ubercake :
Don't get me wrong... It's a brilliant pricing strategy for a game with a world that already has a huge fan base. That's what made and continues to make WoW so successful where others have failed. Games from the Warcraft world already had a large following. This is similar to Elder Scrolls. But the thing Warcraft had going for it that Elder Scrolls does not is it was one of the first to have success and gain traction. Since, there have been many subscription-based games that have faded out because they simply don't offer anything much different than WoW.
I just hope Bethesda continues with a line of single-player Elder Scrolls games otherwise they've lost at least one customer. To me, it seems like all MMORPGs are created with similarly generic tasks because there's a limit to what you can do in a world that would affect all players. In a single player environment, there's a lot more leverage with regard to how a single "hero" can affect the entire world.
Well Bethesda is still making TES:6. ZOS is a totally different studio started for ESO, so they won't effect one another.
It's true that in MMO's it's difficult for a hero to effect the world, but ESO did it better than others. You do a quest and the area changes for you. You decide the fate of entire towns of people, and though you can't go around slaughtering them, you can decide their deaths in many cases.
There's another issue that's unrelated to the fact that it's an MMO that prevents huge changes.
Because all the TES games have been sequels and ESO is a prequel you don't have the ability to make huge overarching changes through choice that would effect the canon.
This is a good and bad thing because it means that Bethesda can make TES:6 a sequel without interfering with the development of ESO.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram