(Non-MMO) TES MultiplayerCo-op Thread

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 9:45 am

Official Multiplayer Thread



The issue of multiplayer has been a hot one on the forums since they were created. It tends to draw a lot of frustration and, unfortunately, flaming. In an effort to help keep things civil on the forums, we have decided to restrict the discussion of multiplayer (or topics pertaining to multiplayer) in the Elder Scrolls section to this one thread. When this thread hits 200 posts, it will be locked and a new thread opened to continue the discussion. Any new multiplayer threads created in this forum, or old multiplayer threads brought back to the top, will be locked and directed here - this includes polls!

A few reminders:
  • All of the forum rules still apply; flaming will not be tolerated, nor will insults directed toward specific users. This does not mean that you have to agree with everyone's opinion, but you must still respect them and their opinions enough to respond civilly.
  • Multiplayer comes in many shapes and sizes: MMORPGs, arena-style combat, cooperative, etc. and it can be very helpful to be specific if you do not intend to discuss multiplayer simply in abstract terms. This obviously isn't a requirement; it is simply a suggestion to help limit confusion and misunderstanding.
  • If someone does post a multiplayer thread in TES General or elsewhere, simply direct them here and report the thread to the moderators. And please, do this civilly, yelling and insulting people (especially new users) because they do not know about this thread serves no constructive purpose, and will likely result in a warning.
  • The moderators are not privy to information that hasn't been released to the public.
Also, please realize that adding multiplayer to Skyrim at this time is simply not feasible. Skyrim has been streamlined for single-player and adding multiplayer would require re-writing large portions of the engine. The devs would much rather spend their time and energy expanding on what they already have, a great single-player RPG, rather than re-doing what they've already finished.

So please, no requests to have multiplayer added with an expansion. Or at least if you're going to discuss this realize that it is not an option.


Finally, multiplayer code requires a ton of effort. For example, it took two people several months to add multiplayer to Soldier of Fortune 2, a game made with an engine specifically designed for multiplayer (Quake 3). Many people seem to feel that a developer can purchase some network code and slap it on with a week's worth of work, but this just isn't the case.

Note that if you wish to discuss the MMO, the Elder Scrolls Online forum section is http://www.gamesas.com/forum/190-elder-scrolls-online-general-discussion/

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1358980-official-tes-multiplayerco-op-thread/
User avatar
Monika Fiolek
 
Posts: 3472
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 6:57 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 6:49 am

I don't think they should put in Co-op, but maybe multiplayer. There would be too many problems to have to solve to be able to make either work. There's leveling, loot, rendering (not too bad) that you would mainly have to worry about.
Rendering: If one person goes in a room, you would have to figure out what would happen with the other person: 1) Both players are sent inside no matter their locations (bad if your friend is all the way across the map doing something important). 2) Can't go in that room until the other player agrees (bad because sometimes the other player would be doing something completely different or not want to go in). 3) That player goes in but the other player doesn't (this would be worst in splitscreen because of the rendering. It would take longer and probably lag the other player. With multiplayer it might work). Not too big a deal for Bethesda to solve.
Leveling: This is going to be an issue because most of the time your friend won't be on with you, unless you make a special save for multiplaying only. And online, whose map would you use because both maps would be different in the aspects of who/what's dead and what missions have been done. If you are 30 levels higher than the other player, the other player may think it's not fair and not want to play with you. Plus you could easily kill them whenever you want (unless they make you invincible like children). And if they do make it so you can't kill them, you'll be killing all the creatures and the other player won't be able to level up. Another thing is creatures level with you, so the other player would find it really hard to kill, or you would find them too easy to kill (depending on if the animals follow the lower or higher level).
Loot: A lot of the time, you only find one of an epic item, and only one of you can have it. That's not really a problem for Bethesda, but it can be annoying when playing with a friend, escpecially online because a lot of the time you don't communicate with the other player so you don't know what they got or what they have that they aren't sharing.

