Will TES:O turn it's back on TES?

[Da_BossMaN69]

Now I'll just put it out there that I'm not a fan of this, but I am not so dedicated to hating the game that I'll simply say "1t wil suxx, MMO's suck, TeH L0re is ruined!!11". So please don't interpret this as me simply bashing the whole game.

Now that being said I have some very important questions I haven't seen been raised in other threads.

For starters: Quests) Now the thing about TES's quests are that while their are quite a lot that are simple 'Talk to A go do B return with C to get D' missions, there are always few such as "Stake out this location, catch this character find out you've been set up hunt down this character and exact vengance". My question is how can we not have the latter type quests, one that rely solely on interaction with NPC's and making choices that affect them, I mean a good bit of the time we end up killing them, or turning them against us. How can this be the case in TES:O.

For starters how can one player be in the final and crucial stage where you're fighting them or tracking them since they fled, but another player is just starting. And if it is a scenario where the NPC must respawn then it takes out the impact of the quest. We won't truly be able to leave an impact on the world.

Thus I can see the end result only being the common fetch/kill this quests common in most MMO's.


Second:Crime) This has always been one of my favorite aspects in TES, hell it what keeps the Thief class alive, knowing [&@%!] can hit the fan at any moment if you slip up and must make a quick get away, or successfully slip away undetected after robbing some one blind.

I mean again going back to the impact thing, if loot respawns, then some of the fun is gone, I mean you can then simply rob the richest fellow again and again. And not only that but the Guards themselves, how can it be done? If we have x amount of them whose to say some schmuck doesn't come running in and just kill all the guards completely taking out the challenge to thieving. And if there's more than one thief then

Also what if someone else attempts to rob the same person as you, does it become a race (thus only adding less stealth and more of a mad dash to the victim's safe). Lastly, what if someone murders the person you attempt to thieve from.

Third: NPC interactions) In such a complex environment as the TES games the only factor that has to be considered in making an impact is you, how can we not complicate things by multiplying it by thousands or more players. I mean I loved the personal interaction we had with shop keepers and random characters, and i don't mind sharing it but what about the schedules.

I mean one of the things we could do was wait or interrupt certain things about these schedules, like we could start a quest with them and throw them off track, if we add several other players into the mix I feel like the NPC reaction to other characters and environment will be changed.

For example If some one else runs around naked yet I talk to them, will they notice me or the other player, If I want to talk to some one or pickpocket them what If some one else comes and chat with them, will I be able to still?

Fourth: Misc) Just a list of some questions that don't really fit anywhere.
-Will shopkeepers still have items lying around we can steal, whatif someone else just takes everything, will it respawn, because if so then how long, because if it's short that can be a simple way to exploit easy cash.

-Difficulty, one of the things that has always been an issue is level of difficulty in these games, now certain areas can be more challenging then others but in the end we were always able to conquer anywhere or anyone we wanted to simply if we had the resources and made the right strategy, with loss of turnbased combat and inventory not pausing the game, I feel like the Game will force us to go to certain locations simply because we're too weak to stand a chance regardless of how skillful or smart we play. Going to these areas will now just demand long hours of 'grinding' xp.

-Will Random encounters be tossed away simply because the Dev's expect the players to fill those roles?

-Loss of impact, with everyone being the Hero and every choice we had in previous games made so important that they could literally close off entire sections of gameplay or quests/characters, will they compensate by making the World essentially stagnant? Or will there be servers dedicated to people who completed quests "A" so that "Character B must be C".

-Technical limitations >Immersion, with thousands of people running around and forcing the game to focus more on them then the world can we expect to see less of the little things that keep these games alive, such as giants herding mammoths over large distances, Dragons soaring around and ravaging random villages, and even simply Deer making bugle calls, realistic animations. Predators hunting prey, and so forth.

[ZeRoc]

I'm thinking that there will be a lot of use of the instance system (see: Guild Wars, Lord of the Rings Online, etc.) for some of these, like if you start a stakeout quest it sends you to a different instance of that location where it is night time and the appropriate stuff happens.

The ability to kill shopkeepers and such on the otherhand... I'm not sure how they will handle that without just making them generic "Shopkeeper" NPCs.

[AKB]

I'm going to be answering these questions the same way you split them up, so I apologize if it's a bit confusing about what I'm referring to.

To answer your first, second, and third questions; phasing. Phasing is where two players can be in the same area, but see different things. With phasing, were you to kill an NPC, this NPC would be dead to you, but other people will still be able to interact with him. You'll never see your victim again unless you join the party of a person who has not killed this NPC. To avoid quest errors for someone being further along in a quest than you are, you'll only be as far as the party leader if you join a party. Once you leave, your personal progress would be the same if you only did things you've already completed.

