Blizzard’s Hearthstone blends traditional CCG mechanics with the world’s most popular MMO

You have to give Blizzard credit.

For all the talk and rumors and speculation about what the company would reveal at PAX East, I don’t think anyone guessed “online collectible card game based on World of Warcraft.” Hey, at least it wasn’t Diablo III for PlayStation 4, right?

It’s always dangerous to venture into comments sections, but I’ve done that on a handful of gaming sites, including this one, and the reaction to Hearthstone seems to be generally positive. There are a few “WTF Blizzard???”s, but there are a larger number of “This sounds cool”s, at least from my viewpoint.

At the very least, very few people are screaming about what an awful idea it is, which has to come as something of a relief, considering how recent gaming news has been and the often vitriolic reactions gamers have to anything that even remotely offends their sensibilities.

I’ve played upwards of 120 collectible card games, with around 25 or so of them in something I would consider a serious manner, and I used to be the associate editor of Scrye, the leading CCG magazine in the industry.

I’ve also worked for two CCG companies – well, one CCG company and one sports card company that decided to dabble in CCGs – including being the co-lead designer on two games. (Disclaimer: Everything you didn’t like about those games was done by the other guys.)

So I like to think I kinda-sorta know my way around this field, far more than my dubious expertise in MMORPGs would suggest. I’ve seen CCGs come and go, seen hugely hyped games fail and seen tiny ones succeed. And my overall opinion of Hearthstone, based on what we’ve seen so far?

More of the same… but that’s OK

I’m not exaggerating in the slightest when I say that every CCG to come out over the last 10 years or so has touted itself as “easy to learn, but with enough strategy to please advanced players” or the equivalent thereof. It’s the classic “trying to appeal to everyone” line that we’ve seen, in various forms, in the descriptions of MMORPGs, and it was part of Hearthstone‘s exposé, as well.

It certainly is simple, at its core. The basic structure of the game is similar to a streamlined Magic: The Gathering, with simplified mana resources, a common trait in modern CCGs. Even MTG creator Richard Garfield has gone on record as saying that if he had the game to do over again, he would do away with land cards.

Hearthstone‘s general similarity to industry leader Magic is the exact same sort of thing MMO gamers lament when the latest “WoW clone” hits, but this doesn’t typically arouse the same ire among CCG fans.

The reason? In a physical CCG, you have to compute everything manually, so having familiar mechanics makes the basics of the game easily recognizable and allows you to quickly move on to more advanced styles of play.

In an MMO, most of the computations are done for you by computers, so the basic mechanics of the game require little thought. As a result, players look for more beyond those basics and when they don’t find them, they tend to rightly get upset at an experience that’s essentially no different from the one they’ve already been playing for years.

In other words, Hearthstone is a “Magic clone” as much as Rift or SWTOR are “WoW clones.” It’s not exactly the same, but it’s similar enough at its core that players of one can easily adapt to the other – and that’s the idea. In fact, it’s a strength, and very few non-Magic-style CCGs have survived, much less thrived, especially over the last decade.

Beyond the basics

Once you get past the relative simplicity of the mechanics, what else does Hearthstone offer? Is it really complex enough or offer enough strategy to please hardcore gamers?

We’ve only seen a limited subset of cards so far, but there seems to be a fair amount of variety. I imagine that high-level strategy will include intricate combos and devious tactics, similar to any CCG, that give highly intelligent players much-deserved advantages.

Most of these tactics will likely involve concepts such as resource management, direct damage, control, creature zergs, etc. It won’t be particularly special or unique, as compared to other CCGs, but it should nicely satisfy that strategic itch.

(Before StarCraft introduced the race, we used to call a certain type of zerg deck in Magic “white weenie,” and no, that wasn’t a sexual joke.)

What Hearthstone can do differently from its cardstock competitors is include elements that are difficult – or even impossible – for a physical CCG to replicate.

Take the simple card Sense Demons, which puts two random demons into a player’s hand from his deck. You wouldn’t see these kinds of cards in a non-offline CCG, because the means of selecting random cards would have been clunky at best.

Keeping track of minion health is another item that you don’t see in most CCGs, because it either requires some kind of tokens or memory. In fact, CCG designers often look to minimize or eliminate so-called “memory issues,” so as to prevent mistakes or arguments. (“Your creature only has one hit point left!” “No, it has two!”)

