Wow, haven't see a review like this, sense Tom Chicks Review of CM Shock Force! ;D
It's not pretty but, I think he tells it, like it is!
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/the-elder-scrolls-online-review,3815-7.html
On top of this, the game is full of farming Bots, exploits, player bans and bugs!
Cut and paste Dungeons, the first 10 are all the same, look, same layout, etc and 71% of the dungeons are same through out the game!
I just watched AngryJoe's review on ESO last night. Fun and damning as appropriate:
Quote from: SgtRock on May 06, 2014, 08:44:08 AM
On top of this, the game is full of farming Bots, exploits...
Full? that's an understatement here unfortunately.
I've found more botters/cheaters in this game than actual players.
And this is a purchase once and then pay subscription game. :P
Jump on the bandwagon of negativity guys!
All Aboard!!!
*sigh*
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 06, 2014, 11:10:32 AM
Jump on the bandwagon of negativity guys!
All Aboard!!!
*sigh*
You have something good you say about it, then say it.
The game has a lot of potential.
And even the hardware review stated a few good things about it.
But the overabundance of botters really detracts from the gameplay.
Quote from: SgtRock on May 06, 2014, 11:33:22 AM
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 06, 2014, 11:10:32 AM
Jump on the bandwagon of negativity guys!
All Aboard!!!
*sigh*
You have something good you say about it, then say it.
If you had taken a little more time to look around you would have found this thread on here already (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=3293.0) in which I have done more than say
something.
But hey, why go to the trouble. Let's just make a new thread so we can all start off in a negative mood and indulge.
Instead you could have added your views to the former thread and actually made a decent discussion.
These videos you have linked are no more than stand-up comedy and with the greater internet as it is, just cause a shitstorm from whichever direction.
Especially MMO's suffer from endless streams of vitriol and uninformed whinefests. Often going on info that has clearly been addressed or was something that
has been a problem. (FFXIV ARR is often mentioned still as the failed relaunch... which couldn't be further from the truth).
We all still have the misconception that a niche game is a bad thing. MMO's need to be a WoW killer or else they have tried and failed.
It's been more than once that I was really asking myself wether I was just fooling myself for liking a game? Clearly if there is so much negativity posted on the net, I must be missing something? Yet I like the given game... *confused*.
Still, I suspect people post earlier and more often if they have complaints over those that are happy with a game. And a much larger part of any given playerbase doesn't even frequent forums at all.
So I have stopped putting any value in videos and reviews like those you linked. If I like a game, I continue to play it, if I do not, then I quit.
What pisses me off here, though, is that there already is a long ESO thread open to negativity, discussion and praise.
This thread is just a primer for crash and burn and flamewars.
P.S> For the record: the bots are annoying and are an issue.
I haven't paid much attention to the other ESO thread, but seeing Tom's Hardware mentioned in the title of this thread drew my attention. I consider TH to be a reliable source of info, so seeing reading the review is meaningful to me.
AngryJoe's reviews are always funny and worth watching for that reason alone.
There was nothing post release or any game details in the other thread and Tom's Hardware isn't your normal game review site, in fact when he reviews something it's more from a design view. I think his review points out the poor design and sloppy/lazy implementation of ESO VS. the half baked rants of Youtube video reviews.
Well the Tom's article is no different from most other articles I have seen.
It has the title 'review' but instead of keeping the focus on technical bits the author goes into the Realm of subjectivity when he addresses voice acting and questslines.
Then there are the power terms like 'ruined the economy '.. What ruin? There is none.
Its just as exaggerated as many other pieces.
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 06, 2014, 03:27:12 PM
Well the Tom's article is no different from most other articles I have seen.
It has the title 'review' but instead of keeping the focus on technical bits the author goes into the Realm of subjectivity when he addresses voice acting and questslines.
Then there are the power terms like 'ruined the economy '.. What ruin? There is none.
Its just as exaggerated as many other pieces.
Bro, are you in denial? ;D Exploits and Botting don't damage the economy, based on what, Obamanomics?
