And this is why it'll keep going this way...

They knew (just like most MMO or server based games do) that there was demand and completely failed to meet it, then dropped key features like cheetah speed to try and play catch up...

As for F2P with microtransactions, no, it's not worse. It's far superior depending on the transaction model. I get to play the game and if I enjoy it, I can plonk down as much dosh as I wish to. With Simcity, they just couldn't play the game they paid for. Yay...

Nevermind if you want to while away the hours on a flight playing a bit of Simcity, or if your internet drops out for the evening. Just because most people can be connected all the time doesn't mean they always are. If you want to play it single player and miss out the regional stuff, why shouldn't you be able to?

And let's not even get started on stuff like tiny city sizes, broken mechanics like miniscule employment rates in high population cities causing your retail sector to collapse, fire stations ignoring calls from places next door merrily burning away, no undo, lost cities due to the cloud save fucking up etc...

You want to bend over and let them take advantage of you sans lube, go nuts, but every time you do you let them know it's okay to try it on with everyone else.

I don't think I need these... who needs to see me playing MMO's on my computer?

There was a great quote I read about Skyrim that summed it up in one sentance. "As wide as an ocean, as deep as a puddle." I'm hesitant to get all hot and bothered about this game just for that reason. Especially with so many studios trying to cash in on 1: the MMO market, and 2: whoring out a franchise.

Uncanny valley is easy to avoid if the characters do nothing more than blink. You'd notice it the moment there was some acting with dialogue. That being said, this is nice work. Too bad about the MMO format, I don't have a nerd card with that kind of security clearance.

All that the Archer/Assassin act in the middle needed was an Oliphant or two. And the elven female mage was HOT (yes, pun intended).
-----

What bugs me about this is it's where Bethesda's attention is going to go for the next four years instead of concentrating and putting out the next quality single-player chapter in what is all of a mature and proven franchise, a genre that they own, and a immersive play experience that they are the absolute benchmark in. MMO's where the money's at, sure, but they made a KILLING with Skyrim and its single-player sequel would have been an absolute sure bet to do same.

Makes me sad as they've been very consistent at releasing a new chapter every 5-6 years for the previous 3 chapters, and this means Elder Scrolls VI is now likely to be much further out than 2016.

Epic bearded guy would be wearing Nordic Carved Armor. So, yeah, Ebonheart Pact.

I completely agree about Elder Scrolls being a single player experience. For me anyway. I've never enjoyed MMOs and there's no chance that this is going to sway me. About the only thing I'd like added to the TES games is a little more micromanagement of my companions. Dragon Age: Origins got that right.

Your link missed an important bit, and showed me ALL the TES factions, then I realized that it should point here:
http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Factions_%28Online%29

Anyhow, I bet you're correct and the 3-way faceoff was between:
Aldmeri Dominion (SW corner of map)
Daggerfall Covenant (NW corner)
Ebonhart Pact (NE corner)

...Presumably to allow for PvP control zones, etc. Interesting, thanks.

Still, the MMO nature will make it difficult or impossible to include many if not most of the key things that I enjoy in a TES game, so I still think that this is a long shot for me personally.

Great trailer. Shame the actual game won't be anything like that .

My favorite thing about Oblivion and Skyrim were the mods. To begin with it was just fixing bugs Bethesda missed, then it was tweaks to balance some aspects of the game but eventually you could get mods that put some professional DLC to shame.

Anyway, they promised to stay true to Elder Scrolls with this MMO, but I don't really see how they can.

Pretty cool trailer... Sadly, I find "Elder Scrolls" and "MMO" to be an oxymoron, so I'd say there is about a snowball's chance in hell of me actually being interested in playing it -- despite the fact that I'm a huge Elder Scrolls fan.

On a different note, anyone want to wager a guess as to what the different groups were in the vid? I thought it was Aldmeri Dominion attacking an Imperial fort of some kind, but then the 3-way Mexican stand off at the end seemed like Dominion vs. ??? (Dark Brotherhood or Thieves guild?) vs. ??? (braided beard dude in Dwemer armor = return of the Dwemer?)

The only thing that'll make me play this over WoW is if it isn't a hot key mmo. I couldn't play Star Wars or Guild Wars 2 after playing WoW for 7 years.

*nsfw for language
I too love figuring out "other games" to play within MMOs

I agree,
Take BF3 for example, if they went all the way trying to put digital photo skins on the models, it would look like zombies fighting. I am also of the strong belief that until you get the human emotions on a face down to a science, you should still stick with cartoonish characters instead. NHL 96 tried to look realistic back in on the PC; they stapled digital hockey players pictures on the low-polygon models, and boy, did it look like we were playing with lifeless Sears mannequins or what?

I love WoW models for the same absurd reason. Given the polygon low count of WoW, regardless of your MMO inclination, you have to admit that the art direction in that game is nothing short of phenomenal.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^EvilDeathBee:
There's just something about Rockstar's mocap that simply looks wrong. It always looks out of place and off-putting to me

Agreed, the environment and vehicles are beautifully rendered, but the characters look like crap.

