Talk:The Elder Scrolls Online/Archive 1

Archive 1

First

"It is a part of the The Elder Scrolls video game franchise, of which it is the first multiplayer installment." The Elder Scrolls Adventures: Redguard was released in 1998, and had multiplayer. 78.82.44.253 (talk) 06:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Also there was an Oblivion Online that was last time i checked in an on and off development by fans. GO Redguard!! =). (CaptianNemo (talk) 20:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC))

first offical game with Multiplayer features. fan made mods do not count/should not count for it. also anything prior was just sharing same cell and basic combat this is fully multiplayer, i.e can be anywhere doing anything away from another player. though TBH i am worried about it. if it's to locked down it looses all the customisation and changing options that made elderscrolls good but if its to open for anything than its a griefers dream. and thats not saying anyhting that the modding community is what makes elderscrolls. can not wait for more info to be avaliable to see if it remains true to previous games engines or if its another cut and dry mmo based on everquest.152.91.9.153 (talk) 03:07, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

No, Battlespire was multiplayer for sure and Redguard did have a mutliplayer feature. Similiar to any other multiplayer feature from Halo to Champions of Norath. Just because they shared the same map doesn't mean it wasn't multiplayer. That's like saying Need For Speed or Madden '13 can't be multiplayer. This should correctly say "The First MMO" in the ES franchise or, as it says now, the first open-ended (though one could kind of argue Battlespire was a bit open ended, I wouldn't). 98.198.85.83 (talk) 21:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

factions

anyone else think the factions are a bit odd?

nord, dunmer and argonians as one faction? these races are as diffrent as it gets and barely get along in the media. how/why would they team together? the altmer faction makes sense except for kahjit. the slave race with heavy magic users? move the bretons to them and have the orcs, argonians and kahjit as a faction and then put the nords, redguard and imps as one faction of the true empire.

i may be letting to much morrowind get involved as well as the skyrim racialness but it just seems a bit odd. hope the info we have was just beta and not the final data152.91.9.153 (talk) 03:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM, but I think the idea is that these are former adversaries joining forces to fight a common enemy. The factions also seem to correspond to three broad geographic areas of Tamriel, with the Ebonheart Pact representing the Eastern provinces and adjacent Skryim, the Aldmeri Dominion representing the southwestern provinces, and the Daggerfall Covenant representing the northwest. I notice Imperials aren't affiliated with any faction; I guess they're stuck in the middle both geographically and politically. --BDD (talk) 19:42, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Here are quotes from the UESP:

"The Aldmeri Dominion is one of the three joinable factions warring against the Empire. The crest of the Aldmeri Dominion is an eagle, and its color is yellow. It consists of the Altmer of Summerset Isles, the Bosmer of Valenwood, and the Khajiit of Elsweyr. The alliance is a nascent empire that rules its holdings with an iron fist. Led by Queen Ayrenn with Elden Root as its capital, the Dominion seeks to reestablish Elven dominance over Tamriel in order to protect it from the carelessness of the younger races."

"The Daggerfall Covenant is one of the three joinable factions warring against the Empire and each other. The crest of the Daggerfall Covenant is a lion, and its color is blue. It consists of the Bretons and the Orcs of High Rock, and the Redguards of Hammerfell. The alliance is an egalitarian democratic association which uses its military might to secure lucrative trade routes. Led by High King Emeric of Wayrest, the Covenant seeks to capture the Ruby Throne in order to restore the Second Empire and return stability to Tamriel."

"The Ebonheart Pact is one of the three joinable factions warring against the Empire. The crest of the Ebonheart Pact is a dragon, and its color is red. It consists of the Dunmer of Morrowind, the Nords of Skyrim and the Argonians of Black Marsh. The alliance was reluctantly formed out of necessity; despite the three warlike races' ancestral hatred for each other, they recognised the threat posed by their unified enemies and banded together to protect their borders. Led by Jorunn the Skald-King, the Pact seeks to defeat the Empire and preserve the independence of its homelands."

