The Elder Scrolls Online

[Abelian75]

I don't think he was using the "dungeon" definition of instance, but rather talking about spawning off a entire server instance for a guild who pays for their own or something, where they could tweak server rules to suit their guild.  That was my takeaway, at least.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Then it's not even an MMO anymore it's just large team based games.

[Nebu]

Then it's not even an MMO anymore it's just large team based games.

Seems to me that's exactly what WoW is designed to be.  A large team-based game (dungeons, raids, WZ's).  The open world stuff is an annoyance filled with moronic chat, griefers, and uninspired content.  GW2 did a MUCH better job with the open world content.  I hope that more people emulate GW2's method of encouraging cooperativity.

[shiznitz]

Then it's not even an MMO anymore it's just large team based games.

Exactly.  I think that model could do very well.  It could even charge a premium subscription if done right.

[HaemishM]

Then it's not even an MMO anymore it's just large team based games.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Typhon]

Abelian75 is spot-on, that is exactly what I'm talking about.

I was taking the NWN concept and marrying it with what DAOC did, server instances with rules variant.  Then I was giving the decision-making authority for what rules to have on that server instance to the folks paying for the server instance, the guilds.  Basically the guild would be all by themselves on a shard with a ruleset that they like.

End goal here would be that the game devs would be able to have games that developed differently based upon player action and (re-)introduce game mechanisms that were cool, but also exploitable.  Essentially a guild-wide single player game.

I don't feel bad.

Edit: added first sentence

[Lakov_Sanite]

The problem with large team based games is you don't meet new people, you are expected to bring your own.  Fine for some people here who have had gaming friends for over a decade but you had to meet those people somewhere.  MMO's may be filled with immaturity but there are still cool people playing them that DON'T have groups of friends and will find them through playing the game. 

That's one of the biggest strengths of the mmo model, finding groups of people you enjoy playing with and thereby giving stickyness to the game at large.  Team based games already exist in the FPS sphere however and those do not charge subscriptions so I think adding a sub model to something you play with your small group of friends could be tough just from an expectations standpoint.

[Typhon]

I was thinking that the main game would be MMO F2P, but that groups of a a certain minimum size would have the capability to start their own instance (and choose their own rule variants).

Guild server instances would need a way to bring in guests to see if they fit with the guild - something like LFR but in reverse, more like a LFTank/Healer/Etc that would be used to vet out guild candidates and fill team shortages from the F2P population.

The idea probably doesn't scratch the 'server first!' type of guilds itch, seems like it would be more for large casual guilds that would like server state to change based upon what the guild (collectively) did.

Just an odd idea I had, not something I'm personally hoping to see.

[Ingmar]

Abelian75 is spot-on, that is exactly what I'm talking about.

I was taking the NWN concept and marrying it with what DAOC did, server instances with rules variant.  Then I was giving the decision-making authority for what rules to have on that server instance to the folks paying for the server instance, the guilds.  Basically the guild would be all by themselves on a shard with a ruleset that they like.

End goal here would be that the game devs would be able to have games that developed differently based upon player action and (re-)introduce game mechanisms that were cool, but also exploitable.  Essentially a guild-wide single player game.

I don't feel bad.

Edit: added first sentence

Wow, you really, really communicated that idea poorly the first time. Sounded like EQ catass raid camping stuff.

[Typhon]

If I wasn't still shunning you, I'd agree that the word 'server' desperately needed to be before 'instance' in that first post.

[Numtini]

Before I sign anything, check your emails.

[Hawkbit]

Hypothetically speaking, I wouldn't run a stress test when half the userbase is almost guaranteed to be doing something else, like working.  But hey, what do I know?

[palmer_eldritch]

It's on Massively.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/01/22/elder-scrolls-online-beta-signups-now-live-six-minute-cinematic/

Oh, and according to their sign-up process, my chances of gettin' into closed beta are "Excellent".

Mine too. See you in game!

These people have snubbed me and as far as I'm concerned they lied to my face. I hate them.

[Merusk]

Hypothetically speaking, I wouldn't run a stress test when half the userbase is almost guaranteed to be doing something else, like working.  But hey, what do I know?

But if we run it when everyone's home then we'll have to work late!

[Lakov_Sanite]

Those elves.....

