Elder Scrolls Online preview

Another article: http://m.ign.com/articles/2013/03/19/the-elder-scrolls-online-just-might-be-awesome

Biggest news to me was:

By far the biggest announcement of the day is that Elder Scrolls Online will feature first-person combat after all, and while my experience with it was limited to watching a minute-long video of an early build set in a graveyard, I loved what I saw, particularly for the promise it holds for archery.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
3,946
Location
NH
Another preview mentioned it. They showed the Dragonknight fiery chain pull ability and it was apparently pretty cool to see.

I guess we now know why they didn't really want to do it, it mean animating every abilities for 1st person...
 
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
7,313
Sounds like a pretty run-of-the-mill themepark MMO - which isn't terribly exciting.

However, when done well - they can be entertaining for a while. The PvP is the feature that can make or break such a game for me - in terms of it being a long-term home.

If they manage to implement it to my satisfaction, I guess I might be happy with this.

But ArcheAge still has me much more excited, even with all the problems I'm hearing about.
 
I cringe when I see these blanket PVE characterizations - aka calling them "theme parks". All video games are theme parks, why single out PVE mmo's? All the sacred cow rpg's could be labeled as such. Jaded much?
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,593
Location
Boston MA
I cringe when I see these blanket PVE characterizations - aka calling them "theme parks". All video games are theme parks, why single out PVE mmo's? All the sacred cow rpg's could be labeled as such. Jaded much?

If you think all video games are themeparks - then you're thinking about the term in a very different way than what's been established specifically for the MMO genre for several years.

In the MMO space - gamers have silently agreed to separate MMOs into two distinct subgenres - the sandbox and the themepark. At the core - the concepts are about the level of player control and influence on the world. Themeparks are generally about feeding content steadily to the player until it's exhausted somewhere around the endgame - where content repetition kicks in. Sandboxes are generally about giving players a measure of player control - so as to allow them to create their own experiences, rather than relying on developer content for that purpose.

Themeparks generally have larger budgets behind them - and they're much more interesting to people who prefer to just be entertained and not get too invested.

Sandboxes are generally less popular, and as such - they don't have big budgets - and tend to be experimental and very buggy. They also generally demand player investment on a much higher level.

Using these simple terms makes it much easier to communicate the basic design paradigm of any given MMO. Sandbox and themepark are neither inherently negative nor positive labels.

I hope this is enough information to make you appreciate why the terms are being used by millions of MMO fans - and how they're not related to being jaded.

However, almost all MMOs have some elements of both genres. They just tend to be mostly one or the other - and ESO seems like a clear-cut example of what's mostly a themepark MMO.

That said, yeah, I'm extremely jaded. I can't help that. Can you?
 
Last edited:
Few RPG's really allow you to influence the world, MMO or otherwise. In single player RPG's its all mostly scripted. But to your point: The "themepark" moniker for MMO PVE is widely used. I simply have trouble believing its origin is not derogatory and I cringe when I see it used. BTW that was a shocking measured response for Dart! Who's using your account? ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,593
Location
Boston MA
Few RPG's really allow you to influence the world, MMO or otherwise. In single player RPG's its all mostly scripted. But to your point: The "themepark" moniker for MMO PVE is widely used. I simply have trouble believing its origin is not derogatory and I cringe when I see it used. BTW that was a shocking measured response for Dart! Who's using your account? ;)

It was certainly more measured than your heavily biased response, so maybe we switched accounts by accident? :)

I mean, you're always so amiable and level-headed!

You said all video games are themeparks - and if you think about games like Mount and Blade, Civilization and so on - you'll find why that's not the case.

As for MMOs, games like EVE Online, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Ultima Online - and so on are almost pure sandboxes. Simply because developer content is so limited compared to the amount of player control and how that control is driving the gameplay.

I'm sure lots of people use themepark in a derogatory sense - but I don't. I've greatly enjoyed several themeparks - and the overall quality of the genre tends to be much higher than the average sandbox.

My personal "ideal" MMO would be a genuine hybrid - as I do love the concept of a sandbox, but I don't like having to create the games for the developers. I need high quality content as well as freedom to influence the world. I'm still waiting for such a game :)

That said, ArcheAge looks like it's the first game to feature close to 50% of each feature-set or design paradigm. Hard to tell until I play it - but it's looking to be the most promising MMO in many, many years. To me, that is.
 
to me the 'theme park' term comes from how in a theme park you go from attraction to attraction, similar in a way that in 'theme park MMOs' you go to a hub of quests that are all appropriate to your level, do all the quests there that also happen to be around the area, then when you're finished you get a quest to send a letter to a dude in another town, you go there and you get a bunch of new quests, strangely all appropriate to your level again and all done around that area, repeat from level 1 to max level.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
5,645
Location
Tardis
to me the 'theme park' term comes from how in a theme park you go from attraction to attraction, similar in a way that in 'theme park MMOs' you go to a hub of quests that are all appropriate to your level, do all the quests there that also happen to be around the area, then when you're finished you get a quest to send a letter to a dude in another town, you go there and you get a bunch of new quests, strangely all appropriate to your level again and all done around that area, repeat from level 1 to max level.

Yeah, that's not a bad analogy.

But I tend to use the term "content" - because it includes quests, dungeons, PvP battlegrounds, and all kinds of activities revolving around unique developer-created assets.

It takes a LOT of resources to maintain player interest in a themepark, because you don't give them the tools to keep the game perpetually interesting. You're obligated to provide content on a regular basis. Which is why I've never understood why developers don't do both. Have the "themepark" be the core of the experience - and then expand the gameplay towards the endgame with sandbox features. The world and the themepark will serve as the lure - to get the high amount of players.

Then I remember how much effort a sandbox takes in terms of smart game design, and it also takes courage to give control to the players - because there's always the potential of ruining the game completely - because of imbalance and griefers.

That's what makes the design part so demanding, because you have to take into account all the ways players can ruin the game for each other.

Ironically, sandboxes are usually made with small budgets and small teams - so it's no surprise that they don't do well in terms of business. Most players don't want to risk losing their investment or progress - and they certainly don't want to risk that in a bland world with minimal or subpar content.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom