Posts Tagged ‘Anarchy Online’
The Elder Scrolls Online Launch Trailer
I consider myself an MMO vet. Been playing them for 10 12 years and I am loving the game. It gets a lot of hate after people played the beta weekend up til level 4 and they aren really qualified to shit on what the game has to offer.
The quest are proper Elder Scrolls quests. They beg you to listen and pay attention and you never feel like you just skipping quest text to race to cap.
The combat and the world open up once you progress your character further. You start getting some awesome synergy between your abilities and the option to customize what kind of gear and weapon you want to use is great. Want to be a sorcerer who rocks a two handed mace? Fucking do it brother.
The pvp is also pretty bonkers. Rolling on up on a castle held by the Aldmeri Dominion and seeing a bunch of players lined up on the top of the wall with siege weapons ready to rock your squad is great. You can also accept scouting missions and try to infiltrate deep into enemy territory and stay away from the zergs. It crazy fun.
Basically what I am saying is the game opens up as most MMOs do after the first 10 levels. It unfair to judge what the game has to offer off of some other guy two day impression of the beta weekends.
[+]adammtlx comment score below threshold (5 children)You take that risk with any full price, AAA game. And yet I don hear people criticizing any other one title for it.
No, the reason people are taking exception to the price of ESO is simply because they become conditioned to expect F2P as the norm for MMORPGs, when in fact F2P has only been in vogue for the past 5 years or so, meanwhile the history of MMORPGs stretches back at least 17 years, and over 20 if you count text based MUDs.
So why should ESO be expected to adhere to a trendy business model that many justifiably believe is having an extremely corrosive effect on the genre? It $60. People spend that much on games they spend 10 15 hours playing and many of them don even think twice about it. I guarantee even if you don sign up for the subscription you get at least that much out of ESO.
It $60 for a month. This means that if I buy the game and wind up not liking it very much, there no way I sinking another $15 into it a month later. Which means I now own a doorstop.
I guarantee even if you don sign up for the subscription you get at least that much out of ESO.
Yeah, I don count up the hours I play a game to judge whether or not I made a good investment. 10 hours of trying and failing to have fun means I wasted my money. Ten hours of a bunch of fun means I made a wise choice. I don really get the whole thing where people try to put $/hour on video games. Doesn make much sense to me.
I don think it that weird to say I don feel like spending $60 on something that I won might not have fun with. I don really understand why you take an issue with that, but I think it a pretty healthy state of mind for a consumer.
The point is the facts do not agree with the notion that $60 is too much to ask simply because there a subscription attached after 30 days. UO asked for $60 and a subscription. So did Everquest. So did Anarchy Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Asheron Call and countless others and all of those games are considered successes, to varying degrees.
WoW asked for that amount for years and no one gave a crap. And before you go back to
when you see other MMO veterans telling you it nothing new and pretty bland, that a risky proposition.
you could have easily found plenty of MMO vets saying WoW was “nothing new” and “pretty bland” when it came out as well. Buying a game entails a risk. There no getting around it. Modern MMORPG players think that F2P is so great because it allows them to circumvent the typical process and assess the game risk free. The problem with this reasoning is that they not actually assessing the entire game. They only seeing a piece of it and to get the full experience they have to spend money, which is a risk. You argue that at least they got to play the game beforehand in order to make a more informed decision, but the issue with F2P is that unlike a demo in a non MMORPG game (in which case the sentiment would be more accurate), content pipelines in F2P MMORPGs are divided with the result being a less cohesive and more fragmented experience. Which means the game itself will likely never live up to its full potential.
That the price you pay for F2P: A more informed decision to get into a lower quality experience. ESO is making the bet that their game is good enough that they don need to lower their standards of quality. They believe that their game is good enough that those who want an enjoyable experience will like their time in ESO and won regret the initial outlay, and will likely pay for a subscription. They have a vision and a goal and don want it compromised by the disease of F2P.
So did Everquest. So did Anarchy Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Asheron Call and countless others and all of those games are considered successes, to varying degrees.
Hey, don forget Meridian 59! And I did play Everquest and WoW and LOTRO (before it went F2P) and FF XIV, and (a little) FF XI. Like I said, I have no issues what so ever with paying to play an MMO, in fact, I much prefer it for all the reasons you listed. Let me reiterate, I do not play F2P MMO Never have, won say I never will, but for now none of them have seemed interesting. I tried Neverwinter a tiny bit, but being inundated with “BUY OUR CURRENCY” every time I went to a menu made me lose any immersion I would have otherwise had. You and I agree on the F2P model. My mother downloaded a F2P game onto her phone and let me son play it and I looked at her and said, “WHAT HAVE YOU DONE??” because I don even want him touching them yet. I much rather have him get used to seeing games as complete experiences, so he can be as cynical about F2P stuff as I am.