There are a few other minor things, but I think it can easily raise issues that can be hard to solve, maybe impossible too. A minor issue would be incorporating the player into the campaign. This shouldn't be too hard, but would they have the Single player and Multiplayer plots be the same, or would they be different. If they're different, it's harder to do and you have more to do, so the campaign's will be shorter. If they are the same, in single player you will pretty much have to have a second person following you everywhere. I'm fine with that, but some people find it really annoying because they can get in the way. And since it's in the story mode, you can't kill the person or tell them to leave.

I'd love to see Co-op, but I don't think it's the most logical thing to do.
User avatar
Tyrel
 
Posts: 3304
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:52 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:58 am

While I've only played Skyrim and some of Oblivion- and, so, I'm no long-time fan of Bethesda's games-, I've found certain features of these games that I've very much enjoyed. Elder Scrolls games have a distinct appeal as opposed to MMOs (say, WoW, a game that I, http://us.battle.net/wow/en/game/mists-of-pandaria/, enjoyed).

-First, Elder Scrolls Games have an evolving, character-based story. While yes, radiant AI and a larger world mean that things happen outside the players control and the world is continually changing, the player character himself is the primary force behind world-changing. I don't think this could be as effectively handled in an MMO as with a single-player game. I realize that an MMO would take place in an entirely different game than Skyrim, so they could potentially work around this, but think of:

Spoiler
The Battle for Whiterun, a quest very much enjoyed by the community. While I realize WoW and other MMOs have implemented "phasing" to change the world according to a player's actions, this really only works well where quests are linear (and player choice isn't involved). So while Bethesda could conceivably eliminate the presence of a building or character following these events, to create to alternate universes in which Stormcloaks or Imperial now run the city for each player is near-impossible.... not to mention terribly confusing for players.

Also, if each quest can be accessed by each individual player, that detracts from player-based control over the world; in Skyrim, every character would lead the Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, Companions, become Dragonborn, etc... meaning every individual character would be responsible for the feats associated (Guards would address everyone as Dragonborn, etc.... Alduin and other dragons- or Elder Scrolls VI equivelants- would be reduced to "bosses" for community raids, and dungeons would require a squad of men to infiltrate. There's no point to developing a character as Dragonborn, because everyone else will accomplish the same thing). Not even taking into account choice that will inevitably change the world into so many alternate universes, even linear progression (say, main quest line) would be meaningless.


-Second, lag... While I love Skyrim and was/still am impressed by the size of the game (it's massive, good graphics, a huge amount of dialogue- even if we all wish there was more choice involved in dialogue... it's just a huge game), there's already a problem with framerate as data accumulates (especially on Playstation 3). Can you imagine what it would be like to have 10 players sharing the same Skyrim world over varying levels of internet connection? Let alone 10,000 (and more; a WoW server).

That's not even taking into account the aforementioned problem of character choice- how could Bethesda possibly expect to implement every character's individual decisions in Skyrim, all the phasing necessary to allow immersion, and still expect to allow each member of a server a smooth gameplay experience? Plus, phasing out objects and characters due to individual game choices will inevitably clash with other players' immersion; is Alduin there or not? Is Markarth Stormcloak or Imperial territory? Etc., etc.


-Third, scaling. Now, scaling is, on its face, a minor detail for an MMO Elder Scrolls; we could dismiss it and simply say "no scaling", opt for the WoW model, etc. However, this seems to eliminate a great degree of player choice; with no scaling, a player would complete quests based on "zones" (like WoW, where players go to a village, 'pick up' every available quest, finish, then travel to the next village). Nevermind a player's desire to immediately join the Civil War, fight some Forsworn, become a mage, etc... no, the player would have to go to the Jarl, pick up a "kill bandit leader of X cave", and complete 10 times before he reached a level high enough to, say, kill the Ice Wraith necessary to begin as a Stormcloak.

Oh, you'd like to see scaling implemented, then? I'm not sure how, given that level 80 and level 2 characters may choose to fight in the same general vicinity. You'll either make low-level Draugr no challenge for the most powerful characters, or make the game literally impossible for the lower levels, just beginning (and say goodbye to difficulty sliders...).