--121.73.169.108 (talk) 02:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

if thats a sourced quote may be worth while adding to the setting section of the article. better than saying we have some faction with some races in it. a bit of back story detail to flesh it out looks nice. i would add it but wikipedia coding is confusing, to many eyes you know. if i can work it out will try to add else can someone dump it in with a source.152.91.9.153 (talk) 02:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Nope, they make perfect sense to me. Nords, Dunmer, and Argonians set aside their distrust for a common goal. Bretons and Orcs reach a treaty, and Redguards offer to assist. Altmer and Bosmer usually work together, and their history with the Khajiit is well-documented as well. VycDarkshadow (talk) 01:01, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

ESO =/= WoW A metal shard (talk) 14:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the markets for the two games are going to overlap much. ESO shows its roots in single-player gaming by being individual-oriented. Most of the game can be done alone or in a group of two to four people. The visual styles are also quite distinct; ESO is highly detailed, and in my opinion very beautiful. There's a lot of "just wander around" space devoted to nothing in particular, but possibly holding something of interest. By far the best way to play it is the same way you'd play an ES single-player game: forget the main quest for long periods of time and go see what's over the next hill. It's nearly always both interesting and rewarding. 174.6.51.17 (talk) 21:44, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Release Date

On the main page, it says Early 2013 but when we check the references, it doesn't mention anything about early or late 2013, just 2013. Perhaps we should clarify or find new references? Alexj25 (talk) 06:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

4/4/14 for PC/Mac, June 2014 for PS4/XBox One. VycDarkshadow (talk) 01:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

gameplay

Article is suspiciously light on what the gameplay is like. "massively multiplayer role-playing video game" is awfully vague. First person? Third person? Murder sim? Social game? Gameplay similar to other games in the series? These things matter. Ikiwksu (talk) 06:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

They do, but as signups for the closed Beta have only just opened this week, and is covered by an NDA, many of these details aren't fully known yet. -- ferret (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The NDA was lifted for the last beta session, Feb 28-Mar 2. You can play in either first person or third person. I found the atmosphere quite reminiscent of other Elder Scrolls games, but many would disagree. I think at least some of those who disagree are simply playing the game in the wrong way. You cannot be too linear in any ES game; rush to the exit and you'll miss most of the show. If you go slowly, inquire a lot, and explore, the game will seem Elder Scrolls; if you dash through, it will be more like a generic MMO. It is an extremely beautiful game visually, provided you max out the graphics settings (you don't need an ultra high end computer to do this; an off the shelf gaming rig is powerful enough), but this may be giving the developers some problems in keeping it running smoothly. The player models are also exceptional in their quality and the degree of control you have over crafting them, except that thin clothing is not bumpmapped, making it sometimes look painted on. At any rate, Skyrim's ugly elves are a thing of the past -- unless you actually want an ugly elf. Crafting has become much more complex, but also more diverse and interesting. Alchemy is no longer the easy road to vast riches that it was in Skyrim, since alchemy ingredients are much harder to find. Some Morrowind features that people have missed over the last two ES games have been revived, such as drag and drop for weapons and apparel and a display that shows what you are wearing and equipped with. (No more absent-mindedly wandering out naked as in Skyrim). The medium armor class and pauldrons are back too. Most of ESO can be played single-player or with one or two companions. I think it will appeal to former ES games players but not to the sort of person who would like WoW, which seems much more group-oriented and social. 174.6.51.17 (talk) 21:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Release date "Spring 2014" source?

References 1 and 2 state as release date 2013. Reference 1 (Gameinformer.com) says "The Elder Scrolls Online is scheduled to come out in 2013 for both PC and Macintosh." and reference 2 (Gamasutra.com) states "Bethesda Softworks will publish The Elder Scrolls Online in North America, Europe, and Japan next year for Windows and Macintosh-based PCs." - the article was written in 2012 so according to them (Gamasutra.com) the release date would be in 2013. We need an updated source for the purported release date of Spring 2014 or otherwise the release date is still 2013.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.237.223 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 6 July 2013

 Done Blackberry Sorbet (talk • contribs) 12:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Reader feedback: i would like to know ( and i...

75.107.56.83 posted this comment on November 10, 2013 (view all feedback).

i would like to know ( and i know it sounds stupid) if the Elder Scrolls Online have an offline mode, because i have bad internet but i love Elder Scrolls.

Any thoughts? I highly doubt it. MMORPGs generally require you to be connected to the internet at all times when playing, especially ones where you pay a monthly fee. Amd9012 (talk) 14:22, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I have marked the feedback as "resolved" and added a line to the article clarifying that ESO has no offline mode (referenced to Bethesda Softworks' support page.) Blackberry Sorbet (talk • contribs) 12:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Reader feedback: Price, requirements, develop...

