Chalk that up to failed because it stuck too much to it's roots.
And isn't WoW a sucess? Did it not change the gameplay...maybe jus ta little bit?
The mass complained that SWTOR played TOO much like a single player game and not an MMO. What was the major difference in game play? Remember all the SWTOR is a CORPG? The game was frowned up because they stated it was an MMO, but had few MMO elements. Chalk that up to failed because it stuck too much to it's roots.
And isn't WoW a sucess? Did it not change the gameplay...maybe jus ta little bit?
Well personally SWTOR bored me because to creat an alt of the same faction I had to repeat content. That is my argument against TESO. I had no problem with the rest of the game to be honest. PvP was never my thing in it so that never bothered me. Would have liked space conflict done better though.
WOW had 3 RTS games prior to it's release. RTS and MMO are totally different genre's. There is no cross over except lore. You are not alienating anyone from the original genre because pretty much everything with the game is new except the lore.
UO - Similar genre appealing to similar target audience - success.
WOW - Different genre apealing to different target audience - success.
SWTOR - Similar genre appealing to different target audience - Failure (well I think it was ok but most don't)
TESO - Similar genre appealing to different target audience.
The successes occour when you either stick to the genre and appeal to your existing audience or totally change the genre and appeal to a differnt audience. The failures seem to take place when you change things but try to appeal to the previous audience. That is what TES is doing.
Originally posted by ShakyMo I can think of 3 mmos that are based on single player prior games, uo, wow & swtor.
One stuck hard to the original formula, the other two made mmos radically different to the single player games.
Which one was the greatest financial disaster in gaming history?
UO stuck to the same basic game design as the ultima series, may be wrrng never really got to try UO but from looking at the crappy youtube stuff then it certainly looks the same.
WOW - Totally changed direction in their game design. Went from a RTS to MMO. Appealed to an entirely new audience and there really was no comparrison at all because the different franchises.
SWTOR You could argue it tried to emulate the story driven KOTOR game but to behonest, if they had done taht it might have been more successful. Problem was, people were expecting KOTORO and didn't get it.
So yes, SWTOR faied because it deviated from the fanbases expectations too much while remaining in pretty much the same genre to try and capture more players, losing their exisiting fanbase and not securing enough from the 'other' category.
So...
Using an IP, remaining in the same genre but changing large portions of gameplay to fit online mode = failure.
Using an IP, keeping the basic structure of the game = Success.
Using an IP, creating a totally new market in a completly unrelated genre = Success.
Which is TESO again?
What ESO is doing is chaging genres (SPRPG to MMORPG. they are two completely different genres).
I know Bethesda are not making the game but they completely changed the game mechanics for TES: Redguard. That was a linear Tomb Raider style game. Why can't they do something different with ESO?
Originally posted by ShakyMo Really the ultima sprpgs featured full loot pking?
You had pick pocket yes and could loot from mobs but it was single player so er...no other players.
Is that it?
Because that is a feature that is pretty damn similar in core functionality between the SPG and MMO.
Come on, how much of the map was blocked off?
Was class restrictions were added?
Which races were locked to certain regions?
You see in an SPG a function like being able to loot a dead opponent has a natural progression into an MMO. A player is just another dead opponent. Functionality is essentially the same.
But take A function like exploration. In the SPG you could explore the entire map, whatever that map happened to be. The natural progression is you have a bigger map so you have more to explore. Not so in TESo because they have a bigger map but sections of the world are now blocked, not becuase they are not part of the game but because of some artificial design descision.
The mass complained that SWTOR played TOO much like a single player game and not an MMO. What was the major difference in game play? Remember all the SWTOR is a CORPG? The game was frowned up because they stated it was an MMO, but had few MMO elements. Chalk that up to failed because it stuck too much to it's roots.
And isn't WoW a sucess? Did it not change the gameplay...maybe jus ta little bit?
Well personally SWTOR bored me because to creat an alt of the same faction I had to repeat content. That is my argument against TESO. I had no problem with the rest of the game to be honest. PvP was never my thing in it so that never bothered me. Would have liked space conflict done better though.
WOW had 3 RTS games prior to it's release. RTS and MMO are totally different genre's. There is no cross over except lore. You are not alienating anyone from the original genre because pretty much everything with the game is new except the lore.