But that’s the exact sort of thing that a computer is perfectly suited for. Probably the best-known MMO-CCG crossover, SOE’s Legends of Norrath, didn’t often utilize these kinds of mechanics because – at least early on – there were aspirations of porting the game over to a physical format.

A lot has also been made of the special effects, like voice acting, animation, and so on, which are also nice window dressing for an electronic game. But it’s the “can’t be done anywhere else” powers that I think will set Hearthstone apart and open up new strategies that are truly unlike any that have ever been seen before in CCGs.

Does compute

But does Hearthstone even need to innovate on the strategy front? As previously mentioned, many Magic clones do just fine, and a Magic clone paired with World of Warcraft seems like a license to print money.

There’s talk of integrating Hearthstone with WoW in multiple ways, the most obvious of which would seem to be “loot cards.” Present in Cryptozoic’s World of Warcraft TCG, these were rare cards with a code that could be entered into your WoW account to provide a unique piece of loot for your character. The most impressive were the mounts, some of which sold on eBay for triple-digit sums.

Then there’s the payment method, which sounds to me like the best deal of all, and something that definitely couldn’t be replicated by a physical game.

It sounds like you’ll get a basic starter deck for free and then can earn extra packs either by paying $1 for five cards (not confirmed, but expected) or by earning points in game that will allow you to buy packs.

This sounds not unlike the method we’ve seen in other “friendly” F2P games like League of Legends and PlanetSide 2. No content is gated, and it would be possible – though slow – to play Hearthstone and become an expert player with a vast collection without spending a single dime. And all of that doesn’t take the awesome-looking crafting system into account.

I think Hearthstone will do just fine, with strong potential to be another great success for Blizzard. Creativity will be found less in the game mechanics themselves and more in how it’s presented and how Blizzard leverages its status as a computer game first and a collectible card game second to drive innovation.

The post Hearthstone: The Next Big Thing? appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

MMORPG Servers And Factions Do More Harm Than Good

To whom do you owe your MMORPG allegiance to? Your server? Your faction? Nobody?

Perhaps the better question to ask would be, with whom do you want to play?

Gary, Quintlyn, and I had a rather heated exchange in voice chat the other day, when talking about faction restrictions in The Secret World. That game is far friendlier than many others when it comes to defining who you can and can’t play with. Servers are only loosely defined, and you can group up in PvE with members of any of the three factions (Dragon, Illuminati, or Templars).

The sticking point came when we were talking about guilds. You can’t form a multi-faction guild, so that means that Q and I (Dragons) can’t be in a guild with Gary (Templar). Ostensibly, this is because we’re all technically on different sides and shouldn’t be communicating all our secret agendas to each other.

Q and Gary think that’s awesome. I think it’s a bunch of crap that hurts the game far more than it helps it.

Splitsville

Maybe it’s because I didn’t “grow up” playing World of Warcraft, or any other strictly faction-split game, but I think that, as much as people naturally lean toward solo content in MMOs, a developer should do the absolute minimum possible to prevent players from wanting to actually, you know, play together.

Splitting your player base can come in many forms. As mentioned, The Secret World isn’t too bad about this, and clever players have found ways around the no-mixed-factions guild issue by forming private chat channels, but many other MMOs either strictly split up their players via servers or factions, limiting the number of people you have available to play with at any given time, usually just to satisfy a storyline framework.

Some MMO devs have even begun to realize that levels are another divisive factor. Games like City of Heroes sought to minimize this via sidekicking, and Guild Wars 2 also levels characters up or down – going as far as to use the superhero-y term “sidekick” – for certain content.

Why did you leave your last MMO? For many people, the answer is, “Because there wasn’t anyone to play with.” So why should games put in barriers that prevent people from playing together? It’s like they intentionally want their player base to dwindle.

Don’t get me wrong, I like story in my MMOs. I want them to be more than just places where I kill stuff to gain loot. I want there to be a reason for my guys to fight their guys.

But it’s not that hard to tweak story to allow characters of diametrically opposed factions to work together. Anyone who’s read or watched A Game of Thrones sees how quickly alliances form and dissolve, and how characters who were friends, or at least cordial, one minute are trying to kill each other the next, or vice versa.

Server splits are usually a little more technology-based, and if a dev can’t figure out how to make one-server technology work for their game, I give a little bit of a pass. But if they can do it, they should.

United we stand…

Some people, like my aforementioned colleagues, like the idea of strictly defined factions or even server-based communities. I can see the reasoning behind that. You want to play or win for your server, or for your faction. You feel like you represent that segment of the population, like you’re a part of something larger than you, your party, or your guild.

