New Brad McQuiad Interview "I want to make Worlds. Not games."

KumaponKumapon Member UncommonPosts: 1,015
Brad McQuiad sits down with gamesindustry.biz and talks about Pantheon, MMO's, the Industry, and games in general. It's a good read.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-09-28-brad-mcquaid-i-want-to-make-worlds-not-games
KilsinXodicKiori001WalkinGlenn
«1

Comments

  • LackingMMOLackingMMO Tucson, AZMember UncommonPosts: 209

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol

    KumaponJemAs666pantaroxmenty
  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaMember EpicPosts: 13,194
    I do agree you need to cater specifically to your target audience,i see absolutely no reason to try and lie to people by pretending your game caters to everyone.However that subject is not so simple because within that target audience it becomes again divided on certain principles.

    There is actually a LOT i look for in games i enjoy,i do not superficially look at 1-3 areas and say ok here's my money.I am not an addicted gamer where i NEED to buy something no matter what,like cell phone junkies,i can wait forever and would rather wait if nothing catches my eye.

    I need to feel intrigued and feel like systems are fresh,newish all the while making sense and being deep in system designs.

    One area that concerns me with all of these mmorpg's is the ability to deceive gamer's with numbers.It makes gamer's look bad,dumb whatever that they are so easily fooled.I have seen it for years,giant numbers flashing across the screen seems to get gamer's all excited,the same way flying mounts seem to get people all giddy.I do not need to see 9 digit damage numbers flashing on the screen nor do i want to see stuff like body plate of godliness with +500 STR +1500 vit,your not fooling me with that crap.
    I do NOT want to see any BEST OF,as these mmorpg's turn into nothing more than superficial gear grinds and that turns me right off.I would rather not even see the term RAIDING tossed around,ideals within the game world should be done for reasons other than LOOT.
    pantaro

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaMember EpicPosts: 13,194
    What still bothers me is an example when they used Cohn Carnage in a video cast.I am not interested in seeing Twitch celebrities used to promote a game,i want the GAME to promote itself with good design.I will be straight up and front,that video stream with Con was not good,i did not get any good vibes from that even though i know it was very early on in the build process.

    I never want to see marketing angles, i see enough of that with mmorpg.com,i only want to see the real stuff,the systems that are going to make this game great and if we can get some solid in depth explanations of how it all comes together ,then great.

    The term or phrase "A world"is more than simple individual systems that are nothing more than level numbers or a dungeon just to RAID for loot,there should be reasons and interactions with npc's as well real people.I don't want to see stuff magically appear out of thin air,like i hit level 30 wood crafting and am given a recipe book for level 30 crafts,that is weak lazy game design.
    Mendeldragonlee66

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • LackingMMOLackingMMO Tucson, AZMember UncommonPosts: 209
    I see what your saying with that Wizardry. The numbers are just superficial really. When mobs damage scale as you level it doesn't really matter anyways, it just looks "cool". But honestly who wants to see a crippling blow for 3 damage, it sounds and looks better when you hit that crippling blow for 3,000.
  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKMember LegendaryPosts: 17,142

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    KumaponAzaron_NightbladeMendel
  • GolelornGolelorn Hiding From Social Media Peeping Toms, ALMember UncommonPosts: 1,320
    Brad has had plenty of platforms. What happened with EQ? It was a world, and he reduced it to a raid game. What happened, little buddy? Was he around for EQ2? Not a world in the least.

    Then we have Vanguard... Lots of potential, but an avalanche has a lot of potential. Never ends well, though.
    svannMendel
  • rodarinrodarin camarillo, CAMember RarePosts: 1,952
    These guys still completely out of touch. They cant make games so they spin the other yarn and sell dreams. These guys have done nothing but fail fail fail when they had any sort of control. He and Chris Roberts cut from the same cloth.

    How many games have released since SC and Pantheon were announced? Many of them completely unheard of. Of course rthese guys have to claim theyre not making a 'game' thats obvious because if they were they would have released something years ago.

    But MMOs are dead. Look at games like PuBG, Fortnite, Dota 2,  Overwatch, and hearthstone. All less than 3 years old, a couple of them less than 6 months old all have more VIEWERS (as in watching OTHER people play the game) than SC or Pantheon could dream of. Add that to some of these other games that are flavor of the week like SoS, Cupheads, Destiny (although that one will prob have legs), CoD WW II and you have 10 or so games, most of which have been released in the past year that combine to have about 300K people watching other people play them.

    Many of those games are games no one had even heard of, on top of that.

    So kno these guys arent about making games because making games is easy. But they would rather sit back, NOT make a game and keep relying on demented nostalgia addicts to support them.
    pantaroGaxusn
  • LackingMMOLackingMMO Tucson, AZMember UncommonPosts: 209
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.


    I don't mind the addition of shops if they are done like lets say GW2, ESO, FF14. Cosmetic stuff doesn't bother me(as long as it goes with the image of the game) Even items for your house. Subscription to me isn't a big deal, 10-15 for a month is nothing. If I plan on playing this game as long as I played eq1/2 or any other long term mmo I played then it saves me money from other games :-)

    I think they know they are making a game that isn't going to reach the success of a WoW, they have a target audience in mind and that target audience is who they are trying to keep. I've been saying for a long time devs need to start doing that and get this one size fits all mentality out. The game is designed for a niche audience in mind. 
  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 1,740
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Who says an MMO is supposed to last forever.  It should last as long as its good, not as long as the developer can find ways to keep making money on a sub par or dated game.

    That's what I hate most about F2P and even most B2P games.  They just aren't very good, at all.  But they can survive simply because of the business model not because its a great game.

    How does this benefit the gamer if we keep getting crap games that still survive.  It doesn't.   If the game isn't good enough to warrant an upfront cost and a sub, it should fail and go away.  The next developer will then know they have to do better or don't bother.  I'd rather have one amazing MMO every 5 to 10 years than 20 pieces of shit every year.
    VorthanionXodicGdemamipantaroDullahanKiori001
  • rodarinrodarin camarillo, CAMember RarePosts: 1,952
    goboygo said:
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Who says an MMO is supposed to last forever.  It should last as long as its good, not as long as the developer can find ways to keep making money on a sub par or dated game.

    That's what I hate most about F2P and even most B2P games.  They just aren't very good, at all.  But they can survive simply because of the business model not because its a great game.

    How does this benefit the gamer if we keep getting crap games that still survive.  It doesn't.   If the game isn't good enough to warrant an upfront cost and a sub, it should fail and go away.  The next developer will then know they have to do better or don't bother.  I'd rather have one amazing MMO every 5 to 10 years than 20 pieces of shit every year.
    The major problem with MMOs is by the time they get released theyre already outdated. Especially the way these guys milk it now. The whole point of these 'indy' shops was faster delivery. Well that slowly turned into this nonsense we get now of 'creativity' and how it takes a lot of time to build a 'vision'.

    Every game that people are looking forward to now, if they even get released will look like crap compared to the whatever is being announced when these games finally do get released.
  • LackingMMOLackingMMO Tucson, AZMember UncommonPosts: 209
    rodarin said:
    goboygo said:
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Who says an MMO is supposed to last forever.  It should last as long as its good, not as long as the developer can find ways to keep making money on a sub par or dated game.

    That's what I hate most about F2P and even most B2P games.  They just aren't very good, at all.  But they can survive simply because of the business model not because its a great game.

    How does this benefit the gamer if we keep getting crap games that still survive.  It doesn't.   If the game isn't good enough to warrant an upfront cost and a sub, it should fail and go away.  The next developer will then know they have to do better or don't bother.  I'd rather have one amazing MMO every 5 to 10 years than 20 pieces of shit every year.
    The major problem with MMOs is by the time they get released theyre already outdated. Especially the way these guys milk it now. The whole point of these 'indy' shops was faster delivery. Well that slowly turned into this nonsense we get now of 'creativity' and how it takes a lot of time to build a 'vision'.

    Every game that people are looking forward to now, if they even get released will look like crap compared to the whatever is being announced when these games finally do get released.

