Pantheon will not attract everyone. Not in a million years. Even if a wise investor comes along with an understanding and appreciation for the game, and invests big bucks, it will still not appeal to everyone.
Why? Most people don't want a game with a learning curve. They don't want a game where you're dependent on other players, progress takes a lot of time, or one that punishes you if you fail. Frankly, they don't want a virtual world, they just want a video game to kill a few hours here and there.
I disagree.
Real MMO players wants virtual worlds.
What you are describing are the mass market players who are not necessarily too keen on MMOs, but they will play them if they are casual enough, hence the explosion of the MMO popularity.
Blizzard hit the jackpot by having a winning intuition, they were the first ones to tap in that huge unexplored market , and got all the benefits.
Because of Blizzard great intuition, all MMO developers decided it was wise to copy/paste WoW in a way or another to appeal those mass market players ignoring the original MMO vision and its players.
The real MMOs died with WoW, when developers decided there was no more room for a PVE MMO, with a virtual world and strong social interaction.
But just because developers have been blind for 10 years that doesn't mean that the desire for a good "old School" MMO is dead.
In fact is as big as ever, but in order to revive it, we need a smart developer that decides to tap in that market the same way Blizzard tapped in the casual mass market, and made it its own.
I hope Pantheon is the one, but until I see some concrete evidence they are serious about it.
I am a fan of Brad MCQuaid, but I have to be honest, and so far the game looks vaporware.
Waiting for their first major update in September.
You don't disagree at all, you just think people who like modern games aren't real MMO players. For whatever reason, they don't count to you. Well, I'm counting them too, and many of them won't be playing Pantheon. Some will probably try it and find they actually like it, but if you actually think the average player currently playing MMOs will enjoy a virtual world that actually takes time, coordinated effort, and often losing or having their progress delayed, you are sorely mistaken.
Brad McQuaid would probably sell his soul to make money that ArcheAge is making.
Just funny that you start off by "making millions" and then mention ArcheAge as a failure which is HUGELY profitable.
Profitablity and forum reputation are two entirely different things - posters can hate ArcheAge day and night but the game is making a killing.
As far as everyone paying $15+ to play and Old school MMORPG - no, that's not even remotely true IMO.
This is my guess on what would actually happen with any old school MMORPG *today*
- initial surge of maybe 500-800K players
- After 6-8 weeks they would be at 30-40% of launch players
- less than 100K in 6 months
The only way to sustain proftiablity would be a cash shop to go along with the sub
^Pretty much. And the same goes for a lot of titles that relics on this site like to hate on.
Of course I can't blame them for hating those games. It sucks when reality sticks its ugly head into one's carefully crafted dreamworld, where only their opinion matters and everyone shares it.
And yeah, the game that couldn't even get Kickstarted successfully is going to blow everyone's minds.
Never change, Delete5230. These forums wouldn't be the same without your sense of humor.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Originally posted by booniedog96 SW:TOR, LotRO, Warhammer Online, AoC, SWG, FFXIV (version 1.0), ESO all established licenses failed in subscription model and have gone f2p or just flat out gone. You think a new IP even dare go P2P after seeing what happened to Wildstar and ESO last year? Those two titles ran out of gas before they even left the gate. They got dropped faster than any MMO I've seen come out as triple A titles, they didn't even make it to the three month mark before a majority of their audience fell off.
The games you described sucked, or were too early on to be spectacular !!!......And F2P will always fail given a few months, period !
Your describing the boring arguing type of post I mentioned in my post.......We argue.....Now we need meat and potato's !
I'll not argue just to argue.
I like your enthusiasm, but your statement that F2P will always fail is questionable. I could name any number of F2P games that are doing rather well. In fact, in today's market, it's the P2P games that have to prove themselves and not the reverse. Of course there are success stories in both cases, but neither is an Eden of success.
This game is not being made for the masses it's being made for a niche group of mmo gamers. Grouping, death penalties and long leveling curb will not be for everyone. On top of this it's a PVE mmo.
Originally posted by delete5230 Originally posted by booniedog96 SW:TOR, LotRO, Warhammer Online, AoC, SWG, FFXIV (version 1.0), ESO all established licenses failed in subscription model and have gone f2p or just flat out gone. You think a new IP even dare go P2P after seeing what happened to Wildstar and ESO last year? Those two titles ran out of gas before they even left the gate. They got dropped faster than any MMO I've seen come out as triple A titles, they didn't even make it to the three month mark before a majority of their audience fell off.
The games you described sucked, or were too early on to be spectacular !!!......And F2P will always fail given a few months, period !
Your describing the boring arguing type of post I mentioned in my post.......We argue.....Now we need meat and potato's !
I'll not argue just to argue.
i doubt you actually played wildstar.
but welcome to mmos.
and seriously, all i see is an outfated tab target combat system.
sure, in 2004 it was good, that's how blizz made their success. incase you didn't get it, that system is MORE Than 20 years old now. time to work on something new.
those phones with the dial disc dissapeared too, and they rised like shiiiiit in sales once they came out
And it's a good job the devs are not making this game for the masses they are making the game for people who like what you dislike in an MMO. Lucky for you there are plenty of MMO's that have what you like, Pantheon is not one of them.
Originally posted by booniedog96 SW:TOR, LotRO, Warhammer Online, AoC, SWG, FFXIV (version 1.0), ESO all established licenses failed in subscription model and have gone f2p or just flat out gone. You think a new IP even dare go P2P after seeing what happened to Wildstar and ESO last year? Those two titles ran out of gas before they even left the gate. They got dropped faster than any MMO I've seen come out as triple A titles, they didn't even make it to the three month mark before a majority of their audience fell off.
In truth people will pay a subscription, FFXIV is proof of that. The problem with your examples is that you really don't take into acount the "why".
Star Wars the Old Republic - A lot of controversy over this titel, hordes of peopel who wanted Star Wars Galaxies 2.0, Players getting their hopes up way beyond reasonable and the game launches, it's not what people want, some perforance issues, "not a world" but a bioware game through and through and then it doesn't do as well as they wanted. Not to mention all the up front money it cost to make it.
Lord of the Rings Online: Turbine was floundering with Dungeons and Dragons Online so tried the free to play and it worked better than they thought. THAT is why they tried it with free to play. Issues? Well, it wasn't what some people wanted from a Lord of the Rings game, the avatars are atrocious, long periods before players get substantial content updates and not really great content updates. I find it very difficult to play any more as it all just feels dreadful.
Age of Conan? Issues, bugs, areas where there were hardly any quests so gaps in questing, a game that played differently from the 1-20 experience, High end machines needed, Star Wars Galaxies - bugs, not bringing in the money they wanted so they changed everything and lost hordes of people,
FFXIV version 1.0 it was horrid, unintuitive interface, people didn't feel it captured "Final Fantasy" it was dreadfully dull,
Elder Scrolls Online - They might have always planned to move it to f2p but with the console launches it made more sense. It wasn't the game a lot of Elder Scrolls fans wanted and the Dark Age of Camelot fans wanting DAoC 2 didn't quite get what they wanted (why they were even a talking point in an Elder Scrolls game is even more disturbing.
So the games didn't fail in the sub model they failed to capture the demographic of players who would have played theri game (to greater or lesser extent).
As far as delete's post, I don't really agree, too many disparate groups of people to all play the same game.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Originally posted by booniedog96 SW:TOR, LotRO, Warhammer Online, AoC, SWG, FFXIV (version 1.0), ESO all established licenses failed in subscription model and have gone f2p or just flat out gone. You think a new IP even dare go P2P after seeing what happened to Wildstar and ESO last year? Those two titles ran out of gas before they even left the gate. They got dropped faster than any MMO I've seen come out as triple A titles, they didn't even make it to the three month mark before a majority of their audience fell off.
EVERY game has run out of gas,remember that super hyped game called AION?The ONLY tiem you will hear about it in subscription games because they have numbers to lose while f2p is a cop out,they have no legit numbers so they can say anything.BTW FFXIV is still a sub game.
Every game that has failed deserve to fail,they were rubbish games,it had nothing at all to do with subscription.
The way developers are trying to scam gamer's right now is a big time joke and tons are falling for it.The ONLY reason we see subs is usually because the developer figures it will grab as much from it as it can and just go f2p which was the original plan anyhow.Then instead of being flamed for releasing unfinished work and asking money,now devs call their crap games early access or Alpha/Beta,the funny part is they are still charging box price to enter these grossly unfinished games.
You know what the developers saw?A sucker born every minute and they are cashing in on them.