Likewise, it can also work for theft. When you go on a quest to steal a specific item, you'll be taken to a cell away from the rest of the world so other players can't bother you. That's mostly just guesswork, I admit. They've been somewhat tight lipped about how thieving will work. I am genuinely worry that it will blow as well, as good MMOs with decent thieving mechanics are few and far between. The only good example I can think of comes from Eve, which seems to go for the approach of if it isn't nailed down (or you have a sufficiently decent hammer), you can steal it. The thousands of other players and NPCs may attempt to stop you, of course. It'll be interesting to see what they do.

As for NPC interactions, they've talked quite a bit about how they've worked on them to get them working in the world. Through the use of phasing and clever schedules, the problems should be minimal to none. One of the most likely answers is that in many locations, you just won't run into other players that aren't part of your party.

I'm not sure if shopkeepers will have stuff to steal still, they definitely should.

I'm not sure what you're getting on about combat, ES games have never been turn-based. Pausing a game is not the same as taking turns bonking each other with swords. It's true that you won't be able to pause, but you could count that as a point for realism. I doubt that combat occurring in real time will remove all strategy elements. An entire genre of games are called "Real Time Strategy"; there is a bit of a precedent for creating strategy without stopping time in the video game industry. You'll just have to be quick on your feet or plan ahead. While there will always be instances of the competition just simply outclassing you unless you use some ridiculous strategy, I don't think that guarantees it'll be a grind fest.

I think I've only heard a brief mention of random encounters, though I do believe it was to confirm their presence.

As I've already mentioned, phasing will handle questing issues to avoid paradoxes. You can still save entire cities from damnation, with someone else deciding to burn it down without it effecting your experience.

To answer your final question, I think they're going for two different approaches from all I've seen. It should have those natural moments we've grown used to as well as having a bunch of players interacting with the world around us. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this'll probably see many of the more bigger and minute details pushed out of from the scope, but hopefully not due to a lack of trying on the developments part. The complexities that human opponents and allies can provide versus their AI counterparts are likely to force many interactions with the AI out of focus.

[Glyre]

Looks like AKB beat me to a lot of this, but, regardless...

I'd have to agree with ZeRoc's assessment that a lot of instancing/phasing will be used.

Regarding some of the other freedoms you mentioned in your original posts, it seems you're thinking that this will be, say, "Skyrim Online." It won't. For better or for worse this game is shaping up to have more in common with WoW than any of the numbered TES games, so things will be a little different. I doubt that it will be possible to kill guards or shopkeepers on your own faction— if it is possible it would most likely be within the confines of (instanced) quests. If I were you I would watch a video of some gameplay from another big MMO that's out right now to get an idea of what this game will probably be like— I think it will be the best way for you to find the answers to your questions.

Finally, it's important to remember that TES:O is not meant to be TES VI, and that Bethesda isn't even behind it. We'll certainly have another "regular" TES game eventually. Look at TES:O as related to the series in the same way that maybe Redguard was: The universe is the same, but the gameplay is different. In this case quite a bit different.

[Wolfie]

Beth has before made Elder scrolls games that do not follow 1 2 3 4 or 5 this is the same

It's a side game, it's NOT a "regular" game no matter how much you want it to be, they won't base it off of the TES series platform because its meant to be different, its NOT meant to be TES 6.

[Avron the S'wit]

I think you should also remember that multiplayer online games are, at their very core, different than a singleplayer game. There are things you can't account for in multiplayers and things that must be handled differently. Let's not forget that!

[DikaSmausha]

Yeah it is not like they are stopping the production of Single Player.

[Pilaf The Defiler]

It's not even being developed by Bethesda. How is that not common knowledge on these forums by now? It's completely different design teams. It seems like I've told the exact same people this at least 20 times.

[Giordano]

I would say that TES assassins and thieves are going to dislike the MMO. I can see you surrounded by faction-friendly, untouchable NPCs in terms of health, pickpocketing, and intimidation. You won't be able to kill faction-friendly shopkeeps (basically, everybody in your entire town) or steal their items. I highly doubt the MMO will be as complexity realistic as single player game because the sheer numbers of players - the downfall of immersion in MMOs is their core concept.

Just my two cents.

[Da_BossMaN69]

I never said it was being developed by Bethesda. But the thing I'm trying to say is that this game will not resemble the classic TES games we've come to know. That's what I mean by turning it's back.

I have some interest in the game, but again only really due to the Idea of a TES game as a multiplayer, not the actual game itself. So I feel like I should give it a fair chance, but again I'm not really seeing so far in it's development.

