The Elder Scrolls Online

[Tannhauser]

I think you're quite safe. 

[Lucas]

Finish the sentence (gif and pics are also acceptable  ) :

"The Elder Scrolls Online thread on F13.net reached 100 pages because..."

[carnifex27]

Finish the sentence:

"The Elder Scrolls Online thread on F13.net reached 100 pages because..."

[Malakili]

http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=24532.0

[Draegan]

The game has almost been completely retooled with some of their upcoming updates. The game actually looks like it might be pretty fun. If you played the game to close to level cap, I would suggest checking out the changes. If they come even close to what they are promising, this is the game that should of been released and might of had a better fairing.

[Signe]

I'm actually playing it now and it's fun enough.  I couldn't get anywhere with Archeage crafting at all.  It might last me more than one month if the crafting is nice... I haven't tried it yet.  I played one character to level 15 in the beta and I'm level 10 on a different sort of character so it's new stuff for me.  I don't think there's any housing in this game though, which makes me sad.  I like housing.

[Draegan]

I actually enjoyed playing TESO during release through 40 something levels, but I never hit the level cap. I saw the wheels coming off a long time before that. But I really enjoyed what was there though. If it becomes more fleshed out, I might give it another spin. I really like their level cap "leveling" system.

I just don't know if the content is there and worth investing more time in.

[Lantyssa]

Fortunately I can wait six month to have the option of f2p or never playing it after beta because they shut down.  Either way, I win.

[Ingmar]

I still think the game will go F2P by March, and have shut down or completely retooled before the end of 2015. Ingmar and I have a steam game riding on this.

I'm feeling confident. Don't think they shut down by Jan 2016, F2P will give them a decent boost, even if it is a dead cat bounce. Unless they blow it on the cash model of course.

[Nebu]

If they come even close to what they are promising, this is the game that should of have been released and might of had a better fairing.

When has this EVER happened with an MMO? 

[Draegan]

If they come even close to what they are promising, this is the game that should of have been released and might of had a better fairing.

When has this EVER happened with an MMO? 

Rift maybe.

[Signe]

Rift is the only one that comes to mind for me, too.  Not a great average, is it?

[Threash]

Eh, i'd say they over sold on both the rifts and their class system imo.  What they described is basically what EQNext is promising but with rifts, and their class system was not supposed to be limited by base classes.

[Lantyssa]

GW2, at release.

[Nebu]

Rift maybe.

Sadly Rift went the exact opposite way for me.  Started off great and slowly devolved into a game I didn't like. 

So much wasted potential in the MMO industry.

[Draegan]

Rift maybe.

Sadly Rift went the exact opposite way for me.  Started off great and slowly devolved into a game I didn't like. 

So much wasted potential in the MMO industry.

Oh I agree with this. They took a really good system and turned it into bland shit. Their class dev team along with the lead dev didn't have a fucking clue. At all. I'm not saying this as a jaded "they nerfed my class they suck" mentality. I actually talked to some of these people and they were completely ignorant of game systems.  Anyway, that ship has long sailed.

As far as GW2, I actually typed that out but deleted it. I thought the "dynamic" events they were talking about would be more dynamic. Instead they were simple pass/fail scripts. None of them were particular interesting after the first time. They actually talked about how some events had all of these turning points. They were all pretty linear.

[sam, an eggplant]

Not after the first time, no. But GW2 has a ton of them, and as it's not a subscription game there's no particular reason to log in except when they offer new content, which they do on a somewhat regular basis. So yeah, they aren't true contained systems in terms of Raph's apocryphal "wolves eating deer controlling the population" type system. They're scripted. But I don't see that as a true downside.

Moving on to Rift, in many ways it was the opposite of Wildstar.

Rift's content was boring and bland; Wildstar's was vibrant and full of character.

Rift had dozens of abilities per character, many off the global cooldown, that had to be macroed together to play optimally. It was an abomination. Wildstar fixed that with its limited action set.

Rift's "soul" character specialization was incredibly well-designed and hasn't been touched since-- but unfortunately it was poorly implemented, with way too many souls per class, leading to lots of duplication across abilities and entire souls (cosmetics aside) and thus homogeneity, the kiss of death. There were no "iconic" abilities, which tossed identity out the window-- very important, to identify with your avatar. It confused players, and when they took the time to learn it, they realized it didn't really matter, there was one optimal spec per role per situation.