-Fourth, the annoying min/maxing mentality and grinding. Some people do actually play Elder Scrolls to complete every quest, earn the most gold, unlock everything, get the best gear, etc. Still, there's a fairly large amount of players who roleplay their character, wear weaker or low level gear for the sake of immersion, eat every day, etc. Assuming there's PvP or no scaling, that's gone. Instead of donning your favorite fur or hide armor, blue mage robes, and other crap-gear that looks cool, EVERY player will be required to equip the best possible rare gear that they acquire by questing; every low-level character will wear Elven armor, the high levels will all opt for Daedric, etc. (of course, whatever equivelant would be proposed in Elder Scrolls VI, etc.). Additionally, if you just want that every XP to advance to the next level (in order to unlock your next quest), you will need to "grind" to get there; that is, find some enemies, and kill them for XP. In order to allow this, Bethesda will need to introduce very fast respawn times in the outer (non-dungeon) world... meaning, every 5 minutes, the bandit hold you just cleared will be repopulated (which reminds me... say goodbye to sleeping and waiting in Elder Scrolls VI, and the game would probably have to be played in real time... the latter may not bother most people, but many people do like to sleep in Elder Scrolls).


-PvP? This isn't as much of a "problem" with a new game as a question; how exactly would PvP work? Currently, you're able to attack essentially everyone, which I'd assume would hold true in an MMO Elder Scrolls.... Just hope that, if it comes out, they don't draw some stupid "Faction 1/Faction 2" line during character creation to prevent same-faction PvP.


-Console players lose on this.... a lot. We've already seen that consoles have trouble with Skyrim's huge amount of data; a console simply couldn't handle MMO Elder Scrolls and, even if it could, communicating with other players by text (which is already a bit of a problem... would you have to initiate dialogue like with other NPCs? How would that work) is a problem for console users.
User avatar
Rex Help
 
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:52 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 7:12 pm

The MMO is under development by ZeniMax Online Studios and not Bethesda Game Studios so i don,t think people need to worry about Bethesda Game Studios continuing making Singeplayer player games since they are diferent companies.And the writters at Bethesda Game Studios could be working with ZeniMax Online Studios on the lore and setting in place,since ZeniMax Online Studios building is only an hour away from Bethesda Game Studios building.
Also a few more things
1.The project has been in the Works since 2007,when ZeniMax Online Studios was created, which is also headed by Matt Firor(producer and designer of Dark Age of Camelot).
2.On March 2011 they opend a costumer support center in Galway, Ireland.That indicated that the MMO could be launched in 2012.Since why would they launch it so early?
3.It uses the same Engine as Star Wars The Old Republic.(Hero Engine)
4.Job postings for MMO developers on ZeniMax,s website.
There are a few more things but i am lazy to write the rest.BTW All of the articles to these related things that i mentioned can be found on gamasutra and other places :cool:
http://www.zenimaxonline.com/
User avatar
Benito Martinez
 
Posts: 3470
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:33 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 5:31 am

How do you guys know its been working on since 2007?
and is the rumors true?
User avatar
sas
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 8:40 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 6:05 pm

How do you guys know its been working on since 2007?
and is the rumors true?
Because thats when ZeniMax Online Studios was created duh plus the Hero engine was licensed the same year.
Just go the ZeniMax Online Studios website and read for yourself.
User avatar
[ becca ]
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 12:59 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:06 pm

If there was some sort of Co-op then it could be done like a companion. To recruit your 2nd player perhaps you could complete a cetain quest which involves the player going into a dark room and meeting a shadowy figure. The darkness would then be uplifted and it would go onto a character creation screen like the one for the main player. They could then play bottom screen like just liek the main player with thier own inventory, skills, level etc. I think the best thing for leveling the second player is to scale it with the main player (a bit like a lot of the main NPCs). To quit co-op you would send the player home and to recommence they would have to go and find them again. Though maybe some actions would need to be reserved for the main player such as diolouge and bartering.
User avatar
Sammykins
 