Gold Exploit
http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/23cc8j/elder_scrolls_online_dupe_bug_found_billions_of/
Botting
http://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/comments/22j9od/botting_is_already_a_huge_problem/
I've not played it. But I've gathered from past MMO guildmates who've played it that it's not all that good and has some serious problems. To be expected, considering it's this company's first MMO. More than one confirmed that most of the AngryJoe review was right on, including that the combat mechanics and PvP were the bright spots but the rest wasn't good. Those of you who have played it for awhile now.. is this true?
Of course, the rampant Bots and waiting lines for quests/bosses is enough to mark it off my list but perhaps there may be hope at some point in the future if they fix lotsa stuff and put more emphasis on it's strengths (pvp)?
Since when is Reddit a reliable source for anything?
The reliable source is the game. And I take it you dont even play it. I do.
The key word here is 'ruin'.
Of course botters have an effect on its economy, but it certainly isn't ruined.
Not having a general Auction House actually helps here too. Players trade face to face and in guilds. As long as you dont join a botter guild you're perfectly fine.
The game's economy might even be strong because of these mini economies.
And my point is again clearly illustrated;
Instead of playing the game you guys rather take various sources for granted which use power terms and exaggeration.
The game does have problems. Most MMO's have on launch. But the devs show a great deal of passion and activity to fix the issues.
I like the game. If that puts me in denial in your eyes so be it, but I do actually play the game. :)
What I do find a possible issue later on, though, is that the game *can* be pretty much played entirely solo up to level 50. Much like SWTOR. Craglorn will be an end game area with lots of group stuff and that's probably a good thing. But I believe they will need to keep the pace up with bringing group content or end game will get pretty stale soon for the more hardcore players.
For now though, the game is awesome for me. I like the questing and the stories told are actually much less generic than many other MMO's feed you, contrary to your reviews above.
Many quests (after level 10) even force you to make moral choices which then have an effect later in the game on a different quest. Pretty neat stuff. (check the other thread for more info on why I find the mechanics of the game good, I am not going to copy that here)
And if I don't find end-game to be my cup of tea in the end, I will cancel my sub and still have had a tremendous amount of fun and gameplay goodness for my money.
See, I am not a fanboy by any stretch, if that's something you were wondering. But I just hate going on exaggerations all the time and possibly cloud someone else's view on a game. Any game.
It's a negative trend on the net and shown in this thread too. That I find dissapointing and unfair to a game and its community.
Reddit? I don't frequent Reddit at all. Especially not for game reviews.
Some of my old guildies, with whom I've played numerous past MMOs, expressed pretty much the same experiences with it as the AngryJoe review. These aren't "exaggerations" from "various sources", they're like-minded individuals I've played MMOs with for years. :)
I was just wondering if you also thought the negative points were valid, whether you enjoy it or not. Even if I find the combat and PvP enjoyable, as seems to be the pros in it's current iteration, I'm pretty sure the cons would just make me rage. However, I wouldn't bother asking about it further if I still didn't hold some interest in checking it out eventually. I'm not trolling a superfan but trying to get further impressions of the good, bad, and fugly of it. The discussion had kinda dropped off rather quickly after release until this thread popped up.
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 06, 2014, 03:27:12 PM
Well the Tom's article is no different from most other articles I have seen.
It has the title 'review' but instead of keeping the focus on technical bits the author goes into the Realm of subjectivity when he addresses voice acting and questslines.
Wait....WHAT????? A review is one person's (hopefully qualified) opinion. Reviews are subjective by definition. It's not supposed to be a laundry list of specs and features.
As bad botters and cheaters are, I have to agree with Ysk on the part that the lack of an auction house makes this part meaningless.
Honest players can still sell their wares to other honest players.
There's no centralized market that can be easily monopolized by the cheating community.
I'm not interested in this title at all - but one thing that did disturb me somewhat (for the future of mmorpg's) was the cost of a horse given the seemingly very low amount of loot dropped...seems it does seem to be geared to making people cough up the extra $20 for a horse in the collectors edition. If that is the case, then it's a kind of crappy turn for gaming.
I've never really minded having different versions of a game - and in game content being bought, but I do if the game is made in such a way as to require the additional content in order to have any enjoyment (or at least reduce your frustration) from the game.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on May 07, 2014, 03:06:17 PM
If that is the case, then it's a kind of crappy turn for gaming.
