The Elder Scrolls Online Relaunches on PC/Mac Today

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

The Elder Scrolls Online Relaunches on PC/Mac Today

<The Elder Scrolls Online has re-launched on PC and Mac today with fresh content, a new subtitle and a buy-to-play monetization model.

Back when The Elder Scrolls Online first launched, there were more than a few gamers left skeptical by its developer's decision to try and sell it as a subscription-based MMORPG in a world largely conquered by free-to-play games. Those skeptics wound up being pretty dang right. While the initial game had its fans and followers, many ignored it and Bethesda eventually made the decision to re-brand the game and switch over to a more appetizing buy-to-play model.

If you were one of the gamers holding out for that change to actually happen, your wait is over. As of today, ESO on PC and Mac is now officially The Elder Scrolls Online: Tamriel Unlimited. Gamers interested in jumping into it will merely need to purchase a copy of the game ($59.99), after which they'll have full and unlimited access to all of its content. This includes "six major content updates" added to the game after its initial launch. Players already owning copies of the original ESO will be automatically upgraded to Tamriel Unlimited.

While the paid-for game won't come with any required subscriptions, players willing to part with a bit more cash will have the option of purchasing an ESO Plus membership. Rewarding players with extra in-game cash, "exclusive character progression bonuses" and automatic DLC access, ESO Plus memberships are being offered in durations of 30, 90 and 180 days. ESO players who had previously had subscriptions will have the remaining time on their accounts automatically transferred into an ESO Plus membership.

The big question, of course, is whether or not The Elder Scrolls Online dropping subscriptions will be enough to entice gamers who had previously ignored it. Considering the continued popularity of The Elder Scrolls as a brand, we'll go on a limb and say that the game might still have a shot. There's also no telling how it will perform when it hits the PS4 and Xbox One later this year on June 9th.

Permalink

Check it out guys, it's a solid game that did not deserve most of the bad press that it got. It's now subscription free and now is a really good time to get into this game.

I HIGHLY recommend this game to anyone who is a big fan of the Elder Scrolls who doesn't mind a bit of MMO bullshit added to the mix. This is definitely MUCH more Elder Scrolls than WoW.

EDIT: Question to the Escapist staff if youre reading this- Will you be doing another review or revisiting your coverage of this game? Because a lot of things have changed since its initial launch and it is now a MUCH MUCH better and more polished game than it was. I think it's in your reader's best interests to do a revisit review if you weren't already planning to. Thanks!

Sometimes I wonder why more companies don't go with a buy-to-play model for online games. I mean, I get that they must have their reasons, but this model is bafflingly rare next to free-to-play and traditional subscriptions.

P.S. Thanks

Sight Unseen:
Check it out guys, it's a solid game that did not deserve most of the bad press that it got. It's now subscription free and now is a really good time to get into this game.

I HIGHLY recommend this game to anyone who is a big fan of the Elder Scrolls who doesn't mind a bit of MMO bullshit added to the mix. This is definitely MUCH more Elder Scrolls than WoW.

EDIT: Question to the Escapist staff if youre reading this- Will you be doing another review or revisiting your coverage of this game? Because a lot of things have changed since its initial launch and it is now a MUCH MUCH better and more polished game than it was. I think it's in your reader's best interests to do a revisit review if you weren't already planning to. Thanks!

The game itselfe might not have deserved the bad press, it was simply a mediocre MMO... a dime a dozen one. Didnt do anything particulary wrong.. but also did nothing particularly outstanding either.

What deserved all the bad press where the business practices of the dev and publisher.

The myriad of collectors editions, subscription fee where you HAD to enter a valid credit card before you could even access your free month that came with the game, ingame shop and such low money gain ingame that you where almost forced to buy a mount from said ingame store if you wanted a decent one (wich was vital in PvP)

They tried to nickel and dime their customers for what back then was merely a mediocre mmo experience that could be had by LOTRO, TOR, the secret world or any other of the many many high quality free to plays out there.

I bought it last month since buying it came with a month subscription anyway and I knew by the time it was up I wouldn't need it anymore.

