Company News The end of Elder Scrolls?

[Koby]

As for why continue...because you can?

... because they can't. Same franchise. Same lore. Both need writers, quest designers and so on. Why would you have two teams of people working on the same game, just because one is an MMO and the other isn't? If anything, they'd end up consolidating the teams, which means the offline version ends up very similar to the online version and you run back into your problem about having two games. Ignoring the fact that you would have people working on the same game twice. One for $20 a month, the other for a once off $80. If you want to push your online game, you don't dilute the market with your own product.

Writers? Quest designers? Fuck that.

I mean just look at what marketing department is using to promote Fallout3:

Megaton, built in the crater of an unexploded nuclear bomb.

[deep throat] Follow the engine(s). [/deep throat]

Its all about the grafix, if you got the visuales, they will come (pun intended).

And in the case of an MMO, an engine, a vary EXPENSIVE engien mind you, that also need to handle "massive" amounts of players, at some kind of minimal level of quality, because bethsoft is not THAT stupid, they know they can "fake" it with the writing, quest designe, and all that, but the grafix need to be top notch!

@Brother None - The same.

Bethsoft will not develop and/or maintain two production engines, it doesn't make sense, it just cost too much, working with only one engine is more then enough, once they will have an MMO capable engine, NOT using it for other projects is not maximizing your resources.

So, unless they are willing to invest into two separated engines in different projects (don't forget about peripheral stuff like the overhead of working with two technologies or the platform problem - too many of them), its a matter of time before resources will be consolidated.

In by itself it sound right, from a market PoV at least, if there are two market segments, they should be in both, however its not that simple.

 

[Jeff Graw]

Bullshit. Morrowind was a horrible game. Maybe an ok RPG in terms of non-linearity and choices and consequences, but it was butt-awful for everything else.

Fixed (You think Morrowind didn't have good non-linearity? What are you smoking!)

Also, the game world was completely dead and the dialog system was so fucking retarded. Oh yeah, and the inventory system was repulsive and contrived. And the difficulty curve went from stupidly impossible to monotonously easy faster than you could blink an eye. Oh, and combat was about as fun as being sodomized with cattle prod. And the leveling system was completely broken and highly abusable. And the character graphics looked about three generations behind the landscape graphics....

...And need I go on? Didn't think so.

 

[elander_]

It makes sense to reuse Oblivion engine for an Elderscrolls MMO. Oblivion is a single-player larping engine so this is more like an Oblivion upgrade to multi-player or in other words an MMO.

 

[DraQ]

Fixed (You think Morrowind didn't have good non-linearity? What are you smoking!)

Quick, does Oblivion have good nonlinearity?

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Morrowind's guilds are completely non-linear, although the main quest is linear.

Oblivion is linear all around.

 

[Brother None]

Bethsoft will not develop and/or maintain two production engines, it doesn't make sense, it just cost too much, working with only one engine is more then enough, once they will have an MMO capable engine, NOT using it for other projects is not maximizing your resources.

Eh? Oblivion runs on Gamebryo, which is currently also used to develop Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning. They don't need to switch engine, just modify.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Elder Scrolls die. The only decent one was Daggerfall.

Am I the only one with no taste for the old ones? I disliked all the ES games, but personally I liked Morrowind best (or least worse, I guess). At least it was fun, versus the boring Oblivion and TES I and II that just didn't offer anything.

Oh well, at least I have MotB and The Witcher to look forward to in the near term, and then we'll see....

Go on keeping an eye on Europe. Drakensang and Hard to be a God are both around the corner, though I'll admit neither is showing the promise of the Witcher.

 

[Jeff Graw]

Fixed (You think Morrowind didn't have good non-linearity? What are you smoking!)

Quick, does Oblivion have good nonlinearity?

Sans the main quest, sure. It's a fucking sandbox game!

Am I the only one with no taste for the old ones? I disliked all the ES games, but personally I liked Morrowind best. At least it was fun, versus the boring Oblivion and TES I and II that just didn't offer anything.