Agree. Pardon my ignorance (and laziness in not just going to The Google), but has Bethesda announced anything to the effect that "ESO" represents the future of the series -- i.e., no more single-player installments to follow on Oblivion and Skyrim? 'cause that would kinda suck...
Don't forget, Bethesda was one of the first to climb aboard the DLC money-train when they introduced "horse armor" for sale ($2, iirc) in Oblivion.
Quote from: sandman2575 on May 07, 2014, 03:10:35 PM
Agree. Pardon my ignorance (and laziness in not just going to The Google), but has Bethesda announced anything to the effect that "ESO" represents the future of the series -- i.e., no more single-player installments to follow on Oblivion and Skyrim? 'cause that would kinda suck...
I don't know how many time they have stated it won't be the case. In fact, ESO wasn't even developed by Bethesda themselves, but by their parent company Zenimax.
Quote from: tgb on May 07, 2014, 03:49:25 PM
Don't forget, Bethesda was one of the first to climb aboard the DLC money-train when they introduced "horse armor" for sale ($2, iirc) in Oblivion.
But again - that doesn't bother me. DLC and minor purchases are fine. But in this case (and I only got this from the Angry Joe's video) to have such a huge game where it takes you ages to go anywhere AND price horses so high whilst limiting your loot is wrong. That would normally be classed as a bug. However, when you see you can have a horse with the collectors edition right from the start - well, that's just wrong.
Reducing the price of the horses in game and/or increasing loot - then I wouldn't even think of it as an issue. But as it is, and given a collectors edition having a horse available just smacks of opportunism.
Quote from: tgb on May 07, 2014, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 06, 2014, 03:27:12 PM
Well the Tom's article is no different from most other articles I have seen.
It has the title 'review' but instead of keeping the focus on technical bits the author goes into the Realm of subjectivity when he addresses voice acting and questslines.
Wait....WHAT????? A review is one person's (hopefully qualified) opinion. Reviews are subjective by definition. It's not supposed to be a laundry list of specs and features.
You are referring to 'Impressions' articles.
Reviews should be as objective as possible and just telling the reader what works and doesn't. What the state of a given game is compared to its predecessors or similar titles. All from a more technical standpoint.
I agree that there will always be a certain amount of subjectivity in reviews for the simple fact that they are written by a person who has inevitably been coloured in his or her view.
But reviews should try to keep most of the subjectivity at bay.
Impressions don't have to.
And don't say: whatever.. Potatoes, potahtoes.
You don't call a Scotsman English just because he lives on the same island either, now do you? ;)
And
Nefaro I was referring to the Reddit links SgtRock posted.
If your mates all share AngryJoe's views then that certainly doesn't qualify as 'various sources' in the general sense. But I would still say their points of criticism are exaggerated! :)
Another point that discredits the THW 'review' is that at the end he reverts to calling on WildStar. Perhaps this game will be the next MMO hit now that ESO has failed in his view.
If anything, this shows that the reviewer has no clue about what he is jotting down.
WildStar might be an MMO as well, but its goal and setup is completely different from what ESO tries to do.
WildStar is a gear/raiding based MMO with arguably even a MOBA like hybrid system. There is humour but little solid story otherwise. Gameplay focussen on action, gear and progression.
ESO is much more the classic storytelling experience like we loved when running our Tabletop PnP D&D sessions. But in a new modern outfit.
Story matters and player interaction is once again a spearpoint (guild trade. No AH for example).
Placing both in the general box of 'the next big MMO' is just silly.
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 07, 2014, 08:09:45 PM
Another point that discredits the THW 'review' is that at the end he reverts to calling on WildStar. Perhaps this game will be the next MMO hit now that ESO has failed in his view.
If anything, this shows that the reviewer has no clue about what he is jotting down.
WildStar might be an MMO as well, but its goal and setup is completely different from what ESO tries to do.
WildStar is a gear/raiding based MMO with arguably even a MOBA like hybrid system. There is humour but little solid story otherwise. Gameplay focussen on action, gear and progression.
ESO is much more the classic storytelling experience like we loved when running our Tabletop PnP D&D sessions. But in a new modern outfit.
Story matters and player interaction is once again a spearpoint (guild trade. No AH for example).
Placing both in the general box of 'the next big MMO' is just silly.