Has not been released yet. Can't release what hasn't been decided. VycDarkshadow (talk) 01:03, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Reader feedback: Needs a gameplay section.

Gameplay is still in progress, and new things are being added, so nothing can be released yet. Hence the "betas". VycDarkshadow (talk) 01:03, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

fraud at early acess

early acess was suposed to give 3 days o early access but : 1st 4,5 GB of data had to be downloaded at 170 kb/s cause the servers didn t give more.. so 1st day meant 12 hours of download before the game worked.. most people don t have even 3 hours to play

therefore the 1st day is gone

2nd day playable till 23 :00 when the server went down for whatever

no playing possible

2nd day 1/3 gone

3d day.. 1st goto load some stuff at 170 kb/s 750 mb at 170 kb/s measns 2 hours lost i paid for

and then the prepaid day ends at 20 : 00 the day ends at 24:00 they stole 4 hours i paid for

in the end the 3 days early access come down to 24 hours = 1 day... thats fraud — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.188.172 (talk) 21:00, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

This is pretty typical in any MMO launch, but unless you have a reliable source detailing the events, we can't consider adding it to the article. -- ferret (talk) 21:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

There were definitely some issues during the early access period, and as a result the free playtime was extended past the official launch through 6 April at 08:00 EDT, though you could continue to play past that time so long as you didn't log out.Noderaser (talk) 09:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

"Generally favorable reviews" is inadequate

When the article says it receives "generally favorable reviews", it's being misleading about the nature of the game's reception.

Where do those words come from? No human review. They're assigned by a computer. Metacritic automatically assigns a verbal description to correspond with certain score ranges. ("Universal acclaim" for ratings over 90, for example.) For the 78/100 that ESO has, the tag is "generally favorable reviews."

But we shouldn't just uncritically import Metacritic's automated tag that's applied to every game with a certain score as if it were a human evaluation of the game that deserves to be the best summary of this particular game's reception.

If we're going to be using GameRanking and Metacritic rankings as the key metric of a game's reception on Wikipedia, it makes good sense to compare those rankings to comparable games to get a true sense of its reception in the community.

There are two key comparisons that can be made for ESO: Comparisons to the previous games in the series. Comparisons to previous MMORPGs.

The reason this game is notable is because it takes one of the most successful single-player, first-person RPG franchises in history (The Elder Scrolls) and combines it with the MMORPG platform owned by another RPG titan, World of Warcraft. It's a huge-budget game with major intellectual property behind it, and expectations are high.

In that context, a 78/100 isn't just "generally favorable". It's also 15 points lower than the previous games in the series. 13 points lower than WoW. And 7-10 points lower than similar MMORPG offerings in recent years.

People didn't like how I wrote the comparison in the article. That's fine. Write it your ways. But we need some context for these numbers to communicate an accurate summary of the game's reception. comment added by Arthegall (talk • contribs) 14:16, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

There are a few issues with this. First, deciding to compare this game with previous games in the series or other games in the genre is flat out original research. We can only make such comparisons if they are made in reliable third party sources. Look at it this way to get some perspective. We don't do that type of comparison for every game in every series in every genre. What makes this different? I would suggest it is a personal bias. Second "generally favorable" is accurate for a rating of 78/100. Those ratings are absolute, not relative. Else we could do the same thing if three games in a series scored 99s, and the fourth scored "only" 90. —Tourchiest ^talk_edits 14:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Why don't we offer comparisons? I would say we should. If you have the time and interest, have at it! I would say it's no more "original research" than looking up the game's own numbers in the first place. If we're not making original conclusions, how is this OR? How many genres of art or athletic endeavors have their top ten or top 100 list on Wiki? It's a common and valuable contribution of the platform. Arthegall (talk • contribs) 17:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