Daggerfall offered hugely in depth character creation and an absolutely immense game world. Some people are able to enjoy the game just because of the sheer scale of the thing, in spite of the dozens of things wrong with it.

Daggerfall also had very well done level scaling, which helped to keep the game interesting longer than the other TESes while being largely transparent to the player (unlike Oblivion).

 

[DraQ]

Fixed (You think Morrowind didn't have good non-linearity? What are you smoking!)

Quick, does Oblivion have good nonlinearity?

Sans the main quest, sure. It's a fucking sandbox game.

How comes that every single questline in this game is a fucking rail then?

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Fixed (You think Morrowind didn't have good non-linearity? What are you smoking!)

Quick, does Oblivion have good nonlinearity?

Sans the main quest, sure. It's a fucking sandbox game.

Not really, the guild quests were all linear stories and had no impact on each other, unlike Morrowind where you could do stuff for a guild whenever, and it actually impacted other guilds sometimes.

 

[DraQ]

Fixed (You think Morrowind didn't have good non-linearity? What are you smoking!)

Quick, does Oblivion have good nonlinearity?

Sans the main quest, sure. It's a fucking sandbox game.

Not really, the guild quests were all linear stories and had no impact on each other, unlike Morrowind where you could do stuff for a guild whenever, and it actually impacted other guilds sometimes.

In Morrowind you could also expect some choice where it was reasonable and had a few forks spreaded throughout the questlines.

 

[Jeff Graw]

How comes that every single questline in this game is a fucking rail then?

Because of lack of choices and consequences. Different thing all together. Besides the main quest/s you can go fuck around with pretty much anything out there in any order, therefore, non-linear.

Not really, the guild quests were all linear stories

Right, but you had a choice in the order you did the quests. Therefore, non-linear.

and had no impact on each other, unlike Morrowind where you could do stuff for a guild whenever, and it actually impacted other guilds sometimes.

Again, choices and consequences does not equal non-linearity.



P.S. I'm not trying to defend this POS game, but guys, it's pretty obviously non-linear.

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Right, but you had a choice in the order you did the quests. Therefore, non-linear.

Not in any of the guild quests I did. The only kind of non-linear one was the thieves guild, because you had to do freelance stealing to get anywhere.

 

[roshan]

How comes that every single questline in this game is a fucking rail then?

Because of lack of choices and consequences. Different thing all together. Besides the main quest/s you can go fuck around with pretty much anything out there in any order, therefore, non-linear.

Not really, the guild quests were all linear stories

Right, but you had a choice in the order you did the quests. Therefore, non-linear.

and had no impact on each other, unlike Morrowind where you could do stuff for a guild whenever, and it actually impacted other guilds sometimes.

Again, choices and consequences does not equal non-linearity.



P.S. I'm not trying to defend this POS game, but guys, it's pretty obviously non-linear.

Youre missing the big picture here. Non linearity doesnt mean shit without choices and consequences. Without choices and consequences and therefore branching plotlines, one comes away with the exact same overall experience as anyone else, regardless of the order they did the quests in. Thus there is no fundamental difference between that and a linear experience.

A true non linear experience should involve non linearity in the plotlines (through C&C) - not just in the order in which different linear plotlines are accomplished.

 

[Jeff Graw]

Right, but you had a choice in the order you did the quests. Therefore, non-linear.

Not in any of the guild quests I did. The only kind of non-linear one was the thieves guild, because you had to do freelance stealing to get anywhere.

Each guild chapter has it's own leader. He or she gives you quests. For example, you can visit four fighters guilds and get a quest from each leader. You can then do those quests in any order you want.

Youre missing the big picture here. Non linearity doesnt mean shit without choices and consequences.

I'm not missing the point and I'm not defending the game. I already said that, dammit. The point here is that C&C is more far important in making a good RPG than linearity or non-linearity.

A true non linear experience should involve non linearity in the plotlines (through C&C) - not just in the order in which different linear plotlines are accomplished.