Honestly, dismissing a review because the writer doesn't classify games to your desired niche is pretty silly, too.
I'm more curious if you disagree with the author's condemnation of the quality and variety of the voice actors, quests, and story content? From his description, if ESO is indeed an attempt to recreate the classic storytelling experience, it is indeed an epic fail of staggering proportions. You've condemned his opinion because he doesn't recognize the game as an an attempt to recreate the classic storytelling experience. What you haven't told us if you agree with his assessment on
why it utterly fails as a storytelling experience.
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 07, 2014, 08:00:53 PM
Quote from: tgb on May 07, 2014, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 06, 2014, 03:27:12 PM
Well the Tom's article is no different from most other articles I have seen.
It has the title 'review' but instead of keeping the focus on technical bits the author goes into the Realm of subjectivity when he addresses voice acting and questslines.
Wait....WHAT????? A review is one person's (hopefully qualified) opinion. Reviews are subjective by definition. It's not supposed to be a laundry list of specs and features.
You are referring to 'Impressions' articles.
No, I'm not. Do you even know what a review
is? Have you ever seen a movie review or read a review of a book or a play or a concert? They are
the reviewer's opinion, which by definition is subjective. And if that isn't clear enough for you, let's go to the dictionary:
Quote
review
Use Review in a sentence
re·view
[ri-vyoo] Show IPA
noun
1.
a critical article or report, as in a periodical, on a book, play, recital, or the like; critique; evaluation.
2.
the process of going over a subject again in study or recitation in order to fix it in the memory or summarize the facts.
3.
an exercise designed or intended for study of this kind.
4.
a general survey of something, especially in words; a report or account of something.
5.
an inspection or examination by viewing, especially a formal inspection of any military or naval force, parade, or the like.
I know this sounds a little condescending but I don't know how else to get it across.
You can be condescending all you want and wave countless dictionaries at me, tgb. Nowhere in your own quote it says it should be the reviewers opinion. In fact, you own quote underlines the more 'academical' way of looking at things. As was my point.
So you can come off your high horse already.
Being critical certainly doesn't mean this is always in the fashion of "it sucks because I wanted it so and so" or it sucks because "I find it does because of this and this ".
The "I find" is an Impressions article. Not a review.
platypus, you are talking on a parallel track here. Clearly I wasn't puttings my point across very well or you don't get it.
Its not about dismissing the reviewers article because of that. It's the fact that he calls on WildStar (and Star Trek Online ?!). A totally different game with a totally different core player group.
Yet he placed them in a general box where one could take over the other if the latter fails. That is pure nonsense.
Still, the whole arguement is because of the way this threads starts and not even as criticism by a player. That is the trend on the internet I was talking about.
People just blubbering on about this and that which they only get from sources other than the game itself. That rubs me the wrong way and I find it to be something we should stop doing.
Its like girls talking about this friend of that girl, when they don't even know.
We are not gurlz are we? :)
If you still think my points are moot then we will either have to chalk it up to being lost in translation or just have to agree to disagree.
Perhaps its best to illustrate my points a bit more. This is not a 1:1 assessment on the whole THW article, but a few things I'll highlight to try to get across what I mean.
Don't try to bait me into further magnifying a specific point here, I will ignore it.
He starts off on page 1 with this:
"He refers to you as "The Vestige", which is where we get the term vestigial from, used to describe body parts that are no longer needed. This is your first clue that your actions in the world of The Elder Scrolls Online won't matter."
It immediately raises the question with me wether this guy even has any experience with the MMO genre? Does any player action in any MMO before this actually mattered? No. There were always countless reruns by other people on the same boss you just defeated, for one. If anything, ESO actually tries to break the mold here with its phasing tech; once you have defeated a boss, he is gone forever (save a few general named NPC's) and the world has changed for your character. Contradicting his point.
Then he goes on: "The newbie island experience is so anguish-inducing that, in a rare case of listening to beta tester feedback, the developers provided an option of skipping it entirely as the default choice (...)"
Anguish-inducing? To him, sure. Does he know for a fact that everyone thinks so? No.
'Rare case of listening to beta tester feedback', he sure must be in the in-crowd and if anything this phrase shows a certain amount of built up frustration, indicating this might become the personal 'Impressions' piece that I am suspecting it will become at this point.
