The Elder Scrolls Online Could Be Heading Towards Disaster

Hardcore Gamer: There are few RPGs that carry the weight of The Elder Scrolls’ title. Since the release of Morrowind in 2002, the series has been analogous with greatness, producing impressive sales numbers and amounting millions of fans worldwide. It’s strange, then, that even the loyalist of supporters expect Zenimax’s MMO debut to crash and burn. Or is it?

[-Foxtrot]

If it wasn't called Elder Scrolls this would be dead on arrival.

Well at least they don't have an excuse to put online of any form in the main Elder Scrolls games since people now have an MMO.

[leahcim]

I am totally agree with you and the article.

[H0RSE]

You could also argue that they don't have an excuse *not to* put MP in future releases because of the MMO. There are many people who simply want co-op integrated into the TES games, not the idea of a full on MMO. Also, adding MP functionality into an otherwise single player ES game, would not necessitate a monthly fee.

That being said, It is likely this game will eventually go f2p. Seems that virtually every MMO that comes onto the market, eventually goes f2p. WoW apparently has a vaccine for this epidemic...

[-Foxtrot]

Those "many" people who want co-op in Elder Scrolls or even Fallout obviously don't like the games for what they are. We don't get many single player only games these days and people like them want to ruin that....why so they can show off to their friends for like a few weeks, get bored and move onto another co-op/multiplayer game while the rest of us are left with a half arsed single player game.

It's Bethesda, they can't even do a single player open world game without bugs do you really want most of their dev time to go onto adding co-op when that time could be wasted on doing something better.

So yeah...sorry but if people want co-op I'd say go somewhere else. You don't get people saying something like "Oh I wish they focused on single player" about a game built up around co-op like Borderlands or L4D.

[yezz]

"There are many people who simply want co-op integrated into the TES games, not the idea of a full on MMO."

Exactly. While this game doesn't interest me one bit, I would kill to have a Skyrim type of game with even 2 player co-op!!

[joab777]

This why they have to take the route of swtor and dcuo. Establish a base, grab revenue and then eventually go f2p...with a paid sub for dedicated players. This is the new route. Its unfortunate b/c for the many that will play for yrs...often $15 a month is much cheaper than the forced microtransactions that will b put in place. Its all about endgame content though. If its action oriented with decent leveling and at least 8 months of endgame content...it will b good to go. And the best part is that if it is supoorted and the team remains large and dedicated, we could see stream of content coming. I have my fingers crossed and I'm not worried about the limited map b/c that the allure...constantly getting to see more of tamriel as the yrs pass.

[thekhurg]

@Foxtrot

I'd have agreed but you said Bethesda was developing, which they aren't. It's Zenimax Online, Bethesda is just a publisher.

[tee_bag242]

The thing is there aren't any other open world games like the elder scrolls where you can adventure around and discover with a few buddies.
Telling people to play Borderlands is stupid, it's a terrible substitute and is far from open.
It's a shame because MMO's generally suck and have watered down physics and rubbish hit detection. I don't want to this to flop but the odds are against it.
Is rather have seen a demon souls type coop.

[-Foxtrot]

@tee_bag242

"The thing is there aren't any other open world games like the elder scrolls where you can adventure around and discover with a few buddies."

...and

Then ask developers for one with co-op, don't try and ruin ES/Fallout for other people by wanting Bethesda to tack it on the game when you know for a fact Bethesda wouldn't be able to do it right and would decrease the quality of the game in general.

"Telling people to play Borderlands is stupid, it's a terrible substitute and is far from open."

It's closest thing to one though....fine, go and play Two Worlds then. Open World and has co-op or what about Dark Souls...

[H0RSE]

@Foxtrot

You offering very little to your argument other than conjecture and theories. You state your claims of Bethesda not being able to "handle" adding co-op to a game, as facts, yet use their single player only games as evidence. You talk about the MMO as if it has been out for awhile and you "know" how it's going to end up. And then you take things out of context.

"We don't get many single player only games these days and people like them want to ruin that"

- Define "ruin." How exactly would co-op ruin anything. If it is a concern of lack of content or lore or story, they are developing an MMO, whose selling points are based around these things. Your rants just sound like the game would be ruined simply because there is another human player occupying the world. Your concerns are derived from things that *could* happen, not *will* happen, and you are willing to promote alieniating a portion of the playerbase, just so you can continue to enjoy games the way you personally like them.

"do you really want most of their dev time to go onto adding co-op when that time could be wasted on doing something better."