    MMOs traditionally have always been behind graphically. Shorter development cycle wont change that. You are right though, endless add-ons to the original idea do delay the progress. I don't see tons of afterthoughts being added here but in other games its new ideas being added before the core game what seems like weekly.
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Manchester, NHMember RarePosts: 3,738
    If you can only do one you make games ...

    Learn to write if you want to create worlds.
    pantaro
  • rodarinrodarin camarillo, CAMember RarePosts: 1,952
    rodarin said:
    goboygo said:
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Who says an MMO is supposed to last forever.  It should last as long as its good, not as long as the developer can find ways to keep making money on a sub par or dated game.

    That's what I hate most about F2P and even most B2P games.  They just aren't very good, at all.  But they can survive simply because of the business model not because its a great game.

    How does this benefit the gamer if we keep getting crap games that still survive.  It doesn't.   If the game isn't good enough to warrant an upfront cost and a sub, it should fail and go away.  The next developer will then know they have to do better or don't bother.  I'd rather have one amazing MMO every 5 to 10 years than 20 pieces of shit every year.
    The major problem with MMOs is by the time they get released theyre already outdated. Especially the way these guys milk it now. The whole point of these 'indy' shops was faster delivery. Well that slowly turned into this nonsense we get now of 'creativity' and how it takes a lot of time to build a 'vision'.

    Every game that people are looking forward to now, if they even get released will look like crap compared to the whatever is being announced when these games finally do get released.

    MMOs traditionally have always been behind graphically. Shorter development cycle wont change that. You are right though, endless add-ons to the original idea do delay the progress. I don't see tons of afterthoughts being added here but in other games its new ideas being added before the core game what seems like weekly.
    thats why you have the rise of these ADD games where you go into a BG for 15-30 minutes (usually killed in less than 5) with a lobby and a few million players.

    The irony to all that is the Star Wars version of that was a complete failure. So it seems like the tried and true fantasy IPs hold no weight.

    These games people are flocking to are just random maps. and theyre all basically the same exact thing. cookie cutter versions of each other.

    so the whole 'clone' thing does in fact work, just not with MMos apparently.

    Maybe its the PLAYERS that are the problem and not the games. because some of these games MMOs hardcores laugh at have millions of people playing them and tens of thousands WATCHING them.

    I admit I laugh at them too, and I watch them from time to time. But theyre not games I have any interest in playing.
    pantaro
  • ZindaihasZindaihas Seattle, WAMember UncommonPosts: 3,642

    I completely agree with him about the goal of building a world and not a game.  That's the attitude you have to have if you are going to even come close to creating a persistent immersive realm.  In fact, I think the acronym, instead of MMORPG (or MMO for short), should simply be MOW for massive online world.

    As far as subscriptions go, I have no problem paying a monthly subscription for a game (oops, world) that I enjoying playing.  Going back to EQ, if you're addicted to it, you gotta have it, and so you're willing to pay for it.  Game stores actually detract from that immersive feeling.  I mean, if you've gotta do it in order to survive, then do it.  Just know that its another reminder that you're playing a game and not living in a world.

    JemAs666pantaro

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 3,055
    A world is incredibly enjoyable; just look at D:OS2.  It's world depth is incredible.

    Translating that into an MMORPG and keeping it fun is another matter entirely.
    JamesGoblin

    image
  • LackingMMOLackingMMO Tucson, AZMember UncommonPosts: 209
    rodarin said:
    rodarin said:
    goboygo said:
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Who says an MMO is supposed to last forever.  It should last as long as its good, not as long as the developer can find ways to keep making money on a sub par or dated game.

    That's what I hate most about F2P and even most B2P games.  They just aren't very good, at all.  But they can survive simply because of the business model not because its a great game.