Onwards; He continues with remarks about copy-paste and how bad dungeons are. Where, admittedly, he does raise some valid points, but they get lost because of the fact that he doesn't even try to restrain his personal feelings.
Then the point about grouping and phasing is valid. He could've left all the snithe remarks at home. I am getting sick of this personal slugfest by now and wishes he rather sticks to the facts.
Still, I can see where grouping can be a chore if you have characters running different parts of the same quest. An issue that is largely fixed by now, by the way and further phasing improvements are coming. But at the time of hos writing they were indeed an issue.
To the part abouts quests:
"Quests
[Forgettable NPC] "Hi! I need you to kill the Garbanzo King invading Castle Bland in Non-Descript Land 2. I'll see you at the mission exit."
(two minutes later)
[Garbanzo King] "You won't stop us from... Agh, you've killed me! You'll pay for this!"
(five seconds later, boss respawns)
[Garbanzo King] "You won't stop us from... Agh, you've killed me! You'll pay for this!"
(a short run later)
[Forgettable NPC] "Good job! Here's a sack of potatoes and 18 gold. Now head north and meet with the Flavorless NPC Generated #193_a for a quest where you run around and slap quest markers before returning to the quest giver... I mean me."
Quest dialogue in The Elder Scrolls Online is atrocious, and if there were a stronger synonym for the word "bland", I'd use it here."
Again this is a matter of opinion.
Most of the stories I find pretty engaging. There are those boring quests with uninteresting and forgettable characters, but many quests have great storylines. IF you take the time to listen and read and actually think about how it fits in the area or the lore of the game. There's many cool things to discover and there are quite a few quests that might mean little at first, but suddenly when you continue on your journey so are confronted with a situation that is a direct result of a quest you did earlier.
That's pretty new in MMO land, IMO and very cool.
For instance;
There was this quest about a couple who had lost eachother. The husband was missing and you have to find out what happened to him. On finding out he is dead, you get two choices; either tell the wife you've found his corpse or lie and just tell her you don't know what happened either.
I chose to tell her because she deserves to know. She is heart broken and commands me to leave.
A while later I am walking along the cliffs on the edges of town when I spot a female at the edge. I approach and a dialog starts where she is talking to (what I now understand) her missing husband and that she is going to find him in Heaven. She jumps off the edge to her death. It was the exact same woman I did the quest for!
This is AFTER I have done other quests, mind you. And there are much more instances like this.
So yes, if you are running through content on your way to get to level cap as soon as possible and don't care about the lore of TES, then perhaps the quests are boring. But if you stop. Slow your pace and actually think about how it fits into the world there are many *many* great stories to be found.
So: A few quest dialogue choices seem to give you the ability to let an NPC live or die, to make a choice that has an impact or effects some unseen karma. Please don't be fooled. These choices currently have zero impact on the game, your future dialogue options, or pretty much anything. They are cosmetic-only.
Is just false. He either hasn't looked well enough or wasn't bothered to.
And then fast forward to this:
"Shallow, generic, bland, meh, flavorless, vapid, uninspiring, monotonous, ho hum, pedestrian, plodding, mundane, trite, empty, devoid. I'm terribly reminded of the seminal 80s flick "The Neverending Story", where hero Bastian fights to save Fantasia from "The Nothing", an elemental force of the absence of content that ate through pages of interesting story and engaging plot. The Elder Scrolls Online is the game you'd get if The Nothing had won and decided to release an MMO based on a best-selling gaming franchise."
The starting terms are all 'emotional' tags, for the lack of a better term. They are subjective. They illustrate my points raised about my criticism on this article well. While not litterally, he actually tells us "I find .. such and so " here.
Had he refrained from using these 'emotional tags' and stuck to the general description of how things worked in the game I probably would have had less trouble with it.
For example; if he just wrote "Eventhough quests are fully narrated, at the core they are still all classic fetch, run from a to b or kill this, quests." That would have been an objective statement about what the quests boil down to, without the subjectivity that is now shown in the article.
That's the difference between a review and an Impressions piece.
There are more examples of the good and the bad in here, but as I've said above, I am only trying to illustrate my point better. Not peeling down his article sentence by sentence.
Thanks for reading and sorry for the wall of text.
Oh and on Angry Joe; that's just comedy. He knows like no other to push the buttons of critics and fanboys alike. It's hilarious to watch, but bears little value in terms of review for me. :D
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 08, 2014, 06:37:50 AM
Oh and on Angry Joe; that's just comedy. He knows like no other to push the buttons of critics and fanboys alike. It's hilarious to watch, but bears little value in terms of review for me. :D
You don't think any of Joe's points were valid?
???
Oh yes I do, but that's really besides the point as I believe his video's are setup such that he is baiting people into reacting a certain way to his video's.
Much a flavour of the day affair.
I just don't believe these are honest reviews, more satire.
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 08, 2014, 04:56:42 AM
You can be condescending all you want and wave countless dictionaries at me, tgb. Nowhere in your own quote it says it should be the reviewers opinion. In fact, you own quote underlines the more 'academical' way of looking at things. As was my point.
So you can come off your high horse already.
Being critical certainly doesn't mean this is always in the fashion of "it sucks because I wanted it so and so" or it sucks because "I find it does because of this and this ".
The "I find" is an Impressions article. Not a review.
platypus, you are talking on a parallel track here. Clearly I wasn't puttings my point across very well or you don't get it.
Its not about dismissing the reviewers article because of that. It's the fact that he calls on WildStar (and Star Trek Online ?!). A totally different game with a totally different core player group.
Yet he placed them in a general box where one could take over the other if the latter fails. That is pure nonsense.
Still, the whole arguement is because of the way this threads starts and not even as criticism by a player. That is the trend on the internet I was talking about.
People just blubbering on about this and that which they only get from sources other than the game itself. That rubs me the wrong way and I find it to be something we should stop doing.
Its like girls talking about this friend of that girl, when they don't even know.
We are not gurlz are we? :)
If you still think my points are moot then we will either have to chalk it up to being lost in translation or just have to agree to disagree.
yksonyn, I'll point out that tgb's dictionary started out with an offer to show you an IPA, and if you don't enjoy a good IPA, well that's just silly. I'll also point out that you'd accomplish a whole lot more if you spent the time writing an accurate review that you've spent justifying your claim that the other article should not be taken at face value.
If you want to bother trying to convince anyone but yourself that ESO is a return to the storytelling traditions of old (a loose paraphrase of your assertion), I'd be interested in reading that. Otherwise, you are providing non of the objectivity that you bitch about in the Tom's article, and so your posts are about has valuable as his. I am far more interested in what you have to say about the game, but you keep talking about the article.
What are the elements of ESO that you find contribute to its separation from current MMOs as a return to the storytelling tradition many of us fell in love with games over in the first place? It is a successful attempt, more or less? If it isn't a success now (close to launch), do you see a framework, infrastructure, or developer efforts that suggests it will improve?
What is your experience with the dungeons in the game? How is it different/same/better than the 71 cookie cutter dungeons the author claims? In the end, that's one of the big reasons I couldn't return to Oblivion -- not only was there a dungeon roughly every fifth step, but so many of them were about so similar and short it didn't feel a lot more different than searching houses for zombiepocalypse supplies.
What about the economy? If horses are indeed in the 5 figure gold piece range, and dungeons distribute single figures, where is the rest of the loot coming from?
I honestly don't know if there are answers that will change my mind about wanting to play. I've had difficulties fully enjoying MMOs since LOTR, largely because I enjoyed leading and playing with my guild so much that other MMOs seem dry in solo play, and I don't have the same kind of free time to reinvest in a guild or anything remotely resembling "serious play." But the articles I've read and the impressions seem to condemn the game as a pretty powerful "meh," at best. You are one of the few posters here who seems to have a different opinion, and I'd like to hear that if you can just stop pointing out what's wrong with the author's intentions for even a couple of minutes.
I have pointed out my dissent over how this thread started.
And I have illustrated my points about the why.
The arguement was about the negativity (not solely towards ESO, but it happened to be the example) and the rabid copy and paste of arguements and false claims. A trend I find on the internet.
Now I am challenged to write a review. That was not the point.
The other thread might see more impressions from my part, though, so keep an eye on that.