Posts: 3330
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:48 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 1:23 pm

I don't see how Co-Op would work. If I was declared the X of prophecy, what sense would it make for another X to join me even though there's only one of me? Doesn't that diminish my role in the story line? For the case of Skyrim, having two dragonborns FUS RO DAHing things just really wouldn't make sense. You are the only known dragonborn.
User avatar
Solina971
 
Posts: 3421
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:40 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:48 pm

Yes, but they'd have the same kina standing as a companion (although more powerful). So the wouldn't be a dragonborn, more like a telented adventurer.
User avatar
Laura-Lee Gerwing
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:46 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:27 pm

You are the only known dragonborn.

Known is the key word here :wink:

but seriously, could they not do a co-op system like in Fable II?

I would prefer not putting co-op/multiplayer in to TES because its always been a single player rping game. idk i may be crazy or something but that's just my take on it, some people may feel differently.
User avatar
RAww DInsaww
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 5:47 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 3:36 am

Known is the key word here :wink:

but seriously, could they not do a co-op system like in Fable II?

I would prefer not putting co-op/multiplayer in to TES because its always been a single player rping game. idk i may be crazy or something but that's just my take on it, some people may feel differently.

I don't thing TES or Fallout should be a multiplayer game. And it may be the key word, but what are the chances they're going to know live in the same place, let alone know each other?
Also, I never really liked the Co-op system in Fable 2.
User avatar
cosmo valerga
 
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:21 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 6:27 pm

Absolutely not. The Elder Scrolls games have always been amazing single-player experiences, and they should stay that way. Not every game needs multiplayer. I'd hate to walk through Whiterun hearing "Yu got pwnzed!!!1 Suk it little boi!!!!". Please, Bethesda, focus on creating an immersive and enjoyable single-player game.
User avatar
Alexxxxxx
 
Posts: 3417
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:55 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 1:22 pm

skyrim online for me its a place like an arena for two or more players who can duel, and another place for trading stuff.
User avatar
Lizs
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:45 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 10:20 am

I'm thrilled and terrified at the idea of an es mmo. If they make it like the single player games where there's really no endgame so much as a living breathing world that you can log into it should be awesome. If they decide to make another wow clone in the es universe I'll likely steer clear.
User avatar
Maria Leon
 
Posts: 3413
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:39 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 1:05 pm

Elder Scrolls as MMO will never happen.

Why?

Ask yourself what Elder Scrolls is famaous for.
How to create every tiny little piece of detail in the nature, details, and make it look "realistic" for a fantasy world.
And that is just one of the things I could mention but you all know Skyrim, so tell me..

Do you want them to move BACKWARDS to make it possible for 1000 players to play together like it was World of Warcraft? No.
We have [censored] loads of MMO's, don't need more.
We have few good RPG's, we need more.

Only MMO I can see they would do is Fallout as it's already been out there and they took over all the papers, etc.
User avatar
Lauren Denman
 
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:29 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 1:54 pm

skyrim online for me its a place like an arena for two or more players who can duel, and another place for trading stuff.

This would be suitable for me, but reducing the time spent on ingame content to get a Multiplayer working story- and otherwise wouldn't add any value for me!

Before they add Multiplayer they should add some of the good features of past games (Journal, longer guild questlines and skill requirements to advance in rank) instead of cutting many things!

@Bamzen

There will probably be a Elder Scrolls MMO pretty soon, but it will only be based on the world, not on the story of the previous games!
User avatar
[ becca ]
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 12:59 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:59 pm

Do you want them to move BACKWARDS to make it possible for 1000 players to play together like it was World of Warcraft? No.
We have [censored] loads of MMO's, don't need more.
We have few good RPG's, we need more.