    How does this benefit the gamer if we keep getting crap games that still survive.  It doesn't.   If the game isn't good enough to warrant an upfront cost and a sub, it should fail and go away.  The next developer will then know they have to do better or don't bother.  I'd rather have one amazing MMO every 5 to 10 years than 20 pieces of shit every year.
    The major problem with MMOs is by the time they get released theyre already outdated. Especially the way these guys milk it now. The whole point of these 'indy' shops was faster delivery. Well that slowly turned into this nonsense we get now of 'creativity' and how it takes a lot of time to build a 'vision'.

    Every game that people are looking forward to now, if they even get released will look like crap compared to the whatever is being announced when these games finally do get released.

    MMOs traditionally have always been behind graphically. Shorter development cycle wont change that. You are right though, endless add-ons to the original idea do delay the progress. I don't see tons of afterthoughts being added here but in other games its new ideas being added before the core game what seems like weekly.
    thats why you have the rise of these ADD games where you go into a BG for 15-30 minutes (usually killed in less than 5) with a lobby and a few million players.

    The irony to all that is the Star Wars version of that was a complete failure. So it seems like the tried and true fantasy IPs hold no weight.

    These games people are flocking to are just random maps. and theyre all basically the same exact thing. cookie cutter versions of each other.

    so the whole 'clone' thing does in fact work, just not with MMos apparently.

    Maybe its the PLAYERS that are the problem and not the games. because some of these games MMOs hardcores laugh at have millions of people playing them and tens of thousands WATCHING them.

    I admit I laugh at them too, and I watch them from time to time. But theyre not games I have any interest in playing.

    Its just the fotm genre right now. Survival games are the thing right now. Everyone is jumping on the wagon and reskinning the last. MMO games don't show very well on streams unless your doing a dungeon or raid and even then its still not something to watch. I know they are wanting to tap that area but it might be hard.
  • centkincentkin Asbury, NJMember UncommonPosts: 1,216
    The problem is that people in MMOs start at level 1.  This makes the difference between level 1 and level 50 huge.  If people started at a functional level 10, then level 50 would be far less different, plus you have an easier time with monsters less powerful than a starting adventurer.  IE you can have a level 7 monster face a level 10 starting character, but it is hard to have a level 0.7 monster to fight a level 1 player.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 3,055
    edited October 1
    rodarin said:
    Maybe its the PLAYERS that are the problem and not the games. because some of these games MMOs hardcores laugh at have millions of people playing them and tens of thousands WATCHING them.

    I admit I laugh at them too, and I watch them from time to time. But theyre not games I have any interest in playing.
    I really don't think twitch streaming makes or breaks a game, honestly.  My educated guess would be that watchability does almost nothing to support or destroy a game financially.

    The most popular viewing event ever on Twitch only reached just over 1 million viewers total.  For context, Overwatch has over 30 million players.  That means the record number of viewers for the single most popular streaming event ever on twitch (much less regular viewers) would amount to less than 4% of the Overwatch playerbase alone.

    As much press as Twitch gets, it's not nearly as big a deal as some folks want to make it out to be.  A 2015 survey published by ESA held that an estimated 42% of Americans play games for at least 3 hours a week.  2015 census data determined American population at just under 321 million.  That means, roughly, that over 134 million Americans play video games for at least 3 hours a week as of 2015 (I don't expect that number went down significantly since then).  Average simultaneous viewers on Twitch is only 600,000, worldwide.  If it were just American visitors, it would still amount for less than 1% (0.4%) of total American gamers who visit that site with any consistency, let alone watch a common title.  Of the international gamer community, that number is even less significant.

    All in all, in the larger scheme of the video gaming industry, Twitch is almost a non-factor.

    https://www.polygon.com/2015/4/14/8415611/gaming-stats-2015
    https://expandedramblings.com/index.php/twitch-stats/#.WdByf2hSyUk
    http://twitchstats.net/
    Post edited by MadFrenchie on
    KyleranJamesGoblinSlyLoKKiori001

    image
  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member EpicPosts: 3,707
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.