I could go on, it's actually fascinating how Rift and Wildstar contrast when you think about it. Moddable UI, dungeon finder, challenging content, etc. But that's not necessary, point is made. The problem isn't that nobody learns or tries to improve on those that came before-- the problem is that they only do so selectively.

You need to address everything. That's what it will take to come close to WoW's success.

[Paelos]

Rift's "soul" character specialization was incredibly well-designed and hasn't been touched since-- but unfortunately it was poorly implemented, with way too many souls per class, leading to lots of duplication across abilities and entire souls (cosmetics aside) and thus homogeneity, the kiss of death. There were no "iconic" abilities, which tossed identity out the window-- very important, to identify with your avatar. It confused players, and when they took the time to learn it, they realized it didn't really matter, there was one optimal spec per role per situation.

I think it's impossible to implement well in that type of game. Unfortunately I think all "class talent" systems inevitably become bland and pointless because there's only so much stuff you can do with them before one true spec rules the day, especially since almost 90% of the time people are using them to increase their DPS. If it becomes a race to the highest output, then math gets involved. Once math gets involved, you're fucked because there is a definite answer. There's no debate anymore. And then you're left with a pointless bunch of other stuff on the scrubs use because what? It's fun? LOL NOOBS.

I've thought talent systems were dumb since WoW first tried to do them. It's pointless. Just give players the abilities and stop trying to put in the illusion of choice. If anything customization needs to be obviously cosmetic, not game system.

[Malakili]

I think it's impossible to implement well in that type of game. Unfortunately I think all "class talent" systems inevitably become bland and pointless because there's only so much stuff you can do with them before one true spec rules the day, especially since almost 90% of the time people are using them to increase their DPS. If it becomes a race to the highest output, then math gets involved. Once math gets involved, you're fucked because there is a definite answer. There's no debate anymore. And then you're left with a pointless bunch of other stuff on the scrubs use because what? It's fun? LOL NOOBS.

I agree, but the same thing would happen even if you get access to all abilities.  Then instead of "You chose X talent, noob" it's "You chose x ability to use, noob."  Any game with math involved (read: basically all of them), is going to have best, optimal choices.  It's why you "one true spec" in RPGs, it's why you have "build orders" in RTS games, builds in League of Legends and DOTA, etc.  Even in FPS games that have relatively little of that, there are going to be optimal choices based on the game mechanics.  Even when math isn't strictly speaking involved, if you are playing games there are good choices and bad choices and - almost always - optimal choices.

[Lantyssa]

GW1 skill and sub-profession system is still my favorite in that regard.  You could do a lot of things, but the limited bar meant you had to pick carefully.  It made for some truly varied builds, even within classes.

[sam, an eggplant]

I think it's impossible to implement well in that type of game. Unfortunately I think all "class talent" systems inevitably become bland and pointless because there's only so much stuff you can do with them before one true spec rules the day, especially since almost 90% of the time people are using them to increase their DPS. If it becomes a race to the highest output, then math gets involved. Once math gets involved, you're fucked because there is a definite answer.

I wasn't really talking about numbers balancing, although that problem did balloon due to the very large number of souls per class at release. I was talking about differentiation, identity, and not having 7 dozen abilities that must be macroed together.

Balancing talents is really a different discussion. Briefly, my answer would not be to make all choices cosmetic, because that means they don't matter.

My answer would be to make most choices not directly pertain to the soul's primary role. For example, a healer might have the opportunity to choose between multiple ways of dealing damage, or a tank might get the ability to off-heal while not actively taking damage, or any of these things could choose between various types of utility like runspeed, non-tank damage (AE) absorption, CC, etc.

Each soul would also get a strictly limited number of choices that do directly impact its primary role. Since the number of these choices would be very limited, balancing them wouldn't be an impossible challenge.

And all the choices should be distinct, visual, iconic, and awesome. You should be able to recognize when a Defense Attorney class uses his Objection! ability. It should do something unique, and powerful, and impact the encounter in a distinct way, and feel great to use. It shouldn't be mistaken for anything else. That's the identity.

[Paelos]

I would make talents about visual effects, more than about ability.

[sam, an eggplant]

Then they wouldn't matter. You're basically saying players shouldn't be able to choose how their characters play, only how they look.