A picture is worth one thousand words and one look at those elves tells me the game is terrible.

[Ingmar]

It's on Massively.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/01/22/elder-scrolls-online-beta-signups-now-live-six-minute-cinematic/

Oh, and according to their sign-up process, my chances of gettin' into closed beta are "Excellent".

Mine too. See you in game!

These people have snubbed me and as far as I'm concerned they lied to my face. I hate them.

Isn't this just a stress test, not closed beta?

[Quinton]

From an invite email (pre-signing-up-for-anything, pre-signing-any-NDA):

"This is not a normal test! Even though this is your first test session with us, we'll be actively trying to push the system to failure during this test instead of focusing on gameplay feedback.  Please help hammer it!  In return for helping us, your participation in this stress test will increase your chances to be invited to a normal, longer-term test."

So it sounds like no guarantee of any access beyond this stress test.  Dangling the carrot of "more beta access" does seem like one way to get a bunch of people to pile on to help melt your servers.

[Evildrider]

Hah, they sent me like 2 more emails:  "ZOMG don't forget about beta tomorrow!  Make your account and install it now!"

[Wasted]

So I can't even get invited to a stress test 

[Fabricated]

I am saying this completely without context: lol

[Hawkbit]

Same.

[Ironwood]

 

[Paelos]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/07/sony-pushed-for-the-elder-scrolls-online-to-come-to-consoles

Heh. 

[HaemishM]

So we have a colossal trainwreck across three platforms to look forward to?

[Lucas]

Triple teh fun! 

[Merusk]

Do they talk to each other or is it a different server cluster for every platform?  Because the first would be amusing to see for once.

[Paelos]

I think they realize at this point exactly how fucked they are, and they are just putting it on every platform in the hope they can sell enough boxes to defray the losses before they go F2P and shut it down.

[Mrbloodworth]

Even more reasons for me to ignore it.

[Nebu]

Are you guys basing all of this on a promo video or do you have something more substantial to go on?

[Lakov_Sanite]

Sounds like TSO will live up to all expectations. 

[Paelos]

Are you guys basing all of this on a promo video or do you have something more substantial to go on?

If you didn't see the 20 minutes or whatnot of leaked footage then you missed out. However, I'm making a few educated guesses about the structure. They've created this shell company specifically for the game so that they can jettison it if it fails. They are making statements about how the publishers are pushing them around. It sounds like the perfect setup for failure when the blame game comes a knocking.

[Nebu]

If you didn't see the 20 minutes or whatnot of leaked footage then you missed out. However, I'm making a few educated guesses about the structure. They've created this shell company specifically for the game so that they can jettison it if it fails. They are making statements about how the publishers are pushing them around. It sounds like the perfect setup for failure when the blame game comes a knocking.

I did see the leaked footage and the combat looked pretty dreadful.  I just wondered if something else had been floating around that I missed.

[amiable]

Are you guys basing all of this on a promo video or do you have something more substantial to go on?

1.  Company that has never made an MMORPG before promises the moon.  Check.
2.  Leaked footage shows clunky terrible combat. Check.
3.  Leaks from developer indicating decisions were forced on them from higher ups.  Check.
4.  Subscription pricing model when the entire industry is moving to F2P and subsequent arrogance regarding "quality product."  Check.
5.  Very little info on actual game systems.  Check.

I'm a pretty hardcore fanboy, and I would love for TESO to succeed (especially if they are RvR focused) but it does, from the outside, look like a steaming train headed for a washed out bridge.  But prove me wrong kids.  Prove me Wrong!!!!  (Full disclosure:  I will be buying 2 boxes because the misses luuuuurves the eder scroll series and insists we play Dunmer or some such crap, so I will happily report on this disaster from the inside).

[Hawkbit]

4.  Subscription pricing model when the entire industry is moving to F2P and subsequent arrogance regarding "quality product."  Check.

Debatable.  There's still a place for sub games, if the game is worth subbing to.

Your other points are spot-on.

[satael]

My biggest concern for ESO was/is that the pc version was supposed to be released in 2013 and now it's delayed to launch along with the console versions next year (not that it's delayed but that they haven't shown any more  so far despite supposedly being on schedule for 2013 launch in the spring this year)