My time playing it was...okay. The combat is so disappointing. It didn't need to be an MMO. It should have been what people wanted it to be: Online Skyrim (Or Elder Scrolls in general). It has no impact or flow, and it just feels really awkward. Skyrim certainly hasn't perfected first person sword combat, but it feels way more satisfying than TSO.

That being said, there's a lot to do. Crap tons of quest with full voiced dialogue, weapon and armor forging, and a sizable skill system will keep you occupied. It still suffers from feeling too much like busy work rather than an actual quest though.

Really though, I'm certain now that the Elder Scrolls formula doesn't work in an MMO setting. Just make the next main Elder Scrolls game co-op. I think that's what most people wanted anyway.

Karadalis:

The game itselfe might not have deserved the bad press, it was simply a mediocre MMO... a dime a dozen one. Didnt do anything particulary wrong.. but also did nothing particularly outstanding either.

Disagree with this. It's much more than "mediocre." It was unpolished at launch but the core of the game is solid, the world is GORGEOUS, the combat is well done and builds are varied and highly customiseable. I can go much longer about this but for the sake of brevity I'll stop there.

What deserved all the bad press where the business practices of the dev and publisher.

Ok, let's go through this one at a time.

The myriad of collectors editions

There were only two. The Imperial Edition and the Digital Imperial Edition (the digital only content of the imperial edition)

subscription fee where you HAD to enter a valid credit card before you could even access your free month that came with the game

There's nothing inherently wrong with subscription fees except that people have gotten spoiled and entitled after having free to play come to prominence. I was much happier paying a sub because I knew that everything in game I had to EARN. There were no shortcuts or pay to win. Everyone had equal access to everything.

As for your point about the credit card, that's pretty much industry standard. And once the game verified the card (by taking $1 and then returning it) you can cancel your sub and play your free month and not pay a dime for the sub. Nothing evil or shifty here.

ingame shop

Didn't exist until the update to free to play. Whoever told you there was an ingame shop was lying.

and such low money gain ingame that you where almost forced to buy a mount from said ingame store if you wanted a decent one (wich was vital in PvP)

Another lie from Angry Joe who didn't bother to play past the tutorial island. Once you get off the tutorial island the loot and gold drops increase significantly and you can easily buy a horse with gold earned in game before you hit level 20 (PVP unlocks at level 10, but you really aren't viable anyway until level 50+) For PVE a horse is nice, but not necessary because the world has enough wayshrines to quick travel to that you never have to spend too long running.

They tried to nickel and dime their customers for what back then was merely a mediocre mmo experience that could be had by LOTRO, TOR, the secret world or any other of the many many high quality free to plays out there.

Again I disagree. Rumours of Zenimax's "cash-grabbiness" are greatly exagerated, and the game is much better than most people gave it credit for. Most people watched Angry Joe's sham of a review and parroted his points exactly even though they are verifiably and unquestionably false.

I always giggle with the ESO threads and Sight Unseen defending the game to the point where it makes you think that he has to work for Zenimax for defending the game so vehemently.

OT: Bought the game at launch, played until level 40. Stiff and boring combat, quests are meh, not a real Elder Scrolls feeling. Can't hurt to try it out now that it's free, but I wouldn't have high hopes for a better game.

Seems pretty good. I might check it out when it gets to ps4.

Kotoriii:
I always giggle with the ESO threads and Sight Unseen defending the game to the point where it makes you think that he has to work for Zenimax for defending the game so vehemently.

OT: Bought the game at launch, played until level 40. Stiff and boring combat, quests are meh, not a real Elder Scrolls feeling. Can't hurt to try it out now that it's free, but I wouldn't have high hopes for a better game.

I am not affiliated with Zenimax or Bethesda in any way other than playing their games. I also shill Rock Band games without being affiliated with Harmonix!

Apart from saying once more that, like most of the internet, I fucking called it when it comes to the game going free to grind-I mean free to play.

To pull off a subscription based MMO these days you need something unique, that no one else has to offer, which is why WoW and Eve are the only ones who are able to pull it off, since everything else is either a clone of WoW or is offering something that a dozen other already free MMOs do. ESO was the later, with nothing in its arsenal that wasn't offered by other MMOs that cost less and often did it better.

