Elder Scrolls MMOG In Development?

Gamespot reports on the rumours swirling around the possibility of an Elder Scrolls Massively Multiplayer Online Game. They began when ZeniMax formed their very own Massive development company, ZeniMax Online. The company subsequently hired Matt Firor, formerly of EA Mythic, as its head. Now, the discussion online is centering on the registration of a URL that hints at big things to come for Bethesda's world. Pete Hines, spokesman for Bethesda, has a perfectly rational explanation: '"We are tired of people squatting on domains related to our games or simply not being able to get them if we needed them (note oblivion.com, fallout.com, and many others) and decided a while back we'd get these to keep it from happening again ... People are grabbing domains like these and trying to extract money from us for them, or using them for some other purpose.' Bogus or not bogus?: Bogus that the URL registration confirms the existence of an Elder Scrolls MMORPG. However, with others holding the Fallout and Star Trek MMORPG rights, the RPG franchise--famous for having MMORPG-size open worlds--is the only truly proven property in Bethesda's catalog."

Comments

Write Much?

[NealokNYU]

Point 1: Fallout 3 is being made by Bethesda
"others holding the Fallout and Star Trek MMORPG rights, the [Elder Scrolls] is the only truly proven property in Bethesda's catalog."

This is just shoddy reporting. Bethesda is making Fallout 3. They have the rights. They are making the game. Why would you even say this?

Point 2: Grammar Nazism
"Bogus or not bogus?: Bogus that the URL registration confirms the existence of an Elder Scrolls MMORPG."

Is this really the level of editorial craftsmanship I have to look forward to when I check Slashdot? Zonk, I thank you for taking on your thankless role. I think you get too much shit from a community here that doesn't bother to appreciate your performance of a task most here would just as soon skip. Nevertheless, considering the volume of your readership, I don't think it's unreasonable for me or anyone else to expect some degree of technical competence in the copy when I check the site.

Even under the most liberal rules of English construction, I think it's fair to say that a colon following a question mark serves no point, is lazy, and its use will jar the reader. I am not harping on formal English. e.e. cummings and Cormac McCarthy got mad skillz, yo. I'm saying that for clarity of expression and the successful conveyance of ideas, this is an instance where adherence to traditional rules of punctuation would make sense. In the future, just use a question mark. You asked a question. The next sentence answers that question. No colon is required. Yay!

I'd like to take a stab at the bizarre non-sentence following your punctuational orgy, but the above paragraph made me tired. I'll be brief: a sentence consists of a subject and a verb. Again, this is not so that you can pay fealty to some draconian grammar overlord. It is for clarity of expression.