So to stick with the thread I'd like to hear any answers to prove me wrong that they will retain some or most of the features I've listed.

[AKB]

Alright.

I'm going to be answering these questions the same way you split them up, so I apologize if it's a bit confusing about what I'm referring to.

To answer your first, second, and third questions; phasing. Phasing is where two players can be in the same area, but see different things. With phasing, were you to kill an NPC, this NPC would be dead to you, but other people will still be able to interact with him. You'll never see your victim again unless you join the party of a person who has not killed this NPC. To avoid quest errors for someone being further along in a quest than you are, you'll only be as far as the party leader if you join a party. Once you leave, your personal progress would be the same if you only did things you've already completed.

Likewise, it can also work for theft. When you go on a quest to steal a specific item, you'll be taken to a cell away from the rest of the world so other players can't bother you. That's mostly just guesswork, I admit. They've been somewhat tight lipped about how thieving will work. I am genuinely worry that it will blow as well, as good MMOs with decent thieving mechanics are few and far between. The only good example I can think of comes from Eve, which seems to go for the approach of if it isn't nailed down (or you have a sufficiently decent hammer), you can steal it. The thousands of other players and NPCs may attempt to stop you, of course. It'll be interesting to see what they do.

As for NPC interactions, they've talked quite a bit about how they've worked on them to get them working in the world. Through the use of phasing and clever schedules, the problems should be minimal to none. One of the most likely answers is that in many locations, you just won't run into other players that aren't part of your party.

I'm not sure if shopkeepers will have stuff to steal still, they definitely should.

I'm not sure what you're getting on about combat, ES games have never been turn-based. Pausing a game is not the same as taking turns bonking each other with swords. It's true that you won't be able to pause, but you could count that as a point for realism. I doubt that combat occurring in real time will remove all strategy elements. An entire genre of games are called "Real Time Strategy"; there is a bit of a precedent for creating strategy without stopping time in the video game industry. You'll just have to be quick on your feet or plan ahead. While there will always be instances of the competition just simply outclassing you unless you use some ridiculous strategy, I don't think that guarantees it'll be a grind fest.

I think I've only heard a brief mention of random encounters, though I do believe it was to confirm their presence.

As I've already mentioned, phasing will handle questing issues to avoid paradoxes. You can still save entire cities from damnation, with someone else deciding to burn it down without it effecting your experience.

To answer your final question, I think they're going for two different approaches from all I've seen. It should have those natural moments we've grown used to as well as having a bunch of players interacting with the world around us. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this'll probably see many of the more bigger and minute details pushed out of from the scope, but hopefully not due to a lack of trying on the developments part. The complexities that human opponents and allies can provide versus their AI counterparts are likely to force many interactions with the AI out of focus.

[Wolfie]

I never said it was being developed by Bethesda. But the thing I'm trying to say is that this game will not resemble the classic TES games we've come to know. That's what I mean by turning it's back.

I have some interest in the game, but again only really due to the Idea of a TES game as a multiplayer, not the actual game itself. So I feel like I should give it a fair chance, but again I'm not really seeing so far in it's development.

So to stick with the thread I'd like to hear any answers to prove me wrong that they will retain some or most of the features I've listed.

You do know they have made games out side of TES games you come to know and love before right?

Not saying they where good or bad, but it wont be the first time, IMO most of them where good games.

[Travalanche]

The biggest negative I have about MMO's "especially WoW" is that there are invincible NPC's or ones that require over a dozen people to take down, nobody, not even Mike Tyson could beat up a dozen people of similar strength and experience just because he is more well known. Once during WoW I had an Undead Rogue at level 60 like 6 months after it came out and had some decent raiding gear and snuck up behind Bolvar Fordragon after kidney shotting half the town. And did a perfect combo yet I died very fast and did like no damage.

Nobody not even the King of England could have taken a knife in the jugular and survived to strike back as well. What I like about Skyrim is that if you stab somebody from stealth no matter who they are with a sharp powerful blade it's over which is how it should be!

This is speculation of course and they may not have invincible NPC's or ones that are severely overpowered but most MMO's do.

[Wolfie]

The biggest negative I have about MMO's "especially WoW" is that there are invincible NPC's or ones that require over a dozen people to take down, nobody, not even Mike Tyson could beat up a dozen people of similar strength and experience just because he is more well known. Once during WoW I had an Undead Rogue at level 60 like 6 months after it came out and had some decent raiding gear and snuck up behind Bolvar Fordragon after kidney shotting half the town. And did a perfect combo yet I died very fast and did like no damage.