    I don't mind the addition of shops if they are done like lets say GW2, ESO, FF14. Cosmetic stuff doesn't bother me(as long as it goes with the image of the game) Even items for your house. Subscription to me isn't a big deal, 10-15 for a month is nothing. If I plan on playing this game as long as I played eq1/2 or any other long term mmo I played then it saves me money from other games :-)

    I think they know they are making a game that isn't going to reach the success of a WoW, they have a target audience in mind and that target audience is who they are trying to keep. I've been saying for a long time devs need to start doing that and get this one size fits all mentality out. The game is designed for a niche audience in mind. 
    Slippery slope tbh. People tend to generalize too much and not understand execution which is the real thing to notice in all of this. GW2/ESO are b2p games that over boosts and so on (ESO has a sub option as well while also charging for ever "expansion" which they tend to launch about once a year?). FF14 is a bit more egregious imo but its updated at the same rate of a f2p game (at least once a month) and sacrifices in game cosmetics just to put them into the cash shop instead of being earned in game. On top of that, there a lot of cosmetics that are not account-wide and even are gender specific (even though they have a npc that can be used in game to change the gender locks on outfits except for some of the cash shop ones). Comparing FFXIV's cash shop to WoW's, you can easily see who's better in terms of fairness since everything you buy in WoW's shop is account-wide and only updated 4-5 times out of the year (then again, Blizzard does have a lot of other properties such as books and stuff that they sell more often than SE so maybe it balances out in terms of economy, but Blizzard doesn't sacrifice as much stuff that could be put in the game as a reward as SE does). I think Kano makes a strong point and I think he's suggesting that they at least consider adopting a "token" system to keep payment options diverse and can actually make the game more money since tokens are usually charged a few bucks more than an actual subscription.
  • KyleranKyleran Paradise City, FLMember LegendaryPosts: 26,885
    Dangerously close to infringing on my signature statement Brad.

    "Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™ "

    ;)
    KumaponConstantineMerusXodicpantaroAzaron_NightbladeMadFrenchie

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    On hiatus from EVE Online since Dec 2016 - CCP continues to wander aimlessly

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon




  • RhoklawRhoklaw Ft. Bliss, TXMember EpicPosts: 5,273
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Tell that to people still playing EQ, 24 expansions later. Subscriptions are not the problem and never have been. It's the community and the catering to self entitled morons or thinking doing a cash shop and making whales pay for everyone else's free ride is what makes a long lasting game. I can tell you right now, even if Pantheon only has 50,000 people playing, much like Eve Online, it's enough to make a good profit with a subscription. A lot of people seem to think you need millions of subscribers to be successful and that's a bunch of nonsense.
    GdemamipantaroKefo

  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus LondonMember EpicPosts: 1,338
    Kyleran said:
    Dangerously close to infringing on my signature statement Brad.

    "Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™ "

    ;)
    Yeah it reminded me of you instantly. The lesson here is cats are more influential than game developers. 
    KumaponXarkoMadFrenchieKyleran
    Have you ever noticed that their stuff is shit and your shit is stuff?
  • XodicXodic RealityMember RarePosts: 709
    All I can say is that Brad's philosophy to making games is the same as my philosophy of playing them. I want to be immersed. I don't care about min/maxing, I don't care about the virtual hoarding of trinkets, I don't care about logging off feeling that I "progressed" one step further to some imaginary finish line. I just want to lose myself for what ever time I have the opportunity to do so.

    Brad is basically making an MMORPG for me. 

    It seems that VR wants to nail the social aspects, and if they can, it will greatly help with Pantheon being self sustaining. If you doubt the impact that socializing can have, look at Facespace. All it takes is a platform that allows people to form their own communities. Once those communities form and they start sharing experiences together, they'll grow stronger. I've re subbed to EQ just to pop in and say hello to people. I would think that VR is on the right track for this type of MMO, and at this point, if anyone can pull it off, it's them.

    @Kilsin
    Any plans to make chat channels accessible to inactive accounts via web?
    Gdemamidragonlee66Kayo83
  • KinkyAmraKinkyAmra ThessalonikiMember UncommonPosts: 12
    edited October 1
    Albatroes said:
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.