And sometimes it’s a good idea. Pretty much any game with open-world PvP, like Guild Wars 2 or PlanetSide 2, or various PvP servers in other two-faction games like Rift or World of Warcraft, requires those kind of splits.

But games without those features, or which marginalize them, like the way Guild Wars 2 segregates its World vs. World, don’t need such divisive policies. That’s my opinion, at least. I feel that having a robust and healthy player base matters more than “server pride.”

(Along those same lines, I think the way Elder Scrolls Online is doing things – only letting your experience your faction’s area and story until you reach max level – is a very bad idea that will divide its player base in not two, but three ways.)

Here’s the thing about gamers, or really any kind of obsessive fan base: They want to keep it small and personal. I’ve seen this in groups of gamers in all sorts of genres: MMOs, trading-card games, role-playing games, etc. They’re not openly hostile to new people (usually), but they’re comfortable with their small and familiar group dynamic and want to keep it that way.

The problem is, that’s antithetical to keeping a group actually going. If you only have 20 people in your clique, and two leave, you’ve lost 10% of your numbers. Two more leave and that’s another 10%. If you don’t boost your numbers somehow, soon you’ll only be down to a few diehards, or you won’t have anyone at all left.

MMO companies – the smart ones, at least – realize this. It’s a common business maxim that states, “If you’re not growing, you’re dying.” Stagnation is death. If you’re a new player who wants to find people to play with on your new server, it would be better to be able to choose from all the players in the game, not X guilds or players divided by the number of servers or factions in the game. If you don’t find those people, you’re less likely to stick with the game, and that’s no good for anyone, players or developers.

In short, a gaming group’s desire to keep its community small and personal – and divided – is at direct odds with the business desires of an MMO developer, which should, realistically, also be the goal of the player: to keep the game healthy, well-populated – and ultimately, functioning.

The more the merrier

I like to think of the big picture. More players are better for the game as a whole. And players will be more likely to play if they can play with who they want, when they want. I think that, like many MMO conventions, we’ve grown to assume that servers and factions are required components of any MMO experience. They’re not. They’re just what we’ve had for so long, many of us have trouble imagining anything else.

There still is room in a server-less and mostly faction-less MMO for group pride. PvP is one way. Quintlyn and I will always go on about how the Dragons are the best faction in The Secret World, and I hear plenty of mock racism in Guild Wars 2 chat. “Asura are the best.” “My charr eats asura for breakfast.” “What about sylvari?” “No thanks, charr only eat meat.”

I’m not saying games shouldn’t have factions, or even separate servers. And it might not work for every game. It’s hard to imagine the Jedi and Sith working together in Star Wars: The Old Republic, for example.

But MMO developers should seek to minimize, or even eliminate these splits whenever possible. They should serve as a framework to enhance the story, not an artificial barrier to limit who you can play with.

Put it this way: How many MMOs have you quit because you couldn’t find anyone to play with? I bet it’s more than the number you’ve quit because you didn’t like its faction dynamics or how much you could brag about “server firsts.”

The post Divided We Fall appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

By now, you’ve probably checked out the Elder Scrolls Online coverage at various places around the Internet. While the coverage has answered some questions, it’s raised several more, and we’d like you to chime in with your thoughts on the following topics:

Are divided factions a good idea?

In his article, Richie Procopio comes at the ZeniMax Online Studios dev team, Paul Sage in particular, with a very pointed query about factions. The response wasn’t exactly what he was hoping for.

It’s a valid concern (and one that I’m prepping an entirely different article for). Is it worth dividing your player base for the sake of story and lore?

Do you think you’ll find it hard to keep your friends together if you can’t play together until you reach max level? Or are you OK with ZeniMax “forcing” you to make characters of the same faction in order to play together throughout your leveling experience?

Do you like the idea of no cooldowns?

As Scott Hawkes reported,

Use of the stamina meter makes ESO sound rather like playing a rogue in World of Warcraft or a thief in Guild Wars 2. Your cooldown is limited (or nonexistent) but you have a pool that you can draw from to power your effects. When it runs out… well…

It does keep in line with abilities Elder Scrolls games, which have no cooldowns and are instead limited by mana or stamina pools, but as any veteran of the series can tell you, that just opens up potion spam to keep you in fighting shape.

Theoretically, in the MMO, there will be some kind of cooldown on potions to keep you from chugging them one after the other, but does that itself deviate from the Elder Scrolls establishment?

Do you really care about first-person view?

Now that first-person view – with hands, even! – is confirmed, the question is: So what? How much time have you spent using first-person view in an MMO? Except for taking screenshots, I’d guess the answer is “virtually none.”

Truth is, if this wasn’t an Elder Scrolls MMO, people wouldn’t ask for – if not outright demand – it here, either. People still want to play Skyrim Online, even though each passing day and reveal proves that that’s not what we’re getting.

First-person view works well enough in single-player games, where you don’t have to worry quite as much about your environment and what might be hitting you from the sides or behind. And it’s quite natural for games that require precise aim, like shooters.

I imagine that I’ll use first-person view in Elder Scrolls Online as an occasional novelty, but not during any real, dangerous fight. What about you?

The post Elder Scrolls Online: What Do You Think? appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

There’s one more Neverwinter beta, starting this Friday, March 22 at noon PDT, and it’s going to be a doozy.

The big addition to this event is the inclusion of PvP, with players getting their first chance to bash each other’s skulls in — and you should take advantage of the gore-splattered action while you can. It’s been previously announced that PvP would be added to the game after launch, but maybe, if we all wish upon a broken, blood-soaked star, the testing will go well enough that Perfect World decides to include it at launch.

In addition to PvP, players will get their first taste of the Great Weapon Fighter, who’s sure to cut a swath of two-handed mayhem through his enemies. An increased level cap of 50 and two new zones – Pirates’ Skyhold and Icespire Peak Adventure Zones — round out the weekend’s agenda.

Though Neverwinter will be free-to-play, there’s still time to get in on the various Founder’s Packs available for the game that offer a variety of perks and bonuses, as well as guaranteed access to all betas. Otherwise, you can sign up for the beta on the Neverwinter site and hope to get selected.

So what are you looking forward to the most in this beta? PvP or the Great Weapon Fighter? Or maybe both, at the same time? Or are you still exploring the rest of the game, the city of Neverwinter itself, or trying your hand at content creation via the Foundry?

The post Third Neverwinter Beta This Weekend appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

Saints Row IV Coming in August

Deep Silver today announced the impending release of the newest entry in its pimp-slappin’ series, Saints Row IV, coming to consoles and PC in North America on Aug. 20, and in all other territories on Aug. 23.

The subhead on the press release? “Saints Row IV Announced, Bitchez.” Classy, no?

In this installment, the leader of the Saints has been elected President of the United States, which sounds like an arguably better version of reality than what we’ve had for the past decade or so. There’s an alien invasion to deal with, sci-fi weaponry to exploit, superpowers to be abused, and probably plenty of bitches and hos to slap around — and we’re not just talking about Congress.

For ‘MERICA!

The post Saints Row IV: Bigger, Longer, Thicker (NSFW) appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

Is the Guild Wars 2 culling problem in World vs. World about to be solved?

That’s the claim made by ArenaNet developer Habib Loew in the most recent GW2 blog post, fittingly titled “The End of Culling.” Loew reminds everyone that culling — meaning the client not reporting nearby characters — will be removed in the March patch.

But the reason culling existed in the first place was to reduce bandwidth and help the game run more smoothly. So if all those characters are now going to be reported to the client, how will ArenaNet prevent the game from running like molasses?

Players will have the option of three settings for determining whether characters render in large fights. They are, as Loew describes:

• High resolution models - These are the high-res character models that you’re all already familiar with.
• Lower resolution fallback models - These are the models that we’ve been using as placeholders in WvW while the hi-res models load. They differ depending on race and armor class, though human, sylvari, and norn share the same model.
• Nameplates only - We don’t render the model at all and instead only show the nameplate for that character.

Players can set how many nearby characters render with a model and how many with a nameplate and the quality of those models.

TL;DR: You likely won’t see every character in a big fight, rendered in stunningly beautiful graphic detail, but you’ll at least have some indicator — even if it’s just a nameplate — that they’re there, so you can select them to attack… or just run away, if you’re a coward.

On the one hand, this implementation seems to fix the issue, at least in terms of functionality. But it’s also a little sad that the dev team has to sacrifice some of the beauty and grace of their artistic design to make it work.

What do you think? Does this solution for culling satisfy you?

The post Culling the Culling appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

PlanetSide 2 Patch Adds VR Training and More

A new PlanetSide 2 patch hit this morning, adding a ton of features to SOE‘s three-faction shooter.