Bottom line is you want QUALITY,quit giving free money for all these crap unfinished games.
Wizardry,
This is a good strong post, thank you very much for nailing the crap that is going on
We need an extremely strong mmo.......It's been too long, Pantheon or not we still need one.
Originally posted by booniedog96 SW:TOR, LotRO, Warhammer Online, AoC, SWG, FFXIV (version 1.0), ESO all established licenses failed in subscription model and have gone f2p or just flat out gone. You think a new IP even dare go P2P after seeing what happened to Wildstar and ESO last year? Those two titles ran out of gas before they even left the gate. They got dropped faster than any MMO I've seen come out as triple A titles, they didn't even make it to the three month mark before a majority of their audience fell off.
EVERY game has run out of gas,remember that super hyped game called AION?The ONLY tiem you will hear about it in subscription games because they have numbers to lose while f2p is a cop out,they have no legit numbers so they can say anything.BTW FFXIV is still a sub game.
Every game that has failed deserve to fail,they were rubbish games,it had nothing at all to do with subscription.
The way developers are trying to scam gamer's right now is a big time joke and tons are falling for it.The ONLY reason we see subs is usually because the developer figures it will grab as much from it as it can and just go f2p which was the original plan anyhow.Then instead of being flamed for releasing unfinished work and asking money,now devs call their crap games early access or Alpha/Beta,the funny part is they are still charging box price to enter these grossly unfinished games.
You know what the developers saw?A sucker born every minute and they are cashing in on them.
Bottom line is you want QUALITY,quit giving free money for all these crap unfinished games.
Wizardry,
This is a good strong post, thank you very much for nailing the crap that is going on
We need an extremely strong mmo.......It's been too long, Pantheon or not we still need one.
Those games still have subscription option.
Yup.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Now this is not a dig against Pantheon Rise of the Fallen.
I'm not a kickstarter expert. This is the new developer scheme-of-all-things now I guess, and I haven't bought into one yet, because I can wait for full games.
So I have some questions :
1) Does this give companies a SOFTER approach for half done games ?
2) Can companies keep an mmo in alpha or beta state forever ?
3) Can they use alpha or bata state to continually ask for financial backing, and give the appearance everything is going to plan ?
4) Do you ever get the feeling you better jump into a kickstarter half done game, because you will be left behind ?
5) What will be the next marketing trick when Kickstarter runs it's toll ?
For me the new buzz word " Kickstarter " does not sit well......
Free to play is a symptom of a problem. The problem is an oversupply of the same thing. Price is a function of supply and demand. If there are dozens of MMORPGs that all are virtually the same such that they could supply a market many times larger than exists. then there's an oversupply. If there's an oversupply then the companies that own the games have to lower prices or people will just go to another MMORPG that is virtually the same but cheaper. So rather than lower prices until they go out of business companies use cash shops to make money. Only that just allows them to lower their subscription even further until everyone is giving their product away and making all their money on the cash shop.
On other thing that is critical to understand is that if you make a product that can be consumed, like most linear games then you face the same problem. It's not that you aren't different it's that once all the players who were interested have consumed your content they move on. So even games that are different can oversupply the market if their game can be consumed and then players move on.
The solution to the problem is differentiation. Make an MMORPG that offers a truly unique experience and is open ended. Then you are not playing in the same arena. You capture a segment of the market that can't get what you have anywhere else. Any game maker can do it. They are just afraid to try.
People who prefer the type of game that is in oversupply will, or course, be convinced that all games must be F2P, because they see no value in a game that is different. So will players who can't imagine anything other than linear quests driven games that can be consumed and then discarded. I think Brad an Company realize that differentiation (whether done by them or someone else) is the key to capturing a portion of the market and is what will allow future game companies to charge a sub and get away with it, because you can't just go somewhere else. They have a captive market.
It's called niche marketing and it's been around for decades and widely employed in almost every industry. Books have been written on it as a way to position a smaller company against much larger rivals.
There's a simple rule: people will always pay for something they think is worth it. Game manufacturers just have to make games that some segment of the market deems worth it and they will attract subscribers.
This thread just proves that some posters here are crazy enough to think that their interests are the interests of the MMO genre as a whole. The goody-two-shoes, as you call us, are the only sane people left on these boards. At least some of us realize that while our exact interests aren't being catered to it doesn't mean that the genre is in trouble, we don't think the MMO genre owes us anything.