Its not about defending ESO specifically. Its about a common mentality found on the internet at large put to example here when this thread kicked off. That I called out.
If there is interest in a decent discussion about ESO I will be happy to engage in it, but I am not going to waste my time getting lectured, get a condescending tone sent to me or having to keep rephrasing my points in order for someone to understand. I think I have been clear enough.
I am more than happy to disagree.
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 08, 2014, 08:16:47 PM
I have pointed out my dissent over how this thread started.
And I have illustrated my points about the why.
The arguement was about the negativity (not solely towards ESO, but it happened to be the example) and the rabid copy and paste of arguements and false claims. A trend I find on the internet.
Now I am challenged to write a review. That was not the point.
The other thread might see more impressions from my part, though, so keep an eye on that.
Its not about defending ESO specifically. Its about a common mentality found on the internet at large put to example here when this thread kicked off. That I called out.
If there is interest in a decent discussion about ESO I will be happy to engage in it, but I am not going to waste my time getting lectured, get a condescending tone sent to me or having to keep rephrasing my points in order for someone to understand. I think I have been clear enough.
I am more than happy to disagree.
Ok, I disagree.
I find announcing that your lectures are sufficient and insistence that anyone who does not agree with them simply doesn't understand you to be very condescending, and I am embarrassed for you that you can feel the need to judge and condemn others for -- guess what? -- judging and condemning. I find meeting negativity with your own negativity is at least as hypocritical as me commenting on it.
Whatever man. *shrug
Did you even read a word I said other than 'I am happy to disagree' ?
If you found my post to be 'lectures' then clearly frustration got in your way.
I would like to remind you that I have tried to illustrate my points with examples. Just to keep the discussion as clear as possible. If that comes across as lecturing then I am at a loss on how to engage in discussion.
Might I also remind you that I was on the receiving end, if anything. The dictionary reference and your quote about 'bitching on' being Prime examples.
You constantly try to lay words in my mouth by claiming 'I reject this and that because it doesn't conform to my niche view'.
Sidetracking to focus on why ESO is bad or not. That wasn't even the point of the discussion I started; is was about how this thread started off trying to piss on the game using references from sources I found questionable and by people who don't even play. The whole discussion could have easily been going on about a totally different game. ESO is just the example being used here.
But once I come with examples to fund my views and try to explain what caused the discussion in the first place I am lecturing All of a sudden?
Someone's on a high horse here alright, but it sure as hell isn't me.
I don't own ESO but, have played the released version for about 3-4 hrs, never played the beta's.
Good
- Combat, it's more than just spamming the 1 key
- Crafting is well done.
- Voice Acting better than most MMO's
- Story (3-4 hours, isn't long enough to see any??)
- Good Solo play
Bad
- Still Buggy
- Grouping outside of PVP is just bad/total crap design
- Big world but a lot looks the same
- Cost/Pricing - total money grab
- Loot VS. Cost of things like Mounts (rip-off) most FTP have free mounts
- Bots/campers - in the little I played I saw a lot of characters just camping on top of areas where enemies/bosses respawn
- Cookie cutter design, most dungeons are the same (first 10 ten, 71% total in game)
- UI could be better, provide more info
Bottom Line
- It's just not worth the cost
- There are better Free to play MMO's
- I didn't see anything New, that isn't in existing MMO's
- Story/ES Lore just don't out weigh game play for me.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FpCsmKMH.gif&hash=735f7872dfb1db8df4fd3f2651bf8cabfa24cca4)
Quote from: Yskonyn on May 09, 2014, 04:58:01 AM
Whatever man. *shrug
Did you even read a word I said other than 'I am happy to disagree' ?
If you found my post to be 'lectures' then clearly frustration got in your way.
I would like to remind you that I have tried to illustrate my points with examples. Just to keep the discussion as clear as possible. If that comes across as lecturing then I am at a loss on how to engage in discussion.
Might I also remind you that I was on the receiving end, if anything. The dictionary reference and your quote about 'bitching on' being Prime examples.
You constantly try to lay words in my mouth by claiming 'I reject this and that because it doesn't conform to my niche view'.
Sidetracking to focus on why ESO is bad or not. That wasn't even the point of the discussion I started; is was about how this thread started off trying to piss on the game using references from sources I found questionable and by people who don't even play. The whole discussion could have easily been going on about a totally different game. ESO is just the example being used here.