There's no such thing as a nonlinear plot-line. You can have all of the choices in the world but when you finish the game, the plot is still going to be linear. Let me spell it out: Plotlines are by definition linear. In case you haven't noticed, line is the operative word. Non-linearity and C&C in games are two completely different things, one let's you do things in a different orders, the other allows you to shape the character and/or the game world via choices.

 

[Ismaul]

The end of Elder Scrolls?

I hope so. Good riddance, too. Let them join the world of mediocrity, retardation and indifference, their rightful place. I think it's more likely that they discontinue the SP games, it makes much more sense, since the MMO and the SP would be competing as they have the same gameplay. A sandbox is more suited for the MMO treatment, because it doesn't use any of the strenghts of SP games, such as strong story, choices & consequences, un-generic setting and quests.

Bullshit. Morrowind was a great game. Maybe not a good RPG in terms of non-linearity and choices and consequences, but it was great for everything else.

Bullshit. Morrowind was the definition of bland. Huge world with nothing inside. Thousands of quests, all the same. Thousands of NPCs, all the same wiki. It's not because Oblivion is such shit in comparision that suddenly Morrowind becomes good. Stuffing the game with mods like you'd do a turkey might redeem it to some extent, but Morrowind itself is shitty on its own.

 

[DraQ]

Youre missing the big picture here. Non linearity doesnt mean shit without choices and consequences. Without choices and consequences and therefore branching plotlines, one comes away with the exact same overall experience as anyone else, regardless of the order they did the quests in. Thus there is no fundamental difference between that and a linear experience.

A true non linear experience should involve non linearity in the plotlines (through C&C) - not just in the order in which different linear plotlines are accomplished.

And that's why Morrowind could use some more nonlinearity and that's why Oblivion was at best multilinear.

 

[Jeff Graw]

*sigh*

 

[Ismaul]

A true non linear experience should involve non linearity in the plotlines (through C&C) - not just in the order in which different linear plotlines are accomplished.

There's no such thing as a nonlinear plot-line. You can have all of the choices in the world but the plot is still going to be linear. Let me spell it out: Plotlines are by definition linear. In case you haven't noticed, line is the operative word. Non-linearity and C&C are two completely different thing, stop confusing them.

Oh god. Stop playing with the language, you know exactly what he means.

When he says plotline, he means plot. A plot/story can be non-linear. How? With choices and consequences. Make a choice, and the plot branches. Simple, yes? This is plot/story non-linearity. This is what we want for RPGs.

Now, you want to play the define a concept game? Here we go. Freedom to do whatever you want when you want, as we see in sandbox games, is not really non-linearity. What would be non-linear? What is linear usually is the plot/story. Freedom to do whatever you want when you want means no story related to the PC. Rather, we might have some background story of the setting. Therefore, the concept of linearity is not appropriate to define a sandbox. Freedom, in gameplay, seems fine to me.

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Each guild chapter has it's own leader. He or she gives you quests. For example, you can visit four fighters guilds and get a quest from each leader. You can then do those quests in any order you want.

But that only happened occasionally. I'd call it semi-linear.

 

[Jeff Graw]

Oh god. Stop playing with the language, you know exactly what he means.

When he says plotline, he means plot. A plot/story can be non-linear. How? With choices and consequences. Make a choice, and the plot branches. Simple, yes? This is plot/story non-linearity. This is what we want for RPGs.

Non-linearity in the story (branching) *is* choices and consequences. It doesn't make the game non-linear like roshan was suggesting though.

For example, in a game with C&C once you make a choice and feel the effects of that choice you can't go backwards or to the side, you can only ever keep going forward. That's linear, through and through. Again I must stress, non-linearity is the ability to pick and choose the order of things you want to do instead of having them set out for you in a predefined order. C&C on the other hand involves choices, and the consequences to those choices, but has *nothing* to do with the order you do things in.