We don't offer comparisons because it's OR, it's synthesis. Why not compare it to anything at all? I could write dozens of paragraphs noting the games that have a better rating. Then, I could write dozens more about the games with worse ratings. It's pure synthesis. If you have a reliable source that specifically compares ESO to previous TES games, or to other MMOs, then that can be included in the reception. Anything else is synthesis and an attempt to inject bias. -- ferret (talk) 17:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Gamespot and Eurogamer both gave it 6/10 these scores should be put into the article. 74.103.250.78 (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Does wikipedia have articles on what makes a really good non-wikipedia encyclopedia article? Most of them have biases and opinions and points of view, but they employ them in service of some truth. You walk away enlightened on the subject. If a person is not fluent in the content of the article, so that he/she is an expert of sorts, they shouldn't really write the article. You aren't going to go to the top critics and hear that ESO was well received. It wasn't. The consensus is that it failed to live up to expectations but with some effort it may be salvaged, but the signs of that having happened or soon to be happening haven't materialized. You write the article to fit that truth, even if it is original synthesis. Damn. wikipedia is off in cul-de-sac, and yet they want funding for what it has become? It was much better in the old days. The professionalism of wikipedia gives us a bad professional encyclopedia AND a bad wiki. It at least used to be a good wiki. 2605:6000:1800:6D:E5F2:C1D:84EC:AB9 (talk) 06:48, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2014

This game did not receive generally positive reviews. That is just propaganda. This game received mixed reviews at best. The typical standard of grading games these days is much like school: anything in the 70s or 7s is a C. A C is not "generally positive"... it's fair. It's neither good nor bad. It's mixed, which is exactly what Elder Scrolls Online's reception was. Heck, very prestigious sites like Eurogamer and Gamespot(which were disregarded for the purposes of positive spin, I imagine) have given the game a 6 - if that's not a mixed reception, I don't know what is.

65.211.104.194 (talk) 15:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I have closed this request only on the grounds that it does not contain a specific request to change the article; it only contains one user's opinion about the current content of the article. I have no comment one way or the other on the merits of the claims made. The {{edit semi-protected}} tag should only be used if you have a specific request in the form of "change X to Y". "Add X before/after Y" or "delete X" are also acceptable. Feel free to reopen this request if you have a request in the required form, but please ensure you include reliable sources to back any claims made. Thank you. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 19:36, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

The above rejoinder is why people hate wikipedia. I am no Rhodes Scholar (no wait, actually I AM) but it is clear to me that the fellow asked that the data presented for "reception" be summed up with the words "fair", "mixed" rather than "generally positive". He gave reliable sources: Eurogamer and Gamespot - games are a subject where endowed professorships are not reliable sources and pop culture outlets are. Wrap your head around that. If you don't know enough to edit the article, pass it along to someone who does. In the old days there was no priesthood ruling over trivial things like this, it was saved for the heavy-hitting articles and even then used sparingly.2605:6000:1800:6D:E5F2:C1D:84EC:AB9 (talk) 06:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

What exactly are you trying to address? The article currently says mixed, and has for sometime. -- ferret (talk) 15:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

When the edit request was made, the article still said "generally positive". The second response is less trying to fix the article (which was changed a few days later), but more to question the edit request's denial. – Bellum (talk) (contribs) 15:21, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Well.. Edit requests are often reviewed and answered by people not directly familiar with the article or even the field. It has a clear format of change x to y, based on sources. Those were lacking in the original request. The response from those patrolling edit requests is valid, and included an invitation to reopen the request with sources. -- ferret (talk) 15:38, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

PlayStation Plus

So is it requrired to have PS+ to play or not? I have read several articles saying you do not have to pay the subscription and do not need PS+, while also read the same ammount that said you do need PS+. Including this one; http://blog.us.playstation.com/2015/01/21/the-elder-scrolls-online-tamriel-unlimited-launches-june-9th/.

Does anyone have anything actually fairly recent that says either or? Did they change their mind and it has to have PS+? Because whatver it is, needs to be said in article. 92.237.149.249 (talk) 16:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Please consider the guidelines at WP:NOTFORUM: "bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles. Talk pages are not for general discussion about the subject of the article, nor are they a help desk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance." -- Pemilligan (talk) 00:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Morrowind

I updated the Morrowind expansion to convert it from an announced release to a past release. I also moved it from its own chapter section to the dlc section, which I updated to better clarify the distinction. In terms of storytelling in the game the chapter flows with the DLC’s in the order of release, so the old layout was a bit confusing. Davey1107 (talk) 23:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Abandoned user draft User:Tehginger/sandbox

User:Tehginger/sandbox is a former user's only contribution to Wikipedia and appears to have never been combined into the live article. Please would an interested editor assess whether any of it is useful, and if so merge it here? Please leave a note here when done. – Fayenatic London 06:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I looked through the mentioned sandbox, and there seems to be nothing that is not already in the article. JML1148 (talk) 04:07, 17 November 2021 (UTC)