2013: ESO Vs FFXIV?Follow

I am. I'm weary of it, but I'm willing to try it out. I heard the combat might actually be worthwhile.

I think this game will have a large niche group of fans, just like FFXIV will. The ESO may have more NA players though. We'll have to see.

Like FFXIV, the ESO has the luxury of having fans that have been cultivated to play by the series of Elder Scrolls games.

I find it interesting that both scratch that "Single player experience peeking out into an open MMO game" itch. Aspect to them that does draw from an established audiance, which is actually contrast to WoW's Warcraft, which was fairly multiplayer in spite of its single player campaigns.

In any case, FFXIV will likely scratch that ich much more than ESO. I go to an Elder Scrolls game to get away from people and be highly violent. >.>

Probably not interested in ESO. I'm sure the character creation models are sure to be quite unattractive. The only western RPG I've ever been able to tolerate was the Mass Effect series. Sci Fi is awesome! I'd sign on to MEO

FFXIV: ARR for me.

I plan on playing ARR full time, but i am going to try out ESO. It looks like a pretty good game, but time will tell. If i like it, i'll probably play it casually, but i'll be focusing on XIV.

I'm in a few alphas and betas, two of which highly interested me... Nothing is holding my attention for long periods like even XIV 1.0 in its super broken state did. Obviously I can't say which ones (other than MWO which really doesn't count as an MMO... and I am rooting for it the same I did as XIV 1.0 as I can see where it's at and where it wants to be even if it's far from it currently), but I had SUPER high hopes for one of them and I played a couple hours and then washed my hands of it. Some people will be hyping that title in the coming months, but it's terrible.... I take that back, it's ok for a certain genre but it isn't the genre that has been successfully produced time and again even with evolution. I have the same fear for 2.0 in the long run, it might turn into a good game... but not the type of game I hoped to play.

I thought about applying for the beta but then I saw the trailer. If people thought that FFXIV was going to be a GW2 clone they should see that game... I stopped caring about the time they mentioned socialist gear.

I'm sticking with 14 because I really like my character from 1.0 and have faith in Yoshi-P.

Also, TES has always been a solo experience for me. Even when they let npcs follow you, I just didn't want them around. It would feel weird in that environment, but I hope they can pull it off.

I'm "stuck" with FF since I'm on PS3.
And at the risk of being shot in the knee with an arrow.....I didn't really care for Skyrim. Stretching that out into an MMO doesn't interest me either.

As much as i like the elder scrolls game, i won't try it.I wont even bother with the beta. Elder scrolls games gave me hundreds of fun hours but as single player.I don't want an MMO. If i want one i have god knows how many choices (and to be honest i only need FF 14 right now :P).

And to be honest i started playing l2 then had 2-3 years of WoW and got really tired of fantasy MMO so i went to EvE online. Now i am willing to stop EvE only for FF 14, and nothing else.

With that been said, if they play their cards right they can make a good MMO.

By the way, they sure know how to make good cinematics. If they made an animated movie i would watch it hehe.

Edited, Mar 5th 2013 4:09am by teravibe

Do I get killed for stating I played Skyrim until it suddenly, despite it's apparent strengths,
suddenly, somehow, sarted to feel utterly boring? Maybe it was that I became far too strong
for any enemy in the game, maybe it was that every Dwemer ruin looked the same, maybe
it was that I simply knew that clearing any of them would not benefit me in any way any
more... or maybe the "lore" was just not all that well fitting my taste.

The first 10 hours or so were great indeed, although the character models required quite
a bit of work to not look ugly. I mean, most of them looked worse than I do, and that's got to
mean something. But after the 15th dragon, I simply put down the controller and uninstalled.

I still can't pinpoint the issue. In theory, the game was close to an enlarged version of The
Witcher, a game that still takes spot No.1 or No.2 in my personal hit list. But somehow it
failed to really catch, and most of all: to surprise me.

In contrast, my gripes with EOS are simple: even though I am relatively new to the ES lore,
even I understand that the whole plot surrounding the three factions was artificially contrived
for the sake of MMO mechanics, and makes little sense or logic. Which allows for the cautious
presumption that most of the story will make little sense and simply accomodate the needs
of the gameplay vision the producers have in mind.

The other option would have be to build gameplay around existing lore. That's what held back
LotRO, in my opinion. You simply couldn't fight Laser Sharks, because Laser Sharks are an
invention of Dr. No, and not of Tolkien.

Anyway, long rant short finale: what I saw and read of it looked strange, flamboyant, twitchy,
badly animated, somehow out of place, and in all regards like a typical "franchise-turned-MMO"
game...

Dammit, I forgot what my point was. Starbucks is not the best place to think straight. Not with
a Venti Frappuccino on the table.

The first time I ever played an Elder Scrolls game, I thought, "This would be great as an MMO." But it couldn't hold my attention as a single player game. I also thought the graphics (art decisions) were terrible.

So it's kind of baffling to me that all those people who love Elder Scrolls worry about how the experience will translate to an MMO. The gameplay seems tailor made for a social experience.

I thought ESO would fail based purely on the interviews with the design team that I read--a canned MMO experience (rather than transferring the gameplay of Elder Scrolls) with the Elder Scrolls skin. They argue that those interviews don't really capture the strengths of their game--I imagine this is more likely a desperate defense by yet more developers who don't know how to innovate successfully. They do specify, however, a more engaged and skillful combat system, so I'm reserving judgement. It could be as bad as GW2--which also had those things in theory, but executed them terribly.

Okay: either you put the game on baby mode and somehow plowed through several dungeons and a dragon every 35 minutes; or you played the game for long enough to become bored with it, in which case there's really no reason to complain.

Honestly, it frustrates me when people will play a game like Skyrim for 50, 60, 80 hours and then have the audacity to call it boring. Even at around 40 hours, it's a sizable RPG, and longer than the vast majority of equally priced games! I mean, Diablo III took around 13 hours to beat if you were taking your time, and that new 3DS Castlevania game is barely 12.