The biggest new addition to the game is a VR training center, where new and experienced soldiers can find their footing before being thrust into the thick of battle. All weapons and vehicles are unlocked, with indoor and outdoor shooting ranges for players to test their skills.

While in the VR training area, players can’t harm each other or become weapons-locked, but, obviously, no experience or stats are accumulated.

Other major changes include:

• Most explosives now do greater damage near their source but the damage tapers off more quickly. No more “I’m sure I was outside that grenade’s blast radius…”
• Similarly, most vehicle weapons with explosive rounds have had their blast radii reduced.
• Total ammo capacity has been increased for nearly all weapons. The only listed exception is the Terran Republic T32 Bull, which had its ammo capacity decreased to 240.
• All vehicles had their torque increased, which should result in higher top speeds when driving up inclines.
• “Removed a non-functional capture point from the Esamir Biolabs.” “Guys, we’ve been standing here for 10 minutes, why isn’t this damn thing flipping?”
• The minimap can now be zoomed manually, by use of the ] and [ keys.
• A Flash can now carry a passenger, who can use his personal weapons.
• The respawn screen has been reworked, merging with the map screen’s capabilities and listing respawn locations on the left.
• “Vehicle horns should now be able to be heard from significantly greater distances.” BEEP BEEP!

A VR training center has been one of the most-requested features for PlanetSide 2 since its launch, and has always been described as a top priority for the dev team. Does its addition make you more likely to check the game out, or to get back into it if you played before?

You can read the full patch notes here.

The post PlanetSide 2 Mega-Patch! appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

GameStop embezzlement case reaches verdict

Screwing over your corporation in a game like EVE Online? Really cool and a sign of ruthless cleverness and ambition.

Doing the same thing to your real-life corporation? Still clever and ambitious, but somewhat less cool.

Former GameStop Texas executive Frank Christopher Olivera was sentenced last week to 51 months of prison time for embezzling $1.7 million from GameStop to the fictitious Cloud Communications LLC. According to a statement from the US Attorney’s Office:

As previously reported, Olivera was let go from GameStop in April 2011 and could have faced up to 20 years of prison time.

Maybe after he’s released he can trade in his worn-out prison oranges for some new duds?

The post Former GameStop VP Gets Prison Sentence appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

SimCity disaster launch unlikely to affect long-term strategy

It’s been an unbearable six whole days since SimCity launched – or at least, tried to launch – sending shockwaves of righteous rage through the gaming community. The way I hear it, EA will never sell a game again, not after a disaster worse than the Titanic, the Hindenburg, and the Star Wars Holiday Special combined.

Bull, I say.

If you’re one of the people who bought SimCity on launch day and are currently among its most vitriolic detractors, I put forth that the reason you feel that way is because you love SimCity that much more than the average fan.

What will that mean when SimCity 6 comes out? You’ll ignore it because “FU, EA”?

Don’t get me wrong, I know there are plenty of folks out there who are angry enough take that approach, ones who aren’t so completely devoted to the franchise or who are sturdy enough to stick to their guns.

And a lot of people simply don’t care for the “forced multiplayer” aspect of the game and would have rejected it out of hand, even if the servers worked just fine.

But I think enough people will have put this incident far enough behind them or will adapt to – and even possibly begin to like – the online gameplay elements that the current game’s troubles will make only the smallest of dents in the next’s overall sales numbers.

Don’t think so? It’s already happened. With a Maxis/EA game, no less.

Virulent Spore

Spore launched in 2008 with DRM tool SecuROM and faced similar vilification from gamers. Barely a week after its launch, 2,016 of its 2,216 ratings on Amazon were of the one-star variety, mimicking the online blasting that SimCity has received.

This article, which quotes a former Maxis employee on the SecuROM/Spore fiasco seems like it could have just as easily been printed last week:

Clearly, that “goodwill that gamers have towards Will Wright” wasn’t diminished much, if initial impressions of SimCity‘s sales are to be believed.

Going away from EA/Maxis, we have Ubisoft, long the primary villain in the DRM world. So much was the company and its DRM loathed that Assassin’s Creed II sold nine million copies. Oh, the horror. People hated Ubisoft so much that (DRM-free) Assassin’s Creed III notched seven million sales by the end of 2012. Short memories or a response to DRM removal? Or just a lot of rage about nothing?