Sight Unseen:

Karadalis:

[quote] ingame shop

Didn't exist until the update to free to play. Whoever told you there was an ingame shop was lying.

You are a blatant liar. There was a cash shop from day one and it sold mounts. It was even attached to a freaking hotkey.

As to the gold, unless you count 2 map transitions past picking your faction as the tutorial island then you are again intentionally misleading people as even 2 maps later you still got 2-3 gold drops from mobs when the game first launched.

Covarr:
Sometimes I wonder why more companies don't go with a buy-to-play model for online games. I mean, I get that they must have their reasons, but this model is bafflingly rare next to free-to-play and traditional subscriptions.

P.S. Thanks

For most MMO-like games they're based around constant content updates in order to keep players playing. Unfortunately for the customers, the content is also expensive enough to produce that they need to pay a decent amount for it, usually by subscription fee or selling the individual content. Plenty of online games don't really worry much about constant content, either because the content is easy enough to produce or rare enough to not matter much. D3 works as an online game because the content is so cheap, with the occasional expansion to sell, for example.

One price paid at the beginning for constant content always makes me look askance at it, as it means that the content is either cheap and thus not really worth buying anyway, or I've effectively paid for the equivalent of an early access game, where they sell me an incomplete game with promises of making the full bit of content later. Neither of those are outcomes I particularly enjoy.

snekadid:

Sight Unseen:

Karadalis:

[quote] ingame shop

Didn't exist until the update to free to play. Whoever told you there was an ingame shop was lying.

You are a blatant liar. There was a cash shop from day one and it sold mounts. It was even attached to a freaking hotkey.

As to the gold, unless you count 2 map transitions past picking your faction as the tutorial island then you are again intentionally misleading people as even 2 maps later you still got 2-3 gold drops from mobs when the game first launched.

You could buy A (as in one single) horse (the lowest quality horse in the game), or upgrade to the imperial edition. And it wasn't in game. It was buried on the website with a small "store" link on the launcher. Unless I'm completely ignorant of it after ~400 hours of gameplay there was not a "hotkey" or any other in game presence to this store. That is just patently untrue.

NOW there's a hot key to the crown store, but that only arrived with the transition for b2p.

As to the gold- the first 1-2 zones for each faction is the (optional) tutorial zone, meant to be played from levels 1-5. Once you leave those zones the drop quality increases significantly. To say otherwise is blatantly untrue. For example, in the Ebonheart Pact, Bleak Rock is for levels 1-4, and Bal Foyen is for 4-5. These are smaller zones with only 3 skyshards each and are designed to be easy to help newbies get the feel for the game. The first "real" zone is Stonefalls which is balanced for levels 1-15 and has 16 skyshards (mentioning to give an impression of the size of the zone.) This is where the proper "loot treadmill" (for lack of a better word) starts.

I understand if you disagree with me, but I haven't lied about anything that I said, and I'd be happy to talk to you if you want to discuss it maturely rather than dismissing me as a liar. I have played this game a lot, I know what I'm talking about most of the time.

Sub model still works and is the best model but what this game failed at and what nearly every new MMO fails at is the social aspect. These aspects like guilds and housing and enhanced interaction are what drive people to keep playing these types of games and they just cut it or think it can be added whenever and by then you've lost a lot of your players.

When I rolled in ESO on release the guild side of things were a mess, even the guild recruitment forum was a mash of EU/US and all 3 factions in one section, you had to troll through page after page looking and then since there was no Guild tags you had no idea what these guilds were like. Simple fact on release have an extensive and well presented guild section in game and people will play a lot longer, yet however obvious this is moronic dev's and publishers fail to do this and wonder why people fail to make a connection with the game and get bored after a few months.

May be willing to give this a shot now.

I do not agree with the re-release price tag of $59.99. That's (in my opinion) a AAA new title release price and this is not a AAA new release. Even if the game is free to play a $59.99 price tag for a game a year old seems a bit off. This could just be me being a cheap ass, but a price point for a year old MMO should probably be listed at something a little more reasonable. $29.99-39.99 feels a little more logical. Once again this is only my opinion of course and turns me off from purchasing.