No game, no matter its quality or feature set, is ever going to grab every MMO player out there. Thinking that it's possible and that the game to do so will be one that aligns with your personal interests is delusional.
It's a breath of fresh air to see a post from the sane posters here mixed in with all us crazy people
More so than not, were all searching for an mmo. Even one !
Some just simply ask on the site for another game, some just game hop around.....Seems very few can call one game home. Some are goody-two-shoes, they love everything. Wrap a rock in tin foil and fling in in the back yard and they'll play with it .
@delete5230 You've been here since 2007. You should have seen hundreds of threads similar to your own for every upcoming, hyped new game throughout that time (I sure have). Whether they are F2P, B2P or P2P; themepark or sandbox.
People get hyped for different things and care about different things. You should know better than to suggest that EVERYONE is suddenly gonna go over to this game. It won't happen.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
We are always told "that is just due to early alpha / beta!".
They always release in a state of crap and copy pasta of past fails.
We market them to gamers.
Most of the gamers have already played MMOs for many years.
Whatever we market, the players grumble "same old, same old" and blame the devs for their overexposure.
All the players truly want to play is a ten+ year old title that's still active.
But the players can't play that one, because it's "same old, same old."
But it's the only game they truly want to play, a copy pasta.
But they hate copy pasta.
Do you see the endless loop?
Your loop is wrong. Yes most older players want to play their 10+ year old title, but they dont play it not because of 'same old same old' as you say, but because those titles are truly old and we are used to better quality of life in our games.
For me personally, all I need is Anarchy Online, with modern graphics and UI, I would ban the devs from changing any aspect of the older game because they are bound to screw it up. They come in with their modern ideas of accessibility, everyone is a winner, must be quick, cash shop mentality and suddenly the game has lost all its charm. So please give me an old mmoRPG with modern UI and graphics and I ll pay you subscription as long there are people playing it. (Dont like solo) .
THis is proven by the numerous old RPG funded on kickstarter - Baldurs Gate, Shadowrun, Wasteland 2, POE and Divintity, etc etc etc.
There is a market for reskinned old games as long as you stay true to the model and dont mess with it too much. MMO developers for some reason refuse to do this - I get that its a big investment and you are hoping to catch some of the market by being innovative with a new story but somebody should try. Right now we just dont know if what the people on the forums really want would work or not because nobody has tried.
To be honest most mmorpg's today are really single player games with a glorified chat system until level cap, there is 0 reason to explore the world at all. You don't need anyone for the lving process at all. Its why my fave mmorpg years ago was ff11, you needed people to do anything, you needed to be social or else you'd get no where. I haven't seen a mmorpg with that level of player interaction with each other since well.. ff11. Though FF11 went downhill once they started changing the game to cater to casuals too much.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
To be honest most mmorpg's today are really single player games with a glorified chat system until level cap, there is 0 reason to explore the world at all. You don't need anyone for the lving process at all. Its why my fave mmorpg years ago was ff11, you needed people to do anything, you needed to be social or else you'd get no where. I haven't seen a mmorpg with that level of player interaction with each other since well.. ff11. Though FF11 went downhill once they started changing the game to cater to casuals too much.
I think some of what you're talking about was predicted 15 years ago. It wasn't hard to see that there was a large contingent of gamers who were asking for things to change. There have always been people who saw the social aspects of the game as a barrier to solo progress. They didn't want to ask for a bind or a rez, they wanted dungeons they could solo, they wanted to be self sufficient. When EQ was the only real game in town the devs harped on "The Vision," but they still did move in that direction, People who liked to comment on the industry could see that and predicted games would give players what they wanted and it would destroy the industry.
I wouldn't go so far as to say it destroyed the industry, I mean it did bring in a massive number of players who wouldn't otherwise be here. However it lead to a glut of single player MMORPGs. I don't think we need the industry to move in a new direction, we need the industry to diversify, to try a lot of new directions. If new games come out and prove that they can be viable with a different model then things will change.
Comments
You don't disagree at all, you just think people who like modern games aren't real MMO players. For whatever reason, they don't count to you. Well, I'm counting them too, and many of them won't be playing Pantheon. Some will probably try it and find they actually like it, but if you actually think the average player currently playing MMOs will enjoy a virtual world that actually takes time, coordinated effort, and often losing or having their progress delayed, you are sorely mistaken.
