I was hyped for TES Online but then after waiting for a while...

#21Spetsnaz420Posted 12/12/2013 5:00:36 AM
I thought ESO wasn't coming to xbox because MS refuses to allow cross platform gaming.
---
I don't conform to social convention
"Xbox people don't care about the truth, they only care about seamless multimedia streaming." - Stan Marsh
#22TheApd_ReturnsPosted 12/12/2013 5:01:54 AM(edited)
Having played the beta (LOL NDA, it was practically open as almost everyone who applied got in the last round), the combat was pretty bad. And that's the core of the game.

And before some idiot says "its just beta lol", show me one game that substantially improved or changed much since beta, and the game releases in less than 4 months.

Liked:
- Technical graphics are up there. PS4+Xbone will not run this 60fps@1080p, I can almost guarantee it.
- Attention to lore detail was better than expected

Disliked:
- Art style
- Combat was an awkward, tehnically poor mishmash between GW2, Skyrim, and traditional rotation combat. The lack of feedback/feeling of impact kills it.
- It's a theme park, which takes away a bit of a true explorative feeling. You're just constantly being ushered into the next higher level area, so no region will feel memorable or really unique.
- Quests are garbage.
- Playerbase skewed towards the dunmer/nord/argonian alliance. Partially because of the races( I play dunmer, I admit), and partially because their areas are intrisincally the most interesting (both on an aesthetic general fantasy level and a fanservice level, considering they have Skyrim and Morrowind).
- The class system kind of reneges on their promises. "play how you want", WEAR HEAVY ARMOR AND CAST SPELLS AND STUFF, but the gameplay mechanics discourage this as armor has more to do with magicka-stamina-health than armor class vs weight. Same with weapons, different weapon styles are catered towards classic MMO roles despite their claims.

Overall, it feels like a missed opportunity. I'm not opposed to the idea of an Elder Scrolls MMO, as it, along with a real Forgotten Realms MMO, would be a great thing of done right. But this game definitely needed more influence from the Eve Online, Ultima Online, and even GW2 side of the house than the Skyrim/WoW side. The sad part is the suits at Bethesda dont realize they couldve been alot riskier with this and still have been commercially succesful because of the franchise name alone.
---
XBL: MauryPov1ch ... BF4 (PC): Chollima ... Steam: callmaury
3DS: 1907-9236-7818
#23PulpPosted 12/12/2013 5:04:00 AM
MrSpaM111 posted...
F2P MMO or GTFO basically


Funny, I am the exact opposite. F2P kills MMOs, because inevitably devs have to expand and balance with monetization in mind, instead of improvements/fun. It's not unreasonable that they HAVE to do this...its a business after all.

Monthly Fee or GTFO basically.
---
Contest Abuse - You have lost the right to dispute or appeal further moderations.
#24MrSpaM111Posted 12/12/2013 5:22:16 AM
Pulp posted...
MrSpaM111 posted...
F2P MMO or GTFO basically


Funny, I am the exact opposite. F2P kills MMOs, because inevitably devs have to expand and balance with monetization in mind, instead of improvements/fun. It's not unreasonable that they HAVE to do this...its a business after all.

Monthly Fee or GTFO basically.


I understand what you mean, I honestly wouldn't mind paying a monthly fee if they were not charging $60 for the client in the first place, this is what annoys me, it should be one or the other. Pay for the client without subscription costs, or pay subscription costs if the client is free to download. They should at least let you try the game out at no costs up to say level 10, just so you can decide if it's the right game to invest a subscription into. Currently it seems like a huge cash grab. It's sad really, because I was pretty excited about playing this on console when it was announced.
---
"Exactly correct TC..."
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/691088-xbox-one/66274628
#25krystylaPosted 12/12/2013 10:12:06 AM
TheApd_Returns posted...
a real Forgotten Realms MMO


There is a severe lack of Forgotten Realms games in general, especially high budget. Screw LoTR, screw GoT, screw the Witcher and make an open world post spellplague Faerun game
---
FC: 4227 - 1514- 7752 IGN:Mara
PSN: JudasInHell Gamertag: Crystyn 7B
#26blakenbl00Posted 12/12/2013 10:18:30 AM
Fallout New Vegas wasn't made by Beth and it is loved and adored by millions. ES:O will be fine.
---
E-101 You-go guay guay fi dee schow'
#27Juzten76Posted 12/12/2013 10:23:46 AM(edited)
Crysiania posted...
ESO looks terrible, ive heard reports that the combat is beyond mediocre which just does not work in an mmorpg.

So yea, i wouldnt hype ESO until you see what its like closer to release.

Keep in mind the game isnt even made by bethesda.


It can't be worse than the typical MMORPG that requires you to simply attack while spamming special abilities. Combat has always been mediocre in Elder Scrolls games and MMORPGS.
#28Darth VengerPosted 12/12/2013 10:38:03 AM
MrSpaM111 posted...
Pulp posted...
MrSpaM111 posted...
F2P MMO or GTFO basically


Funny, I am the exact opposite. F2P kills MMOs, because inevitably devs have to expand and balance with monetization in mind, instead of improvements/fun. It's not unreasonable that they HAVE to do this...its a business after all.

Monthly Fee or GTFO basically.


I understand what you mean, I honestly wouldn't mind paying a monthly fee if they were not charging $60 for the client in the first place, this is what annoys me, it should be one or the other. Pay for the client without subscription costs, or pay subscription costs if the client is free to download. They should at least let you try the game out at no costs up to say level 10, just so you can decide if it's the right game to invest a subscription into. Currently it seems like a huge cash grab. It's sad really, because I was pretty excited about playing this on console when it was announced.


Or charge less than $15. Why not $5? Or $7.95? Or even $9.99? And why not $40 instead of $60?
---
Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'.
#29AzaneAzerPosted 12/12/2013 10:43:09 AM(edited)
TMOG posted...
likematches posted...
Hidan623 posted...
TMOG posted...
Agreed. I would love a co-op Elder Scrolls/Fallout game, but I'm not big on MMOs.


Yeah because most people will play this MMO like a co-op anyway so make no sense for it to be an MMO plus we have to pay extra for it. I wouldn't mind paying but for it to be their first mmo we don't even know how good it will be. So why not go pay for something you know is good not to mention all the free to plays out there.

They should have gone the CO-OP route and not tried to make more money. They already know just because the name bethesda is on it and it's called elder scrolls it will sell millions so they didn't need to worry about a paywall. If anything the paywall will hurt their sales.

Subscription price is for server maintenance and support.

MMOs are not cheap.


What about the free-to-play MMOs that are making more money than the ones with monthly subscriptions, by way of the fact that they have a much larger userbase spending money on vanity items?


You mean P2W, and by vanity items you mean "increases your damage by 20% for 30 minutes", and no, those games aren't even making 1% of 1% of WoW's revenue.


I will not touch of look at any of the P2W Scam games, because I know they inevitably have to milk more out of players than Traditional MMOs do with subscription fees.
#30ImThe8thWonderPosted 12/12/2013 10:43:13 AM
bessy67 posted...
I think ESO looks cool, but I will not pay $15 a month no matter how good the game is.


This^

Subscriptions are the bane of the gaming industry.
---
Currently own: PS4, XB1, PS3, XB360, PS2, PS1, PS Vita, Wii, Wii U, DS, 3DS, Super NES, N64, and a gaming PC.