Perhaps this is partly due to the console releases as well? Because technically that would be a brand new AAA new release, but still does not feel right.

StewShearer:
While the initial game had its fans and followers, many ignored it and Bethesda eventually made the decision to re-brand the game and switch over to a more appetizing buy-to-play model.

Can we seriously stop saying Bethesda had anything to do with this game? I mean I feel bad for them more then anything, Zenimax did everything with this game and Bethesda takes all the blame.

Sight Unseen:

It was unpolished at launch but the core of the game is solid, the world is GORGEOUS, the combat is well done and builds are varied and highly customiseable.

You know what else was unpolished at launch? Assassin's Creed Unity. Doesn't matter how good a game eventually becomes, if it's unpolished at release, it's gonna get a bad score and rightfully deserve that score. If you're asking for $80 - $120 dollars for a game (AU dollars, don't know the price range elsewhere) than I don't care if you had a deadline, I don't care if you'll make it better down the track, the game should be polished from the get go. If I'm gonna sacrifice an entire days worth of work earnings to buy something, I'm expecting it to be good at a minimum. Not okay, not average, not give it a couple of months, straight up good from the very word go.

There's nothing inherently wrong with subscription fees except that people have gotten spoiled and entitled after having free to play come to prominence.

When I'm able to pay $67 for Xbox Live/$50 for Playstation online for an entire year of playing any game I own or borrow accessing it's online features, this mindset no longer becomes "entitled" or "spoilt" it becomes the norm. Hell, I don't have to pay shit if I buy the same console games on PC! So I'm sorry, subscription based games have become archaic remnants of old school video gaming where it use to be a big deal having online multiplayer.

$60 just to try it out is still kind of ridiculous. I think World of Warcraft had the right idea, making it free up to the point where you know whether you want to keep playing or not and then hitting you with the subscription fee. Though even then $15 every single month for just one game is pretty insane. Even Xbox users who play nothing but Call of Duty and buy every new game every year pay less than that for the game and their online access combined. $15 quarterly for an MMO is more reasonable, and should be more than enough to cover the expenses of keeping the servers running and deliver content updates, and still reap a tidy profit.

bug_of_war:
When I'm able to pay $67 for Xbox Live/$50 for Playstation online for an entire year of playing any game I own or borrow accessing it's online features, this mindset no longer becomes "entitled" or "spoilt" it becomes the norm. Hell, I don't have to pay shit if I buy the same console games on PC!

Isn't this because: (1) on consoles, Sony and Microsoft foot the bill for hosting servers for multiplayer for every game they certify, using the PSN and Xbox Live subscriptions you described to cover it, and (2) on PC, the multiplayer is always either shitty peer-to-peer or hosted on fan-run servers that usually have all kinds of stupid mods or ads or both? I don't play a lot of multiplayer games and I've never owned a console, but that's what I've heard.

Setch Dreskar:
Can we seriously stop saying Bethesda had anything to do with this game? I mean I feel bad for them more then anything, Zenimax did everything with this game and Bethesda takes all the blame.

The game was not made by Bethesda Game Studio. But it is published by Bethesda Softworks, who presumably had/have a large say in changing the payment model.

I play ESO. The game did not have a stellar launch. There were a number of problems with it back then, but I feel that since the launch, Zenimax has done just about everything right. The development pace has been pretty impressive. Aside from adding some pretty engaging content to the game, they've fixed nearly every gripe I've had about the game. The one remaining complaint is that VR levels are pretty slow and grindy, but those are on the way out too.

On going buy-to-play, I don't think it actually has to do with the subscription numbers, which were pretty healthy any time we got a peek at them. I have heard no confirmation, but I'd bet it has more to do with the console launch coming soon. They really can't charge console players a subscription fee on top of the PSN/XBox Live fees, and they can't give console players a free subscription while still charging PC players - either of these things are sure to cause tons of outrage and cost them sales/subs. So instead, they just went B2P across the board.