But once I come with examples to fund my views and try to explain what caused the discussion in the first place I am lecturing All of a sudden?
Someone's on a high horse here alright, but it sure as hell isn't me.
You have some mighty powerful protection from irony panties there. What are they? +5? +11?
Vorpal protection from irony panties?
You did get one thing right. You don't know how to discuss.
Quote from: SgtRock on May 09, 2014, 10:15:23 AM
I don't own ESO but, have played the released version for about 3-4 hrs, never played the beta's.
Good
- Combat, it's more than just spamming the 1 key
- Crafting is well done.
- Voice Acting better than most MMO's
- Story (3-4 hours, isn't long enough to see any??)
- Good Solo play
Bad
- Still Buggy
- Grouping outside of PVP is just bad/total crap design
- Big world but a lot looks the same
- Cost/Pricing - total money grab
- Loot VS. Cost of things like Mounts (rip-off) most FTP have free mounts
- Bots/campers - in the little I played I saw a lot of characters just camping on top of areas where enemies/bosses respawn
- Cookie cutter design, most dungeons are the same (first 10 ten, 71% total in game)
- UI could be better, provide more info
Bottom Line
- It's just not worth the cost
- There are better Free to play MMO's
- I didn't see anything New, that isn't in existing MMO's
- Story/ES Lore just don't out weigh game play for me.
Wow. A review shockingly close to the evil satanspawn that is Toms Hardware. I hope Sgt Rock can withstand Yskonyn's contempt.
just a reminder to please keep the discussion focused on the game, or reviews of the game, and not on each other.
thanks!
There's only one answer to this impass:
Thunderdome!
:P
It's the ES lore that attracts players to ESO, to me it's just not enough for others it is. I've played GW2 for almost 2 yrs now, I couldn't tell you what the story is, I play because I like the game play. Each month I set my own goals in the game, this month it's to reach 600 gold (595 so far), complete Leather Working (crafting) to 500 (done!) and complete my first full set of Ascended Armor (2 more pieces to go, looks like 2 more weeks of farming).
Quote from: SgtRock on May 09, 2014, 11:42:43 AM
It's the ES lore that attracts players to ESO, to me it's just not enough for others it is. I've played GW2 for almost 2 yrs now, I couldn't tell you what the story is, I play because I like the game play. Each month I set my own goals in the game, this month it's to reach 600 gold (595 so far), complete Leather Working (crafting) to 500 (done!) and complete my first full set of Ascended Armor (2 more pieces to go, looks like 2 more weeks of farming).
Yes I think so too.
And with sites like The Imperial Library (http://www.imperial-library.info) with its immense display of TES lore there is a lot to digest for those who are into it! :)
I can see where players like yourself would find the experience in ESO not to your liking at all.
In the end most quests still are of the classic Fed-ex, Kill X, etc flavour. If you don't care for the lore you wil often miss the abundant references to it in the NPC conversations.
In this sense it probably caters more to the singleplayer RPG crowd who takes their time to get immersed into the gameworld much more than the modern MMO player who is more about progression, gear and raids than about story and lore.
Yassy,
Can you (or anyone else) link to a good Youtube video showing gameplay? I've tried searching a few times, but I hate, HATE, videos with dudes talking during the video about what they're doing, critiquing the game, etc.
I just want to get a sense of what unedited, unnarrated gameplay looks like. I can't believe how hard that has been to find...
Those are indeed hard to find...
Your YouTube search will be as good as mine I am afraid. :(
I only know of either teaser trailers, presentations (QuakeCon, etc) or Let's Play's.
But those don't qualify, I would say...
We're going on a holiday for two weeks and will have no internet, so I am sorry I can't be of any more help.
Perhaps others can link something you're looking for?
I found a few videos- you have to Youtube search for "Elder Scrolls Online No Commentary"
I have to say that I'm seriously thinking about jumping on this bandwagon. It's not like $60 is going to prevent me from retiring a year earlier or anything... :o
I'm actually getting a bit bored with the game, so if any of you guys on the American servers care to guild-up, it'd be nice.
Watched the second vid....thought I was watching Skyrim. That's not a critcism, just an observation.