- no one claimed for Bethesda to dedicate "most of their time" to a co-op feature. That's your fear talking, trying to convince others that it would result in disaster.

"So yeah...sorry but if people want co-op I'd say go somewhere else."

- And if you want to player single player game without the concern of it being "ruined" by adding in co-op options, go play solitaire..

The real question is, "why not just add co-op?" Your fears of co-op "ruining" the game, can be addressed in a couple ways

1) Offer it as DLC - by doing it this way, Bethesda can craft the single player game they want without distraction, and then work on co-op functionality later. MP functionality has already been added to a number of Bethesda titles, including Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, and Fallout 3, through the method of adding it in to the single player player component, which is what a DLC would do.

2) Outsource the MP component - Bethesda could "lighten the load" of the development, by bringing in an outside team to help with the MP aspect. Have them working with Bethesda throughout development but concentrating their efforts on one aspect - Bethesda could also just hire more people.

Something to consider is that adding co-op to TES is not like adding SP to Battlefield. It isn't it's own feature separate from the rest of the game. It is adding functionality/features to the already existing game, so any resources out into developing the co-op aspect wouldn't really really detract from the single player, since it is essentially all the same thing.

Bethesda is also in a favorable situation where the develop and produce their own games, so the could essentially take all the time they needed for something like this to work, rather than being hassled by time constrained issued by publishers.

You are conducting yourself like a stubborn purist. A player who doesn't want anyone to mess with his "precious SP game" in fears that they might mess it up, but not "mess it up" in terms of actually breaking the game, only in terms where the aspect you enjoy *might* be compromised, and it is merely the notion of this *might* that has you spouting off like a raging derelict. Your point of view is extremely selfish and close-minded.

[dedicatedtogamers]

They're making a classic mistake: trying to leverage the name to get sales. Many dead/dying MMOs went down that path. LotR, The Matrix Online, SW: Old Republic, etc.

TBH, I think it will flop hard. Bethesda isn't known for their quality control or post-launch support, so what will happen when ESO launches and the mod community isn't there to pick up Bethesda's pieces?

[KrisButtar]

@Foxtrot

Why are you so against co-op in an TES game?

The only difference I can see with having co-op in a TES game would be your follower would be your friend instead of some stupid A.I. What is so bad about that? It doesn't change the game and if you wanted to play alone, you could play alone.

Edit: I don't mind if you PM me :)

[-Foxtrot]

Why? I've said many times why, hell I pretty much explain it in each post so people can get it through there thick skulls...no offence but some people keep asking for it and they never think about it logically

It's Bethesda...BETHESDA, the guys who's games are always bug ridden, where they spend after launch on fixing those bugs. It takes a lot to create a massive open world game like the ES so it's not all bad but imagine if they wasted their time on Co-op...something WHICH IS NOT easy to do like many people think. It would waste dev time and resources on co-op and the single player would be lacking because of it, in that time they spend on co-op those team members doing it could be spending their time on 4-6+ missions for the single player or fixing the single player bugs.

Then you have to think after the game, instead of focusing on the game breaking single player bugs they'll focus on co-op ones, you know how long it takes then to fix single player bugs with co-op it will be twice as worst.

Not to mention DLC could take longer because of this and maybe even will end up involving co-op only DLC instead, again wasting even more time when they could be doing main single player DLC.

You get where I'm going with this, some developers just aren't that good to do both things, Rockstar are an amazing developer and they couldn't even pull off their online correctly. Bethesda do great single player games, why mess with that just because you want to show off to your friend. Just talk to them about it next time you see them, you don't have to go online and show them or do missions with them, there's plenty of other games out there

I'm just really sick of single player games decreasing in quality because of the feature. I don't mind games built up around co-op, it's just when it's added where it's not needed. As I've said if your that arsed about co-op you mustn't like the game for what it really is....it's your story, not you and everyone else.

In the end those people wanting it will get a half arsed co-op game and a half arsed single player. They'll go on it for a while then come off it once the hype wears off and single player ES fans will be left with a crappy single player.

It's all about common sense.

@Below - MysticStrummer

"The only realistic argument"

Only realistic argument...they are all pretty realistic.

[MysticStrummer]

I agree with you completely. I'd much rather be able to play Skyrim with 1-3 friends than have this MMO, though I would play ESO if there was no subscription.

The only realistic argument against ES co-op is that Bethesda can't technically handle making a single player version so there's no way they'd be able to pull off co-op.

@Foxtrot - They already give you the option of have followers. Co-op would just make them human instead of a bad immersion breaking AI. I've played all the ES games and the premise of a lone foretold hero is so tired, I don't even pay attention to it anymore. Nothing would stop you from playing the game the way you wanted to play it. You'd just be able to meet up with a friend in the tavern and set out to explore together if you so desired. I agree that Bethesda can't handle it, but the rest of your arguments don't make sense to me. It would be great to play the warrior who has a thief friend that can disarm traps and pick locks, or a mage friend who can charm animals. TES is the closest thing to a video gaming version of Dungeons and Dragons that there is except for one thing, and that is no friends to play with.

[-Foxtrot]

@MysticStrummer

"They already give you the option of have followers. Co-op would just make them human instead of a bad immersion breaking AI"

Oh my god do you actually think it's that easy, see this is the problem you think it's so easy to add it. It's not just a few buttons here and there to switch the AI to other people from other Xbox/Playstations to take their place, it needs a lot of planning to get everything right and I'm guessing it would be to be built up not just switching the AI to player controlled.

"I've played all the ES games and the premise of a lone foretold hero is so tired, I don't even pay attention to it anymore."

Then thats your fault, you've grown tired of the series, why want co-op to ruin it for others who arn't tired of it. The main point of the game is that YOUR the hero, it's YOUR story.

"Nothing would stop you from playing the game the way you wanted to play it. You'd just be able to meet up with a friend in the tavern and set out to explore together if you so desired."

<Sigh>

Are you kidding, as I've just said it would stop me because the game will most likely end up being half arsed or have more game breaking bugs because they spent most of their time on co-op during development. Did you just ignore my points above. If that was the case I wouldn't have a problem with it and this conversation wouldn't be taking place.

"but the rest of your arguments don't make sense to me"

How come...

So wanting the game to be what it's always been and keeping it from going down hill are bad points. Games which don't need co-op change for the worst, like co-op in horror games for example (RE5/DS3 for example)

"It would be great to play the warrior who has a thief friend that can disarm traps and pick locks, or a mage friend who can charm animals"

Then that would just make things too easy, the whole point of picking your class is to manage the advantages and disadvantages of it. Having your friends do other things you can't do is spoiling the fun at the end of the day.

"TES is the closest thing to a video gaming version of Dungeons and Dragons that there is except for one thing, and that is no friends to play with."

Then you know what you and other co-op fanatics should do, ask another developer or even Bethesda to make a RPG built up around co-op. Go play Two Worlds if your that bothered.

Seriously I feel like wanting this feature is clouding your judgement of the consequences...the cons outweigh the pros on this by a lot. There is no point in it.

[thekhurg]

@foxtrot

You're wrong again - it's not Bethesda that's developing this game, it's Zenimax Online.

[-Foxtrot]

@thekhurg

What planet are you living on

We're talking about the MAIN Elder Scrolls games in our comments...not the MMO.

You've done this twice (your comment above)

[KrisButtar]

@Foxtrot

The TES games are my most cherished games, same with my friends and we love how the story makes you out to be the hero but what is the difference if your follower is AI controlled or human controlled? You are still the hero. You come across as you think that would be taken away, we are not talking about having 2 Dragonborns in Skyrim for example. I know we would not use co-op a whole lot but we would rather that than a bunch of followers, most of which are useless ones or the same

Why do you think they would have to build the game from the ground up? I mean they already have followers in game, now if they didn't have followers at all I think adding co-op would be pretty difficult but its only a matter of choice where the commands come from, as in AI or another player.

[tee_bag242]

@ KrisButter

EXACTLY

@ Foxtrot

Nothing you've said is common sense. Nothing I hate more than TES know it all's/ phony purists like yourself who say they don't want online but have never honestly followed the series.
Obviously you've never heard of An Elder Scrolls Legend: Battlespire which had coop back in 1997.
Now what do you have do say about your broken logic?! It's not as hard as you make it out to be. ITS BEEN DONE 17 YEARS AGO SON !
No offense, but seriously mate. Don't throw stones in glass houses!!

[-Foxtrot]

@KrisButtar

"Why do you think they would have to build the game from the ground up?"

Because tacking it into a single player game is never good....it never works and ruins the overall game. As I said it's not that easy adding it...something you guys are still ignoring.

They don't just change an AI follower to player controlled, it's not that simple....as I've said countless times.

@tee_bag242

Lol....oh dear where to begin

"Obviously you've never heard of An Elder Scrolls Legend: Battlespire which had coop back in 1997."