I think it's more of a style. If it looks more realistic they lose a certain flair or ridiculousness which they like. Sort of like World of Warcraft which people whine about but I love how it looks.

Yeah, whatever happened to trying to emulate Ultima Online instead of WoW? Seriously! WAKE THE FUCK UP!

If someone came out with an updated game that allowed me to go into town kill some fuck for his ships deed and then take my new ship full of stolen weapons and sail it down the coast to fuel a war on some island it would make shit loads of money!

Or just make a house and sit in baking bread and making furniture....

>> ^luxury_pie:

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^spoco2:
Then I start hearing him talking about people getting paid by other players for their starship designs, and look at the pledge amounts and see they come with certain credits and start thinking 'Fucking hell, another fucking game that has in game purchases'.
You know, I heard that and I thought "finally, my childhood dream of making a living designing cool spaceships could be realised! "
I genuinely don't have a problem with that unless it becomes a "pay to win" scenario. In which case I'll stick to the single player campaign. Apparently, some people are making pretty good money designing stuff for TF2 and I think that's awesome.
aside from the minor problems of my complete and utter lack of artistic ability, design skills and 3d modelling know-how

TF2 is exactly the game to bring up on this topic. As long as Mr. Roberts sticks to this "no pay-to-win" rule. It's going to be fine. Let me shut my eyes and believe already
And I've been waiting for a dynamic MMO where players design/ have an impact on the environment in which they play.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^spoco2:
Then I start hearing him talking about people getting paid by other players for their starship designs, and look at the pledge amounts and see they come with certain credits and start thinking 'Fucking hell, another fucking game that has in game purchases'.
You know, I heard that and I thought "finally, my childhood dream of making a living designing cool spaceships could be realised! "
I genuinely don't have a problem with that unless it becomes a "pay to win" scenario. In which case I'll stick to the single player campaign. Apparently, some people are making pretty good money designing stuff for TF2 and I think that's awesome.
aside from the minor problems of my complete and utter lack of artistic ability, design skills and 3d modelling know-how


TF2 is exactly the game to bring up on this topic. As long as Mr. Roberts sticks to this "no pay-to-win" rule. It's going to be fine. Let me shut my eyes and believe already

And I've been waiting for a dynamic MMO where players design/ have an impact on the environment in which they play.

>> ^jmzero:

As for jmzero... I dont think hes even played it.

Well, uh, you're wrong. I've played about an hour, which was a half hour more than I needed to see this wasn't the game for me. I played the first game really quite a lot.
There are many things you can say about GW2, both good and bad, but "slightly different flavor of WoW" isnt one of them.

I don't think YOU'VE played it. Ha! See how annoying that is?
Anyways, it's a hell of a lot more like WoW than Guild Wars 1, though I suppose MMO connoisseurs probably see all sorts of distinguishing characteristics. I played through the storyline of Guild Wars 1 and only played with other people once or twice (using the AI mercenary things as required). In Guild Wars, I didn't even get to fight the "boss" thing at the end of the tutorial - someone killed it before I got close. That's not the same kind of game.
And they've futzed with the multi-player (which to me was the actual game). I can't just pick the skills I want. I can't just jump into a reasonably balanced (and levelled) PvP character (or, if I can, they didn't present that option very well). In the first game, I made a PvP monk with a bunch of heals, and was doing multiplayer (and having fun) immediately - like, within 10 minutes of installing the game. I have no idea how far off the horizon that is in Guild Wars II, but even when it comes I'm quite sure I don't want to play it. It plays completely different - far more action-RPG focus instead of the old focus on skill-selection and tactics. If I want an action-y game, I'll play a game style that supports that - like DotA.
Guild Wars 1 was a really appealing game for me. Guild Wars II is nothing of the sort - and to me it goes in the same trash-heap as every other "kill 10 rats", "grind equipment and levels" MMO that came before it.
Oh, but yeah, I didn't realize that it's set in the same painfully, painfully generic fantasy universe (I really didn't). Thanks for straightening me out on that.


1. Basing any game on an hours play is stupid.
2. You talk about how you loved GW1s story, yet you ignored the story in GW2 which said wait for the NPC.... this was there so you didnt miss out on killing the boss.... perhaps you should pay attention next time.
3. In GW1 most people picked the same 3 or so skills for weapons every time, AN simply locked the skills in place to make sure people who didnt understand wouldnt be caught out with a build which was useless. All the other skills can be picked by the player, tho again with more limitations. The GW1 system was powerful, but impossible to balance. The new system is able to be managed by AN, but it sactually more indepth than it seems, tho it is simpler.
4. You can jump into pvp right away actually. Just make a charater (such as a guardian) and goto the pvp lobby. Done, lvl 80 with access to all items, skills and access to the jump in, and tournament play. Again, if you'd bothered to play the game you would have known this. All this information was in the manuel linked right from the launcher.
5. You dont grind equipment and levels. You'll get both by doing whatever you want, be it spvp, wvw, story content or jump roaming around.

Its not perfect, but dear lord play it first to find out for yourself.