And then there’s Diablo III. Error 37s and all, it sold 3.5 million copies in its first week and 12 million in all of 2012. That means that, even after its problems were well known in its first seven days, it still sold 8.5 million copies. If Diablo IV sells fewer than 10 million copies, I’ll eat my hat.

Fail Wail

It’s true that SimCity‘s defenders point out that the online-only mode is a required game function and a part of the design – not an oppressive DRM scheme. It’s possible that the developers envisioned it that way, dubious a design decision as it might have been.

But in the lightning-fast – or is that cheetah-fast? – world of the Internet, perception becomes reality. To the majority of dissatisfied players, the always-online requirement is DRM, meant to treat paying customers like criminals, and that’s the end of the story. EA/Maxis can’t spin this in a positive direction, no matter how hard they try or even what facts they offer forth.

The phrase “vote with your wallets” gets bandied around a lot right now, but the fact of it is that the number of people who are pissed off enough about the SimCity debacle to not purchase the next version – or even this one, once things are straightened out a little more – is probably very miniscule.

And it’s not like bad sales of the game – if they are realized – will “kill” EA, which has plenty of other cash cows, like Madden and FIFA to weather the storm of any one bad release. You not buying the next EA game will kill EA like you quitting World of Warcraft “killed” that game.

There’s not likely a whole lot you can do about this. By virtue of reading this, you’re in the minority of gamers who have the patience to get to the end of a 1,000-word article, which makes you very much unlike the types with the short memories and attention span of a gnat who will flock to retail outlets, physical or online, to pick up the next installment of a series that they loathed with such venom just a few years back.

In other words, that same fervor with which gamers demand their product right freaking now is used against them by companies that know that there will be an overwhelming number of zero-hour purchases that instantly swell their coffers, even if a relatively small number of people exhibit instant buyer’s remorse.

Money talks… quietly

If I had any advice to give, it would be to not put yourself through the same wringer next time. Because there will be a next time, whether it’s the next SimCity, Diablo, or even your favorite MMO that has its usual slate of issues at launch and beyond. If you’ve waited years for a game, waiting a couple more weeks won’t hurt you, and, if a game like SimCity‘s connectivity issues are any indication, you might not be missing anything by delaying your purchase anyway.

And if you really want to “vote with your wallet” without completely cutting yourself off, don’t buy direct. If it’s EA you want to spite, don’t buy from Origin. Buy from a third-party retail outlet, like Amazon or Best Buy, who takes a cut from every sale.

Don’t let your fanaticism work against you. Yes, a company that takes your money should give you a fully functioning product in return. But if you keep making the same mistakes in your purchasing habits, you’re just setting yourself up for inevitable frustration and are learning as much from your errors in judgment as EA and Maxis are from theirs.

The post SimCity: Flamed Out appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.

Full voice acting confirmed for The Elder Scrolls Online

Previous “Ask Us Anything” sessions for The Elder Scrolls Online have been, in this writer’s opinion at least, rather lackluster, especially in terms of gameplay details.

This week’s installment makes up for that in a big way, as the team at ZeniMax Online Studios reveals several juicy details about the game and its presentation.

Full voice acting. As if people weren’t drawing enough comparisons between TESO and Star Wars: The Old Republic, now there’s this. BTW, TESO‘s still not using the HERO Engine.

Automatically sorted inventory, similar to what’s seen in Skyrim and Oblivion. Hallelujah. Why more MMOs don’t take this tack, I’ll never know. In addition to sorting based on type, like armor or weapon, more options will be available, such as sorting by value or when acquired.

Light-armor tanks. While ZeniMax says you’d rather use heavy armor in close-quarters fighting, the option is apparently there “to increase your health to the max and carefully choose your abilities” and create “a light armor character that would last a good, long time on the front lines.”

Narrowly specialized characters. While the skill system would seem to reward hybridization, there should be plenty of options for people wanting to specialize along a single track, such as exclusively being a healer.

Equipping weapons. The Q&A confirms that a system will be in place similar to Skyrim‘s, where you can equip weapons, spells, and shields on a per-hand basis, and you’ll also be able to easily switch between builds — something the single-player games have generally lacked.

Moral choices. While not as black-and-white as, say, choosing to represent the Light or Dark Side in SWTOR, there will be some “tough choices” your character will have to address which might range from having a minor effect on the story to having “lasting consequences.”

So which of these features sound the most appealing to you? And what else would you like to see in the game?

The post ZeniMax Gets Vocal About The Elder Scrolls Online appeared first on Gamebreaker.tv.