Let's take Fallout. It's non-linear because you can visit different cities and do most things in the game in whatever order you want to. It has C&C because the choices you make when you play shape your character and the world around you. Oblivion is non-linear because it let's you put your own order to most things you do in the game, but it has little C&C.

I mean, for fucks sake people, If non-linearity and C&C were the same thing we wouldn't need two terms for the same thing. We would never say "Fallout is a non-linear game with C&C". Use your bloody head.

 

[Longshanks]

I'm with those who think SP TES may be in trouble if TESO is successful.There are too many similarities between SP TES and MMOs, I can't see an online TES seeming siginificantly different to the SP title.

A big world with plenty of boring quests, a strong focus on loot collection, exploring and grinding? TES SP already has all of these MMO hallmarks, the MMO would just be a bigger version.

I agree that having one on consoles and the other on PC is a possibility, but there is little reason the next generation of MMOs won't make there way onto consoles, so I consider this unlikely.

 

[Lingwe]

Let's take Fallout. It's non-linear because you can visit different cities and do most things in the game in whatever order you want to. It has C&C because the choices you make when you play shape your character and the world around you. Oblivion is non-linear because it let's you put your own order to most things you do in the game, but it has little C&C.

Jeff Graw, you might want to learn the difference between non-linearity (in which the quest has branching paths) and sandbox play (in which you choose the order in which you perform your quests) before you start spewing shit like that.

 

[Sir_Brennus]

Because Oblivion is going to be a huge influence for future RPG makers

*cough*two worlds*cough*

Repeating lies won't make them more true.

Want an example: Tell me how you could work your way up in both the Skarga Clan faction AND house Skeldon faction at the same time and to the top in Two Worlds?

You can't answer this, because there is no such thing in Two Worlds, but it is a major reality for all factions in crappy Oblivion. TW had c&c - TES4 did not have them.

IF you look for inspirations for TW look elswhere: Diablo (H&S combat), Gothic 3 (gfx), Gothic 2 (open world)... equals what TW was from the beginning: Sacred in 3D.

No fucking Oblivion clone.

 

[Jeff Graw]

Lingwe, I've already explained my position fully, which is more than I can say of your attempt -- explain your logic, don't just state your opinion.

 

[Longshanks]

Let's take Fallout. It's non-linear because you can visit different cities and do most things in the game in whatever order you want to. It has C&C because the choices you make when you play shape your character and the world around you. Oblivion is non-linear because it let's you put your own order to most things you do in the game, but it has little C&C.

I mean, for fucks sake people, If non-linearity and C&C were the same thing we wouldn't need two terms for the same thing. We would never say "Fallout is a non-linear game with C&C". Use your bloody head.

Non-linearity is very much about being able to make choices, and is only meaningful if these choices have consequences. I see choosing the order of side quests (Oblivion) as a weak, and very common form of non-linearity (though even this is all about choices, though with small consequence, so your claim that choices are not non-linearity is rather strange).

For me, in basic terms, non-linearity in an RPG means being able to do different things (quests, NPC interactions), in different ways (persuasion, combat, thieving) on different playthroughs.

Using this basic definition, Oblivion allows you to choose the order you do side quests, you can however complete them all in one playthrough. All that will be different on your next playthrough will be the order you complete the side quests. This is because there are no choices to be made in the main quest, or in each side quest line (bar a few very minor exceptions). Oblivion's main story is strictly linear, it is always the same sequences of A-B-C-D ... every time you play.

Contrast with Fallout, where there are many choices to be made, both in which quests/interactions you get and in how your character deals with them. Fallout forces one NPC interaction and one or two quests, the player has many choices in how they get to the end.

So, Oblivion has same sequence of events (long line of NPC interactions and quests) in main story every time, choice in order of side quests (with no mutual exclusivity). Very weak non-linearity.

Fallout has choice in order, as well as which main story quests/interactions you get, same goes for the side quests (because of mutual exclusivity, not all are available in one playthrough). Very strong non-linearity.