Caffiene:

Setch Dreskar:
Can we seriously stop saying Bethesda had anything to do with this game? I mean I feel bad for them more then anything, Zenimax did everything with this game and Bethesda takes all the blame.

The game was not made by Bethesda Game Studio. But it is published by Bethesda Softworks, who presumably had/have a large say in changing the payment model.

No they literally had no say, it was put under the head of Bethesda to steer criticism towards it, Bethesda had nothing to do with the game nor did they want to publish it. Zenimax, the lawfirm that owns Bethesda, pushed for it and created Zenimax Online Studios to make the game itself. Bethesda could raise a stink, but Zenimax is the parent company and can do whatever they want, that is why we legit almost had an exact WoW clone on our hands until the community backlash during development.

Setch Dreskar:
No they literally had no say, it was put under the head of Bethesda to steer criticism towards it, Bethesda had nothing to do with the game nor did they want to publish it. Zenimax, the lawfirm that owns Bethesda, pushed for it and created Zenimax Online Studios to make the game itself. Bethesda could raise a stink, but Zenimax is the parent company and can do whatever they want, that is why we legit almost had an exact WoW clone on our hands until the community backlash during development.

That makes no sense.

Youre claiming that Zenimax deliberately wanted it under the Bethesda name, and have the power to have been overriding every publishing decision of their subsidiaries, and yet they created a Zenimax branded studio to make the game instead of creating a Bethesda branded studio because... reasons?

Bethesda Softworks is the publisher. They make publisher decisions. I agree that BethGames probably wanted nothing to do with it, but to claim that the publisher had nothing to do with the revenue decisions is just a conspiracy theory.

I played for one of the beta weekends and it soured me to the game hardcore, while the environments looked nice the character models looked barely any better than Oblivions. The combat was total arse, slow, plodding and lacking in any engagement or any impact. And perhaps the most egregious error was ruining the wonder and excitement of exploring you have in other Elder Scrolls games, it didn't seem like there was much to find beside some shitty standard mmo quests and if you did manage to find something cool it was often ruined by seeing some other schmuck dancing in his underwear.

Watched some gameplay and combat videos. Looks kinda garbage. If the combat was interesting and the movements didn't look so crummy, I would probably get it.

Uh-huh. Sure. Good for them. Let me know when they make Elder Scrolls 6.

Not sure how I feel about this actually. I was all up in arms about having to buy the game multiple times (the game AND the sub in addition to XBL/PSN if you were on console) so I'm happy about the sub "dying". I'm not pleased they're trying to sell it for $60 again. It's not a new game just because you're trying to rebrand it, so that pisses me off. But I'm confused about the new sub, I mean "ESO Plus membership". This reeks of shenanigans. If it's B2P then a sub is ridiculous, especially if it adds game changing stuff like XP boosts. Why not just sell DLC packs or sell a season pass? I am still wary of this whole thing.

Sight Unseen:

As to the gold- the first 1-2 zones for each faction is the (optional) tutorial zone, meant to be played from levels 1-5. Once you leave those zones the drop quality increases significantly. To say otherwise is blatantly untrue. For example, in the Ebonheart Pact, Bleak Rock is for levels 1-4, and Bal Foyen is for 4-5. These are smaller zones with only 3 skyshards each and are designed to be easy to help newbies get the feel for the game. The first "real" zone is Stonefalls which is balanced for levels 1-15 and has 16 skyshards (mentioning to give an impression of the size of the zone.) This is where the proper "loot treadmill" (for lack of a better word) starts.

I understand if you disagree with me, but I haven't lied about anything that I said, and I'd be happy to talk to you if you want to discuss it maturely rather than dismissing me as a liar. I have played this game a lot, I know what I'm talking about most of the time.

You've proven your dishonesty in your attempt to hide it. Extending the concept of "tutorial island" past the jail break section is flat out misleading in a poor attempt to make your point through misdirection. Once you re-enter the world the map becomes open world and quests and events happen as they would anywhere else in the game. You're trying to lessen guilt by smudging real facts. It's like saying that the tutorial zones in WoW extend beyond the small enclaves the players start in. Once you enter the real world you are no longer being led around by the nose being taught basic cornerstones of the game and thus are no longer in the tutorial zone.