    I don't mind the addition of shops if they are done like lets say GW2, ESO, FF14. Cosmetic stuff doesn't bother me(as long as it goes with the image of the game) Even items for your house. Subscription to me isn't a big deal, 10-15 for a month is nothing. If I plan on playing this game as long as I played eq1/2 or any other long term mmo I played then it saves me money from other games :-)

    I think they know they are making a game that isn't going to reach the success of a WoW, they have a target audience in mind and that target audience is who they are trying to keep. I've been saying for a long time devs need to start doing that and get this one size fits all mentality out. The game is designed for a niche audience in mind. 
    Slippery slope tbh. People tend to generalize too much and not understand execution which is the real thing to notice in all of this. GW2/ESO are b2p games that over boosts and so on (ESO has a sub option as well while also charging for ever "expansion" which they tend to launch about once a year?). FF14 is a bit more egregious imo but its updated at the same rate of a f2p game (at least once a month) and sacrifices in game cosmetics just to put them into the cash shop instead of being earned in game. On top of that, there a lot of cosmetics that are not account-wide and even are gender specific (even though they have a npc that can be used in game to change the gender locks on outfits except for some of the cash shop ones). Comparing FFXIV's cash shop to WoW's, you can easily see who's better in terms of fairness since everything you buy in WoW's shop is account-wide and only updated 4-5 times out of the year (then again, Blizzard does have a lot of other properties such as books and stuff that they sell more often than SE so maybe it balances out in terms of economy, but Blizzard doesn't sacrifice as much stuff that could be put in the game as a reward as SE does). I think Kano makes a strong point and I think he's suggesting that they at least consider adopting a "token" system to keep payment options diverse and can actually make the game more money since tokens are usually charged a few bucks more than an actual subscription.
    The hate you have for FFXIV and SE is so real.In every post you make you bash them.
    Post edited by KinkyAmra on
    GdemamiKyleran
  • delete5230delete5230 Member RarePosts: 4,229
    goboygo said:
    DMKano said:

    "But if you're making a game that is meant to be played for a longer period of time, then I think you should have a target audience and you should spend the time making the best game for them because you want to keep them around. Every player is important - not just the 3% or 5% that monetise. And especially if you're using the sub model, keeping them around and keeping them happy and making it more than a game and more of a home, that's what's important."


    Nice find, was a good read. Now I need to stop looking at this game again so I stop getting my hopes up! lol



    The problem with pure subscription model when it comes to MMOs - it's a losing battle longterm, as there's only one outcome - declining population which means decreasing profits over time.

    WoW, EvE and a handful of others managed to grow the population post launch - but inevitably after a while they too started losing players.

    What WoW and EvE both did (as well as 99.99% of all MMOs currently running) is introduce additional ways to spend money on game outside of subscription to compensate for declining playerbase - aka cash shop.

    Pantheon can launch without a cash shop - it can even run for a year or more without one - but it cannot run for 5+ years without something in addition to subscription that players can spend money on to offset declining playerbase.

    Who says an MMO is supposed to last forever.  It should last as long as its good, not as long as the developer can find ways to keep making money on a sub par or dated game.

    That's what I hate most about F2P and even most B2P games.  They just aren't very good, at all.  But they can survive simply because of the business model not because its a great game.

    How does this benefit the gamer if we keep getting crap games that still survive.  It doesn't.   If the game isn't good enough to warrant an upfront cost and a sub, it should fail and go away.  The next developer will then know they have to do better or don't bother.  I'd rather have one amazing MMO every 5 to 10 years than 20 pieces of shit every year.

    Agree goboygo 

    How this topic turned into a payment model discussion I don't know.... Wait... I know DMKano is pushing his F2P again. 


    With F2P, this is what happens:
    When it releases EVERYONE plays it like any new release.  EVERYONE spends money on what is needed.  The ENDLESS MONEY SPENDERS support a lot of revenue in the early stages. 

    A few months in the revenue stops forever !!!!....... Unless it's offered on Steam for $5 and advertised as new every so often......Given more time, the revenue stops forever, and for good !!!

    F2P is an old Asian trick to get large sums of money fast.

    Hit-and-Run

    GdemamipantaroKyleran
Sign In or Register to comment.