Course I have...and my "common sense" still stands because

1) That game was NOT a main series Elder Scrolls game

and

2) It was crap compared to the main games, which proves my points about co-op in these games.

"No offense, but seriously mate. Don't throw stones in glass houses!!"

Maybe you should take your own advice mate

Oh and by the way. next time your going to use an example to "break my logic" please have a good example, not something which actually futhers my point.

No good can come from co-op and that game kind of proves it. Thanks for that though, I totally forgot about that game

[ShinMaster]

Honestly, co-op in an Elder Scrolls game ala Borderlands 2 would be great.

Borderlands 1 was definitely best as a co-op game because the game felt dead playing it solo. However, Borderlands 2 was a lot better as a single-player game.

[ChaosKnight]

Reminds me of Star Wars: The Old Republic.

[JasonKCK]

Too expensive and MMO's are my thing.

[hankmoody]

Signed up for the beta, so I'm hoping to get some hands on time with it. My main turnoff to it at this point is the monthly subscription fee.

[Ricegum]

I don't think it'll be a disaster, but I don't think they'll charge what they're charging for too long. I mean, I wouldn't mind paying, but that is just a bit too much each month.

[KrisButtar]

I recently seen some beta footage and I have to say I am not impressed. People are waiting for the chest to spawn in the middle of a dungeon, so you have no luck of grabbing that chest and move further into the next part of the dungeon and guess what, more people waiting for the next chest to spawn treasure. Chests just say empty unless you decide to wait up to 15mins. That doesn't feel like a TES game to me.

[tee_bag242]

Yep that sounds crap. I hope they get this game right but I seriously have my doubts. They should have done coop or a limited single player online coop like dark souls. MMO engines are always dodgy.

[KrisButtar]

There are other things that bothered me, there is now a level requirement for weapons and armor, so if you happen to get a lucky score and get some great gear you can't wear it until you reach the X level. There is a chance monsters will spawn on you if your running a few mins behind the last guy who killed them. Only NPCs I noticed were quest givers, so no populated towns like Whiterun from what I seen.

My friends and I want coop as well but we think that this game has a lot more MMO feeling in it then a TES game. Its more like a MMO with Elder Scrolls paint on it in my opinion since I have seen the Beta

[Gh05t]

I was one of the unlucky ones who got the beta during the same weekend XBOX1 was released. Needless to say I didn't play it as much as I would have liked but I did play long enough to form some opinions.

I won't share everything I think about it but if I could sum it all up in one sentance.

Like a square wheel trying to roll down a hill.

It will get there but it's far from perfect or even fun and there already more MMO games that are more fun off the bat.

I started the series the day morrowind hit the xbox and I have to say to me it ruins the whole concept.

[Lukebb91]

Elder scrolls fans did want to play with friends but not at this level. Its unfortunate that everything i have heard about this game is bad, wont stop me buying it... the subscription will though i will probably only pay for a couple of months. I see it as being just like gta online (i know they are completely different) over hyped, buggy and repetitive.

[Phils_Libra]

If they go with a payment setup alike Guild Wars 2, as in 'buy the game at $60 and play for free', ESO will sell like gangbusters. They can recoup the additional development costs through DLC content released later. I'd probably buy it myself in that scenario. I love the Elder Scrolls series of single-player games, but I have never seen nor tried a game that justifies paying monthly to play, and my impressions thus far on ESO doesn't change that.

[JBSleek]

If you have never tried a game that has a monthly subscription how can you talk about them not being worth the money?

[Phils_Libra]

I am in the beta for ESO, so I have "tried" the game already; a few times already in fact. Same applies to Final Fantasy XIV, I got in the beta for that too, and alike ESO, it was mildly fun, but not worth a monthly subscription to me.

[Cyb3r]

This is probably the only Elder Scrolls game I wont buy

[iiorestesii]

People that like MMOs are weird. People that like Elder Scrolls are equally weird, myself among them. Good luck with the marriage. Honestly Id rather see another Elder Scroll after the graphically superior disappointment that was Skyrim. I think even a turn based Elder Scrolls would be more welcomed than this. I have to say though, the seiging of that castle at the end of the latest trailer makes this game test worthy via game fly at the very least. Not much hope though.

[MadLad]

I have been calling this game trash since being given early access with a few others. From what I got back the opinion was, almost, wholly shared.
Once the beta came and was in people's hands, the general public agreed.
It was only then where I wasn't getting attacked by fans of the series.