What we want and what we get are two different things sadly.
They want to milk the franchise and hope to get their slice of the mmo pie.
Will a TES mmo svck? Yes ofcourse, but so do nearly all mmo's and they still make a lot of money.
Players are more than happy to give up story, graphics and gameplay in order to grind some "epic" gear they can show off to the crowds of adoring noobs.
User avatar
Aaron Clark
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:23 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 7:42 am

Hello gentlemen. I have found several reasons why Multiplayer would be a bad Choice for the Elderscrolls series. Please, take time to read my OPINIONS and respond. I would appreciate feedback on these.

?1. The Elderscrolls is supposed to be a single player game. It was made for single player it should stay that way. Bethesda knows how to make single player games, not multiplayer games. That would be like taking a Master Mason and having him try to be a Carpenter. While they are both construction methods they are both way different. (not saying that Bethesda couldn't do a good job)

2. Griefing. There would be so much griefing that Bethsda would end up having to do some serious stuff like making it so players can; kill each other which would ruin the game. Through the years that has been one the major things about Elderscrolls, being to kill just about anything as long as your strong enough to do it.

3. Loot distribution. While playing with friends would be fun I don't want to have to roll on a Dragon Priest mask. Especially if it's a good one.

4. Glitches. How would Bethesda take care of ALL the glitches. Also, Todd Howard said that they were going to leave the fun glitches in. Like putting baskets on peoples heads. If they make the game multiplayer they will have to remove ALL glitches which would not only take a crap load of time but would also make it so they would have to take out the fun ones.

5. Dragon souls. How would one share a dragon soul with a party member? Everyone gets a soul? Dragons have more then one soul?

6. Lag. With skyrim Graphics and mechanics there would be so much lag that the world would end, no need for Alduin.

7. Massive battles. While these would be fun it would create lag. Can you imagine 100 players in the same place at the same time? AoE spells, dragon shouts, cleave attacks, elemental fury. all these things would destroy the latency.

8. Thieves. Nuff said.

9. I'm not sure if it was Bethesda's intention, but to me it seems as if character is unique to that saved game. Would it be fun having 30 people wearing heavy armor and casting spells? Or having 7 million people who play sword and shield? You're supposed to be the savior of the world, the Neverar, the Hero of Kavatch, the Savior of the Nine, the Dragonborn, SLAYER OF ALDUIN!

10. Imbalances. At the early levels magic would be outrageously overpowered. Flames would kill everyone. 8 flame dmg/s plus the instant 10% done for all fire spells would equal disaster.

11. These games are meant to be immersive and allow to explore and fight on your own terms. I think the moment I run into xXBONERMAN420Xx my game is ruined.

12. There is a lot of people who don't want Multiplayer. While a lot of them probably haven't spent the time to put the ideas down in text they still need to be counted as part of the community. A game get's really good when the Dev's listen to the community.

I am not here to tell people off or point out mistakes. I'm just trying to say this "Elderscrolls:MMORPG is a bad idea. Please don't do it. It will save Bethesda and Zenimax a lot of money, time, and work.
User avatar
Beast Attire
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:33 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 3:01 pm

Hello Adventurers!
We want your say on, not a MMO Skyrim, but a multi-player 2-4 player, so you are able to play with your friends or enemies, those who say they're better than you so you can prove them right. Also if it is only a a 2-4 player online then you wont have massive 100 player fights, it would almost be normal other then just a few changes to make it work. You could have a 2v2 or just own one of your friends with a 3v1. There should be your online and offline profiles, so when your offline on one of your characters could be level 48 and on your online he/she might be only level 12. Bethesda could also change around the campaign so instead of having the quests one player make it so that there is more then one reward and have puzzles that require more people and have it so a certain amount is needed for the quest. As for shouts I belive if bethesda change you from being the Dragonborn and being just a normal soldier, mage or assassin running around the world. If you want to enjoy the wonders of Dragonborn you can just play offline. If we can get enough comments and shares Bethesda may look at this and start on the idea of a multi-player Skyrim!
Thanks for your support and we hope to see a co-op Skyrim in the future!
User avatar
SEXY QUEEN
 
Posts: 3417
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:54 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 6:55 am