UO - Similar genre appealing to similar target audience - success.
WOW - Different genre apealing to different target audience - success.
SWTOR - Similar genre appealing to different target audience - Failure (well I think it was ok but most don't)
TESO - Similar genre appealing to different target audience.
The successes occour when you either stick to the genre and appeal to your existing audience or totally change the genre and appeal to a differnt audience. The failures seem to take place when you change things but try to appeal to the previous audience. That is what TES is doing.
What you are doing is filtering your results to try to prove your point, when in fact, that is nothing like what you stated previously.
Just like movies, music etc...no game will fit everyone. The amount of whining is unreal when it comes to mmorpgs...its like people expect games to be tailored to their needs and their needs alone. There are games i dont play and wont play for design reasons, but i really dont see the need to hop onto their forums to express my distaste for it. I just dont buy/play it. That simple.
For example...wow is a good pve game, and tons of people play it....but its not for me. I tried it, didnt like it, moved on.
Wait, so people dont whine about Music they dont like?!? Star Wars fans didnt cry like little girls on the rag about the new movies being bad?
Anyway...sorry but your point does not apply.
I will however apply a PROPER analogy for you.
A new group is going to take beatles lyrics, set it to death metal, have a K-pop singer sing it but it will only play if you have a plug-n-play flute and play along with it.
So tell me, should beatles fans be happy and content enough to remain silent as they are told by the record company that they are making it for them? Well...yeah, cause that is what is being done with the TES IP.
You generalized his statement. He said "He" didn't buy something he didn't like and that "He" didn't whine about it. You took it out of context and inserted your own point of view into his point.
I got his point completely. He meant he didn't get on forums and cry about a game he doesn't like, he just doesn't buy it . He has a hard time grasping why people like yourself and many others who take to the forums to broadcast your angst.
I agree with his view point. You evidently don't. Neither of us is wrong or right. We just don't agree with each other.
I played DAOC. Really enjoyed it. So my opinion is biased. I can however, see why people complain about not being able to explore the entire game world. I mean in "Skyrim" I got to run around the entire world..... oh wait... no I didn't.
Said it before will say it again. Opinions are like assholes. We all have one and they all stink.
That quote about arseholes...not everyones does stink, only those that don't wash think that.
It's your lie... tell it how you want too. It's just logical. If feces comes out of it... it's gonna stink. No matter how much you wash. Only a diluted person or someone with a personality disorder would think otherwise
Comments
There is a reason why not many game studio's take a known IP and change the core concepts and founding principles of the game. I will leave you to work out what that might be though....
Yes hence its ongoing success despite being run by ea clowns
Hence the excitement for cu
Hence the two most successful new mmos of last year being heavily influenced by it. Gw2 is basicly a "my first daoc"
Ps2 obviously influenced by ps1 which was based upon daoc and unreal tournament.
(and voluntary please pick my pocket lol)
I actually tried to think of a title of a game that was a single player game and became an MMO but couldn't. Perhaps some examples might help us look at the issues more clearly.
Nicey stated and I agree I wish there were several ruleset servers and those would not effect the balance of development nor would it be possible for players to transfer to or off them.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Yeah the lotr mmo is just like the ip
As is dcuo
And any other ip based mmo
LOL
Ultima online is a mmo.based on single player game
Is DAOC still running? LOL ok
Forgive me if I am wrong but...isn't CU all PvP and no PvE? Isn't the excitement a little premature?
If GW2 was influenced by DOAC that explains a lot. I played PS2 for a few hours...round and round we go, no point to it. rather play a proper PvP game. The PvP in both GW2 and PS2 were both...souless.
Sorry but I know some might agree with you thinking DAOC was a better game to emulate then TES for a TESO game but I don't. But having 3 factions fighting isn't the problem. Losing my ability to explore the world with my character and being forced into a faction by race is.
Whatever you say, these 2 things mean it is not a TES game, in any format, to me.
What game was LOTRO based off?
What was the pre-cursor to DAOC?
Learning to Read FTW!
What game was WOW based on?
UO...yeah that is a good one. So what changes were made to UO from the SPG? I mean, the world is the same, could go anywhere...what did they have to lose to make it work in an MMO format?
This! QFT.
I make spreadsheets at work - I don't want to make them for the games I play.