[Paelos]

Then they wouldn't matter. You're basically saying players shouldn't be able to choose how their characters play, only how they look.

I'm saying it's a false choice, and a trap developers fall into all the time. Eventually they do what WoW does and continually pare things down further and further until they might as well not have them at all.

[sam, an eggplant]

WoW's current talent system is carefully and elegantly designed to do exactly the opposite. It embodies what I was talking about quite neatly, in fact.

I said designed, not implemented. The implementation leaves much to be desired.

[Paelos]

The implementation is everything. That's the point.

[sam, an eggplant]

Totally agree.

Key point here is just because nobody has ever succeeded at a task, that does not make it impossible. Difficult, certainly. Improbable, even. But not impossible.

Whichever game eventually supplants WoW will need to improve on it in every way, a quantum leap like WoW was to EQ. That definitely includes such key RPG ingredients like character progression and customization.

[Paelos]

Okay let's not get semantic on the deal. Impossible in my mind means it's yet to have been done, given numerous attempts by large doses of cash.

Is there a universe or time where it's possible in a technical sense? Probably. As of yet, it has not occurred, and I do not see it occurring any time soon given the way MMOs are moving.

My main problem with "talents" is the falsehood they perpetuate, and the amount of time wasted on designing them when they could actually spend that time on a crafting/materials system that's awesome and would get much much more use.

[sam, an eggplant]

Don't get caught up on the word talents, what we're really talking about here is character customization. Can you imagine D&D where wizards and rogues can't pick spells and feats? Is a game without character customization really a RPG? Even call of duty has perks and proficiencies. These things can be balanced, if you don't go crazy with the number of options like Rift. All I'm sayin'.

WoW successfully implemented a number of talent tiers, as a matter of fact. They failed many more, but that doesn't mean it's impossible, just that the recent fourth (or is it fifth?) generation of WoW devs working on class mechanics ran into a brick wall.

[Paelos]

The problem I have is the goal and the trinity. Talents don't fit into that box unless you're designing for a single player experience where fun is the name of the game.

As soon as you open it to multiplayer and co-op? It breaks.

[sam, an eggplant]

It doesn't, though. It's just harder. For example, take the survival hunter L60 talent tier in WoW.

http://www.wowhead.com/talent#zhy

The player can choose between three options, all of which directly impact their chosen role's performance by changing ability usage through resource generation or free attacks. All three options perform essentially identically-- simulated variance on sustained damage is ~2.5% from top to bottom.

The first option, Steady Focus, changes how the spec plays, asking the player to use abilities differently. It increases resource generation and changes the spec into more of a "casting" playstyle to sustain activity.

The second option, Dire Beast, summons a temporary pet, which itself deals damage and also generates resources. It's fire and forget, every 30 seconds. Doesn't change gameplay but looks cool.

The third option, Thrill of the Hunt, again changes how the class plays by providing frequent procs of cheaper attacks. It frees the spec from relying on moderate cast-time abilities to generate resources to using many more instant attacks.

The player can pick whichever one he wants. This is a great example of three real choices. All three perform similarly, all three play differently, and the one that doesn't really transform gameplay is visual-- it looks super cool.

[rattran]

You two just need to smooch and get it over with.

I'd try this game again if there was a 7day trial.

[Ingmar]

Then they wouldn't matter. You're basically saying players shouldn't be able to choose how their characters play, only how they look.

Eh, not really. You still make the broad playstyle choice of what class you pick.

[Draegan]

I really liked the macro system in RIFT. It let me condense a bunch of abilities into 2-3 keys. I hate rotation based gameplay.

People discussing ability bloat in RIFT are silly though. Yes you had a ton of abilities. It didn't mean you had to use them all. It allowed freedom for the player, though I do agree it was poorly implemented, but the idea was sound. The problem was they marginalized every single soul so that it became bland. Not only that, they used vertical progression in each tree as expansions came out (i.e. the tree got taller). So you further shoehorned builds into putting more and more points into a single tree and you began to take away fun builds. They should of done horizontal progression.

[satael]

I really liked the early ability system that allowed for alot of interesting builds (most of which were sub-optimal while a few were too good). Unfortunately alot of the freedom was exchanged for balancing later on. Also some of the dungeons were actually challenging early on in expert mode (atleast for me) until they "fixed" those too. Hell, I even liked the first raid-zone (greenscale's blight).