Well, as most of you know, Bethesda is (if the claims are true) going to announce a elder scrolls MMORPG in may. Personaly, I think this is a awesome move! I just hope that there are NO monthly fees. Monthly fees make you feel like your wasting money, and shouldnt be spending money on the game at times. Also, I hope the developers take their time on this game, and not rush it. I would rather have a good game, and wait several years, than have a game made in a year that svcks. Im hoping for something that is like, the world of daggerfall, (except more dungeons and dungeons are done better, they arent all the same) The graphics of skyrim, (graphics still dont matter too much, they are just nice) and balanced gameplay and less glitches (Nobody can stand unbalanced gameplay and glitches that are abused and gamebreaking lol) also, try to make it as awesome as skyrim, morrowind, and daggerfall combined, but bigger, better, funner, and more addicting. Something that will get bigger than wow, and pretty much all other mmos. Thats pretty much what I want, and hopefully others agree with me.
User avatar
FirDaus LOVe farhana
 
Posts: 3369
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 3:42 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 5:55 am

Hello gentlemen. I have found several reasons why Multiplayer would be a bad Choice for the Elderscrolls series. Please, take time to read my OPINIONS and respond. I would appreciate feedback on these.

?1. The Elderscrolls is supposed to be a single player game. It was made for single player it should stay that way. Bethesda knows how to make single player games, not multiplayer games. That would be like taking a Master Mason and having him try to be a Carpenter. While they are both construction methods they are both way different. (not saying that Bethesda couldn't do a good job)

2. Griefing. There would be so much griefing that Bethsda would end up having to do some serious stuff like making it so players can; kill each other which would ruin the game. Through the years that has been one the major things about Elderscrolls, being to kill just about anything as long as your strong enough to do it.

3. Loot distribution. While playing with friends would be fun I don't want to have to roll on a Dragon Priest mask. Especially if it's a good one.

4. Glitches. How would Bethesda take care of ALL the glitches. Also, Todd Howard said that they were going to leave the fun glitches in. Like putting baskets on peoples heads. If they make the game multiplayer they will have to remove ALL glitches which would not only take a crap load of time but would also make it so they would have to take out the fun ones.

5. Dragon souls. How would one share a dragon soul with a party member? Everyone gets a soul? Dragons have more then one soul?

6. Lag. With skyrim Graphics and mechanics there would be so much lag that the world would end, no need for Alduin.

7. Massive battles. While these would be fun it would create lag. Can you imagine 100 players in the same place at the same time? AoE spells, dragon shouts, cleave attacks, elemental fury. all these things would destroy the latency.

8. Thieves. Nuff said.

9. I'm not sure if it was Bethesda's intention, but to me it seems as if character is unique to that saved game. Would it be fun having 30 people wearing heavy armor and casting spells? Or having 7 million people who play sword and shield? You're supposed to be the savior of the world, the Neverar, the Hero of Kavatch, the Savior of the Nine, the Dragonborn, SLAYER OF ALDUIN!

10. Imbalances. At the early levels magic would be outrageously overpowered. Flames would kill everyone. 8 flame dmg/s plus the instant 10% done for all fire spells would equal disaster.

11. These games are meant to be immersive and allow to explore and fight on your own terms. I think the moment I run into xXBONERMAN420Xx my game is ruined.

12. There is a lot of people who don't want Multiplayer. While a lot of them probably haven't spent the time to put the ideas down in text they still need to be counted as part of the community. A game get's really good when the Dev's listen to the community.

I am not here to tell people off or point out mistakes. I'm just trying to say this "Elderscrolls:MMORPG is a bad idea. Please don't do it. It will save Bethesda and Zenimax a lot of money, time, and work.
If you dont like multiplayer, dont buy the game! (sorry about double posting)
User avatar
Amelia Pritchard
 
Posts: 3445
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:40 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:34 am

Hello gentlemen. I have found several reasons why Multiplayer would be a bad Choice for the Elderscrolls series. Please, take time to read my OPINIONS and respond. I would appreciate feedback on these.

?1. The Elderscrolls is supposed to be a single player game. It was made for single player it should stay that way. Bethesda knows how to make single player games, not multiplayer games. That would be like taking a Master Mason and having him try to be a Carpenter. While they are both construction methods they are both way different. (not saying that Bethesda couldn't do a good job)
ZeniMax is making the MMO, not Bethesda. If they are actually making an elder scrolls MMO I'm sure Bethesda would help with the lore, but ZeniMax is the one actually developing it.

2. Griefing. There would be so much griefing that Bethsda would end up having to do some serious stuff like making it so players can; kill each other which would ruin the game. Through the years that has been one the major things about Elderscrolls, being to kill just about anything as long as your strong enough to do it.
This is legitimate. An MMO would seriously differ from the gameplay of normal ES games. But, if you want just want to run around killing everything, an MMO isn't the game for you anyway.

3. Loot distribution. While playing with friends would be fun I don't want to have to roll on a Dragon Priest mask. Especially if it's a good one.
This is every MMO ever.

4. Glitches. How would Bethesda take care of ALL the glitches. Also, Todd Howard said that they were going to leave the fun glitches in. Like putting baskets on peoples heads. If they make the game multiplayer they will have to remove ALL glitches which would not only take a crap load of time but would also make it so they would have to take out the fun ones.
Again, ZeniMax is making the game. Also, bugs are a way of life for us MMOers :smile:

5. Dragon souls. How would one share a dragon soul with a party member? Everyone gets a soul? Dragons have more then one soul?
The only ES game with dragon souls was Skyim There's no reason they would have to be in the MMO.

6. Lag. With skyrim Graphics and mechanics there would be so much lag that the world would end, no need for Alduin.
No MMO will have graphics like skyrim for a long time. Without getting too technical, it's basically just not feasible for skyrim-quality graphics in an MMO because of the number of playable characters you have to draw on the screen.

7. Massive battles. While these would be fun it would create lag. Can you imagine 100 players in the same place at the same time? AoE spells, dragon shouts, cleave attacks, elemental fury. all these things would destroy the latency.
100 players in the same location in any MMO causes lag.

8. Thieves. Nuff said.
You're not going to be able to steal things from other players. No MMO developer in their right mind would make that happen.

9. I'm not sure if it was Bethesda's intention, but to me it seems as if character is unique to that saved game. Would it be fun having 30 people wearing heavy armor and casting spells? Or having 7 million people who play sword and shield? You're supposed to be the savior of the world, the Neverar, the Hero of Kavatch, the Savior of the Nine, the Dragonborn, SLAYER OF ALDUIN!
this is one of the biggest complaints from fans of the ES series. But, there is an easy solution to this - don't play an MMO if you want to be the hero.

10. Imbalances. At the early levels magic would be outrageously overpowered. Flames would kill everyone. 8 flame dmg/s plus the instant 10% done for all fire spells would equal disaster.
I'm sure game balancing would be different in an MMO. They're not just going to port Skyrim to an MMO setting.

11. These games are meant to be immersive and allow to explore and fight on your own terms. I think the moment I run into xXBONERMAN420Xx my game is ruined.
Many MMO's have restrictions on naming. This won't be a problem if they do the same.

12. There is a lot of people who don't want Multiplayer. While a lot of them probably haven't spent the time to put the ideas down in text they still need to be counted as part of the community. A game get's really good when the Dev's listen to the community.
If you don't want multiplayer, then don't play an MMO. Problem solved.

I am not here to tell people off or point out mistakes. I'm just trying to say this "Elderscrolls:MMORPG is a bad idea. Please don't do it. It will save Bethesda and Zenimax a lot of money, time, and work.
User avatar
Dean Brown
 
Posts: 3472
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:17 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 10:43 am

I never play MMOs, but...

Elder Scrolls MMO = more money for Bethesda = bigger budget for Elder Scrolls VI

Bring it on.