One stuck hard to the original formula, the other two made mmos radically different to the single player games.
Which one was the greatest financial disaster in gaming history?
UO stuck to the same basic game design as the ultima series, may be wrrng never really got to try UO but from looking at the crappy youtube stuff then it certainly looks the same.
WOW - Totally changed direction in their game design. Went from a RTS to MMO. Appealed to an entirely new audience and there really was no comparrison at all because the different franchises.
SWTOR You could argue it tried to emulate the story driven KOTOR game but to behonest, if they had done taht it might have been more successful. Problem was, people were expecting KOTORO and didn't get it.
So yes, SWTOR faied because it deviated from the fanbases expectations too much while remaining in pretty much the same genre to try and capture more players, losing their exisiting fanbase and not securing enough from the 'other' category.
So...
Using an IP, remaining in the same genre but changing large portions of gameplay to fit online mode = failure.
Using an IP, keeping the basic structure of the game = Success.
Using an IP, creating a totally new market in a completly unrelated genre = Success.
Which is TESO again?
The mass complained that SWTOR played TOO much like a single player game and not an MMO. What was the major difference in game play? Remember all the SWTOR is a CORPG threads? The game was frowned up because they stated it was an MMO, but had few MMO elements. Chalk that up to failed because it stuck too much to it's roots.
And isn't WoW a sucess? Did it not change the gameplay...maybe jus ta little bit?
Well personally SWTOR bored me because to creat an alt of the same faction I had to repeat content. That is my argument against TESO. I had no problem with the rest of the game to be honest. PvP was never my thing in it so that never bothered me. Would have liked space conflict done better though.
WOW had 3 RTS games prior to it's release. RTS and MMO are totally different genre's. There is no cross over except lore. You are not alienating anyone from the original genre because pretty much everything with the game is new except the lore.
UO - Similar genre appealing to similar target audience - success.
WOW - Different genre apealing to different target audience - success.
SWTOR - Similar genre appealing to different target audience - Failure (well I think it was ok but most don't)
TESO - Similar genre appealing to different target audience.
The successes occour when you either stick to the genre and appeal to your existing audience or totally change the genre and appeal to a differnt audience. The failures seem to take place when you change things but try to appeal to the previous audience. That is what TES is doing.
What ESO is doing is chaging genres (SPRPG to MMORPG. they are two completely different genres).
I know Bethesda are not making the game but they completely changed the game mechanics for TES: Redguard. That was a linear Tomb Raider style game. Why can't they do something different with ESO?
You had pick pocket yes and could loot from mobs but it was single player so er...no other players.
Is that it?
Because that is a feature that is pretty damn similar in core functionality between the SPG and MMO.
Come on, how much of the map was blocked off?
Was class restrictions were added?
Which races were locked to certain regions?
You see in an SPG a function like being able to loot a dead opponent has a natural progression into an MMO. A player is just another dead opponent. Functionality is essentially the same.
But take A function like exploration. In the SPG you could explore the entire map, whatever that map happened to be. The natural progression is you have a bigger map so you have more to explore. Not so in TESo because they have a bigger map but sections of the world are now blocked, not becuase they are not part of the game but because of some artificial design descision.
What you are doing is filtering your results to try to prove your point, when in fact, that is nothing like what you stated previously.
You generalized his statement. He said "He" didn't buy something he didn't like and that "He" didn't whine about it. You took it out of context and inserted your own point of view into his point.
I got his point completely. He meant he didn't get on forums and cry about a game he doesn't like, he just doesn't buy it . He has a hard time grasping why people like yourself and many others who take to the forums to broadcast your angst.
I agree with his view point. You evidently don't. Neither of us is wrong or right. We just don't agree with each other.
I played DAOC. Really enjoyed it. So my opinion is biased. I can however, see why people complain about not being able to explore the entire game world. I mean in "Skyrim" I got to run around the entire world..... oh wait... no I didn't.
Said it before will say it again. Opinions are like assholes. We all have one and they all stink.
That quote about arseholes...not everyones does stink, only those that don't wash think that.
It's your lie... tell it how you want too. It's just logical. If feces comes out of it... it's gonna stink. No matter how much you wash. Only a diluted person or someone with a personality disorder would think otherwise
* swg/eq/DF fans
lol, okay... I surrender... no debating that logic