Nobody not even the King of England could have taken a knife in the jugular and survived to strike back as well. What I like about Skyrim is that if you stab somebody from stealth no matter who they are with a sharp powerful blade it's over which is how it should be!

This is speculation of course and they may not have invincible NPC's or ones that are severely overpowered but most MMO's do.

ut.. in TES your like that, you can take on an entire badnit camp with out breaking a sweat

[skooma steve]

...That's his point. Invincible NPCs will make your character feel like a wimp even if he's extremely high level and has insane gear. It also just makes the game unrealistic.

I think it would be better if the NPCs were "instanced" in such a way that if you kill them, they're dead for good (thus also closing off any topics/quests etc. from that NPC). I don't want NPCs that I kill respawning all the time.

They probably won't do that though, since MMO's aren't fond of players being able to doom themselves out of questlines and such.

[Wolfie]

...That's his point. Invincible NPCs will make your character feel like a wimp even if he's extremely high level and has insane gear. It also just makes the game unrealistic.

I think it would be better if the NPCs were "instanced" in such a way that if you kill them, they're dead for good (thus also closing off any topics/quests etc. from that NPC). I don't want NPCs that I kill respawning all the time.

They probably won't do that though, since MMO's aren't fond of players being able to doom themselves out of questlines and such.

but all his point is saying NO ONE should be that powerful, but we are.

What about the fact that they CANT do that, even if they did there is NOT going to be anything else to do but grind and pvp

this is not meant to be like oblivion, morrowind, or skyrim, just like none of those where like the other.

[skooma steve]

I know that, Mr. Wolf. I'm just saying that TESO will probably go the route of invincible NPCs.

[Frost Mage]

Disclaimer: This post was based off of the title of the thread, and that alone, not the textwall OP, or any of the discussion it may have caused.

Basically... no. They're developed by entire different studious. I really doubt TESO could do anything so dramatic that it would be considered "turning its back" on the Elder Scrolls series. Come on guys, have some faith in Bethesda for once.

[Dohva.]

Beth has before made Elder scrolls games that do not follow 1 2 3 4 or 5 this is the same

It's a side game, it's NOT a "regular" game no matter how much you want it to be, they won't base it off of the TES series platform because its meant to be different, its NOT meant to be TES 6.

Thank the Divines for that.

[DikaSmausha]

It won't. It will add some more flavor to the series, is all.

[Taters]

...That's his point. Invincible NPCs will make your character feel like a wimp even if he's extremely high level and has insane gear. It also just makes the game unrealistic.

Frankly, I think it's more unrealistic to assume that a single man would be able to defeat dozens of dragons INCLUDING a nearly god-like one that couldn't even be defeated by the strongest heroes of the land, i.e., Skyrim. While I agree that some of the bosses in WoW are ridiculously hard(requiring upwards of 40 people to kill), I think it's more realistic than making everyone an easy target.

Alduin can be defeated by a single being; Deathwing needs an entire world's worth of very strong heroes to bring down. Both are world-destroying dragons of unimaginable power. Which sounds more realistic to you? In short, I think such additions would make the game feel more balanced and realistic, not less.

[skooma steve]

@Jedi Taters: The broader issue really has to do with the challenges of converting a single-player franchise into the MMO format. Obviously, a lot of single-player conventions fans have come to know and love (or hate) will have to be dramatically altered, or done away with entirely.

A single player game typically aims to turn the player into a hero, a main protagonist. Thus, it is a very personal experience. The goal of MMOs is almost exactly the opposite. A good MMO fosters cooperation and socializing, and all but REQUIRES people to work together to succeed in high-level dungeon crawls and boss battles.

Think about it. In Skyrim, if you had to join with an army of NPCs in order to take down a dragon, the entire single-player experience would be compromised. Conversely, lone players taking down epic bosses without breaking a sweat in an MMO would absolutely ruin the MMO experience.

I guess I just don't really see your point here, or how the issues you raised relate to my previous post, which was only criticizing the realism of invincible NPCs - not other realism issues that exist within both MMO and single-player games. I understand that invincible NPCs are basically a necessity for gameplay reasons, but they still destroy realism in my book.

[Mod-Loving Wood Elf]

I really, truly, honestly don't think ESO will create any problems. It's not like Elder Scrolls is turning MMO from now on. ESO is basically a spin-off. It's probably going to be pretty good, concerning the amount of lore the developers are studying. So we should just sit back and let it happen.

[Travalanche]

I kind of skimmed the OP's post as it's quite long but I read most of it, what I have to say is that it's most likely that they will turn their back on it from a logical perspective. Basically look at what WoW did to the Warcraft franchise for reference.