Stating game time to evade that the things you say are patently untrue is low.

Sarge034:
Not sure how I feel about this actually. I was all up in arms about having to buy the game multiple times (the game AND the sub in addition to XBL/PSN if you were on console) so I'm happy about the sub "dying". I'm not pleased they're trying to sell it for $60 again. It's not a new game just because you're trying to rebrand it, so that pisses me off. But I'm confused about the new sub, I mean "ESO Plus membership". This reeks of shenanigans. If it's B2P then a sub is ridiculous, especially if it adds game changing stuff like XP boosts. Why not just sell DLC packs or sell a season pass? I am still wary of this whole thing.

Thats how B2P generally works in my experience. You can buy what content you want and leave the rest and subbing could either be a good value or a poor one depending on what they plan to offer.

Its very close to The secret Worlds model and I feel that theirs is the best in the industry. The only thing they're lacking in that in TSW each month you're a subscriber you also got something for free. Almost always cosmetic, it was usually a piece of clothing(Armor doesn't show in that game so your character being completely customizable was a huge thing) or a minipet or something else along those lines. Not having that, the sub's value all comes down to if you think the stuff in the store is worth your money. I honestly don't see how they will do that considering how ESO is set up considering your gear is something that needs to be shown since its PVP heavy and they probably want to avoid selling power since they are trying to not slip and fall again.

On the price hike, yea.... fuck them. TSW went on sale when they went B2P and even after the sale they kept the price low because they realized that the point of going B2P is to get people back and get more people to start playing and nothing does that like making it more accessible. Too bad Zenimax don't understand basic concepts like that.

Sight Unseen:
Check it out guys, it's a solid game that did not deserve most of the bad press that it got. It's now subscription free and now is a really good time to get into this game.

I HIGHLY recommend this game to anyone who is a big fan of the Elder Scrolls who doesn't mind a bit of MMO bullshit added to the mix. This is definitely MUCH more Elder Scrolls than WoW.

EDIT: Question to the Escapist staff if youre reading this- Will you be doing another review or revisiting your coverage of this game? Because a lot of things have changed since its initial launch and it is now a MUCH MUCH better and more polished game than it was. I think it's in your reader's best interests to do a revisit review if you weren't already planning to. Thanks!

I dunno. I played it at launch I think it easily deserved most of what it got. Broken quests in large number, abhorrently poor class and ability balancing, broken group questing, bot dungeon boss farming, teleporting resource nodes bots, latency, bad quest linkages(miss a few and it was hard to quest in the next zone), excessive respec fees, and the lack of an auction house was a stupid idea.

It had promise, sure. But the game should have been delayed at least 8 months to a year.

templar1138a:
Uh-huh. Sure. Good for them. Let me know when they make Elder Scrolls 6.

and when all the bugs for that have been worked out ...

I might have liked Skyrim but I'm not about to buy anything from Bethesda month 1.

as for this MMO thing, sorry, can't hear you over FF14 ARR and the up coming Heavensward expansion (Yay for Dark Knights :D)

If it has controller support (which I don't think it does), I *might* check it out now. But honestly I'm going to wait to read a review or three. And if there's been so little change that no one re-reviews it, then I'm definitely saving my sixty bucks!

snekadid:

Sight Unseen:

As to the gold- the first 1-2 zones for each faction is the (optional) tutorial zone, meant to be played from levels 1-5. Once you leave those zones the drop quality increases significantly. To say otherwise is blatantly untrue. For example, in the Ebonheart Pact, Bleak Rock is for levels 1-4, and Bal Foyen is for 4-5. These are smaller zones with only 3 skyshards each and are designed to be easy to help newbies get the feel for the game. The first "real" zone is Stonefalls which is balanced for levels 1-15 and has 16 skyshards (mentioning to give an impression of the size of the zone.) This is where the proper "loot treadmill" (for lack of a better word) starts.

I understand if you disagree with me, but I haven't lied about anything that I said, and I'd be happy to talk to you if you want to discuss it maturely rather than dismissing me as a liar. I have played this game a lot, I know what I'm talking about most of the time.