Skyrim's budget = $100 million = open world RPG

Mass Effect 3's budget = $200 million = linear action game

Something is terribly wrong here.
User avatar
Rex Help
 
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:52 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 10:14 am

Hello gentlemen. I have found several reasons why Multiplayer would be a bad Choice for the Elderscrolls series. Please, take time to read my OPINIONS and respond. I would appreciate feedback on these.

?1. The Elderscrolls is supposed to be a single player game. It was made for single player it should stay that way. Bethesda knows how to make single player games, not multiplayer games.
[snip]
The rest of your points have been adressed well by others, so I wanted to comment on this in particular. Elder Scrolls Legends: Battlespire, the 3rd TES game created, featured multiplayer. In fact, I'd say that the existence of the Legends, Adventures, and Travels series proves that TES need not be a sandbox, single-player RPG in order to be considered TES. A TES MMO, if it indeed exists, would be a proper MMO, not just Skyrim with tons of characters.

(That's not to say that they might not introduce co-op or versus play in Skyrim DLCs or future games, but I'm talking about a specifically designed multiplayer TES here)
User avatar
Poetic Vice
 
Posts: 3440
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:19 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 10:38 am

Hello gentlemen. I have found several reasons why Multiplayer would be a bad Choice for the Elderscrolls series. Please, take time to read my OPINIONS and respond. I would appreciate feedback on these.

?1. The Elderscrolls is supposed to be a single player game. It was made for single player it should stay that way. Bethesda knows how to make single player games, not multiplayer games. That would be like taking a Master Mason and having him try to be a Carpenter. While they are both construction methods they are both way different. (not saying that Bethesda couldn't do a good job)

2. Griefing. There would be so much griefing that Bethsda would end up having to do some serious stuff like making it so players can; kill each other which would ruin the game. Through the years that has been one the major things about Elderscrolls, being to kill just about anything as long as your strong enough to do it.

3. Loot distribution. While playing with friends would be fun I don't want to have to roll on a Dragon Priest mask. Especially if it's a good one.

4. Glitches. How would Bethesda take care of ALL the glitches. Also, Todd Howard said that they were going to leave the fun glitches in. Like putting baskets on peoples heads. If they make the game multiplayer they will have to remove ALL glitches which would not only take a crap load of time but would also make it so they would have to take out the fun ones.

5. Dragon souls. How would one share a dragon soul with a party member? Everyone gets a soul? Dragons have more then one soul?

6. Lag. With skyrim Graphics and mechanics there would be so much lag that the world would end, no need for Alduin.

7. Massive battles. While these would be fun it would create lag. Can you imagine 100 players in the same place at the same time? AoE spells, dragon shouts, cleave attacks, elemental fury. all these things would destroy the latency.

8. Thieves. Nuff said.

9. I'm not sure if it was Bethesda's intention, but to me it seems as if character is unique to that saved game. Would it be fun having 30 people wearing heavy armor and casting spells? Or having 7 million people who play sword and shield? You're supposed to be the savior of the world, the Neverar, the Hero of Kavatch, the Savior of the Nine, the Dragonborn, SLAYER OF ALDUIN!

10. Imbalances. At the early levels magic would be outrageously overpowered. Flames would kill everyone. 8 flame dmg/s plus the instant 10% done for all fire spells would equal disaster.

11. These games are meant to be immersive and allow to explore and fight on your own terms. I think the moment I run into xXBONERMAN420Xx my game is ruined.

12. There is a lot of people who don't want Multiplayer. While a lot of them probably haven't spent the time to put the ideas down in text they still need to be counted as part of the community. A game get's really good when the Dev's listen to the community.

I am not here to tell people off or point out mistakes. I'm just trying to say this "Elderscrolls:MMORPG is a bad idea. Please don't do it. It will save Bethesda and Zenimax a lot of money, time, and work.

I agree with this post...

but please explain 8... lol
User avatar
Stace
 
Posts: 3455
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 2:52 pm

Next

Return to The Elder Scrolls Series Discussion