You've proven your dishonesty in your attempt to hide it. Extending the concept of "tutorial island" past the jail break section is flat out misleading in a poor attempt to make your point through misdirection. Once you re-enter the world the map becomes open world and quests and events happen as they would anywhere else in the game. You're trying to lessen guilt by smudging real facts. It's like saying that the tutorial zones in WoW extend beyond the small enclaves the players start in. Once you enter the real world you are no longer being led around by the nose being taught basic cornerstones of the game and thus are no longer in the tutorial zone.

Stating game time to evade that the things you say are patently untrue is low.

Wow... what the hell did I do to get you so pissed at me?

I'm not hiding anything... Those zones which I mentioned, ARE OPTIONAL! The game strongly encourages you to visit them, and you'll miss out on 6 skyshards if you do, but you're under absolutely no obligation to ever visit them. You can start off in (for instance) Stonefalls and never visit Bleakrock or Bal Foyen. They are there deliberately to be easy zones (every quest and monster in the first zone is level 2 or 3 even though you'd easily pass that level if you do all the quests), to kickstart the story, and to give new players a place to get comfortable with the game. As such, the drop rate is reduced in those areas (whereas the number of crafting nodes is increased for the base raw materials) In the beta, these zones were the mandatory tutorial island, but a lot of testers complained that they wanted to get straight to the action, so they were made optional. If you want to start right in the main zones, you can! And the drop rates are not in any way fudged in those areas!

I have not been "hiding" anything and everything that I have said is true to the best of my knowledge. I have given a good faith effort to engage you in discussion and you have responded with nothing but hostility and claims that I'm lying to your face. If you still disagree with me then that's your prerogative, but I have been up front with you about everything I've said and I do not appreciate being called a liar by someone who has clearly not played the game.

persephone:
If it has controller support (which I don't think it does), I *might* check it out now. But honestly I'm going to wait to read a review or three. And if there's been so little change that no one re-reviews it, then I'm definitely saving my sixty bucks!

I'm pretty sure that it doesn't have controller support yet, though I think they've mentioned adding it in future, maybe. You can map the game to a controller though with programs like XPadder. I've never done that though so I can't really comment.

Sight Unseen:

Wow... what the hell did I do to get you so pissed at me?

I'm not hiding anything... Those zones which I mentioned, ARE OPTIONAL! The game strongly encourages you to visit them, and you'll miss out on 6 skyshards if you do, but you're under absolutely no obligation to ever visit them. You can start off in (for instance) Stonefalls and never visit Bleakrock or Bal Foyen. They are there deliberately to be easy zones (every quest and monster in the first zone is level 2 or 3 even though you'd easily pass that level if you do all the quests), to kickstart the story, and to give new players a place to get comfortable with the game. As such, the drop rate is reduced in those areas (whereas the number of crafting nodes is increased for the base raw materials) In the beta, these zones were the mandatory tutorial island, but a lot of testers complained that they wanted to get straight to the action, so they were made optional. If you want to start right in the main zones, you can! And the drop rates are not in any way fudged in those areas!

I have not been "hiding" anything and everything that I have said is true to the best of my knowledge. I have given a good faith effort to engage you in discussion and you have responded with nothing but hostility and claims that I'm lying to your face. If you still disagree with me then that's your prerogative, but I have been up front with you about everything I've said and I do not appreciate being called a liar by someone who has clearly not played the game.

You use intentionally misleading/fraudulent wording to make your points, relabeling areas with terms that don't have the meaning you attribute to them. I don't have a problem with subjective opinion, but you state objectively false things as fact and that is a problem as misinformation is worse than someone just not knowing.

I did play, I played for the first month, which was the subject of the post you were quoting and attempting to misrepresent the state of the game at the time that caused its wretched reputation. You are not allowed to rewrite history.

I have a few questions for players of the game:
1. Is there a cash/premium shop? What is in it? Be detailed please.
2. It mentions DLC, this makes me skeptical. What do these "DLCs" contain.
3. Is there a free trial?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here