^Pretty much. And the same goes for a lot of titles that relics on this site like to hate on.
Of course I can't blame them for hating those games. It sucks when reality sticks its ugly head into one's carefully crafted dreamworld, where only their opinion matters and everyone shares it.
And yeah, the game that couldn't even get Kickstarted successfully is going to blow everyone's minds.
Never change, Delete5230. These forums wouldn't be the same without your sense of humor.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
I like your enthusiasm, but your statement that F2P will always fail is questionable. I could name any number of F2P games that are doing rather well. In fact, in today's market, it's the P2P games that have to prove themselves and not the reverse. Of course there are success stories in both cases, but neither is an Eden of success.
I self identify as a monkey.
The games you described sucked, or were too early on to be spectacular !!!......And F2P will always fail given a few months, period !
Your describing the boring arguing type of post I mentioned in my post.......We argue.....Now we need meat and potato's !
I'll not argue just to argue.
i doubt you actually played wildstar.
but welcome to mmos.
and seriously, all i see is an outfated tab target combat system.
sure, in 2004 it was good, that's how blizz made their success. incase you didn't get it, that system is MORE Than 20 years old now. time to work on something new.
those phones with the dial disc dissapeared too, and they rised like shiiiiit in sales once they came out
And it's a good job the devs are not making this game for the masses they are making the game for people who like what you dislike in an MMO. Lucky for you there are plenty of MMO's that have what you like, Pantheon is not one of them.In truth people will pay a subscription, FFXIV is proof of that. The problem with your examples is that you really don't take into acount the "why".
Star Wars the Old Republic - A lot of controversy over this titel, hordes of peopel who wanted Star Wars Galaxies 2.0, Players getting their hopes up way beyond reasonable and the game launches, it's not what people want, some perforance issues, "not a world" but a bioware game through and through and then it doesn't do as well as they wanted. Not to mention all the up front money it cost to make it.
Lord of the Rings Online: Turbine was floundering with Dungeons and Dragons Online so tried the free to play and it worked better than they thought. THAT is why they tried it with free to play. Issues? Well, it wasn't what some people wanted from a Lord of the Rings game, the avatars are atrocious, long periods before players get substantial content updates and not really great content updates. I find it very difficult to play any more as it all just feels dreadful.
Age of Conan? Issues, bugs, areas where there were hardly any quests so gaps in questing, a game that played differently from the 1-20 experience, High end machines needed, Star Wars Galaxies - bugs, not bringing in the money they wanted so they changed everything and lost hordes of people,
FFXIV version 1.0 it was horrid, unintuitive interface, people didn't feel it captured "Final Fantasy" it was dreadfully dull,
Elder Scrolls Online - They might have always planned to move it to f2p but with the console launches it made more sense. It wasn't the game a lot of Elder Scrolls fans wanted and the Dark Age of Camelot fans wanting DAoC 2 didn't quite get what they wanted (why they were even a talking point in an Elder Scrolls game is even more disturbing.
So the games didn't fail in the sub model they failed to capture the demographic of players who would have played theri game (to greater or lesser extent).
As far as delete's post, I don't really agree, too many disparate groups of people to all play the same game.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Those games still have subscription option.
Yup.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Now this is not a dig against Pantheon Rise of the Fallen.
I'm not a kickstarter expert. This is the new developer scheme-of-all-things now I guess, and I haven't bought into one yet, because I can wait for full games.
So I have some questions :
1) Does this give companies a SOFTER approach for half done games ?
2) Can companies keep an mmo in alpha or beta state forever ?
3) Can they use alpha or bata state to continually ask for financial backing, and give the appearance everything is going to plan ?
4) Do you ever get the feeling you better jump into a kickstarter half done game, because you will be left behind ?
5) What will be the next marketing trick when Kickstarter runs it's toll ?
For me the new buzz word " Kickstarter " does not sit well......
On other thing that is critical to understand is that if you make a product that can be consumed, like most linear games then you face the same problem. It's not that you aren't different it's that once all the players who were interested have consumed your content they move on. So even games that are different can oversupply the market if their game can be consumed and then players move on.
The solution to the problem is differentiation. Make an MMORPG that offers a truly unique experience and is open ended. Then you are not playing in the same arena. You capture a segment of the market that can't get what you have anywhere else. Any game maker can do it. They are just afraid to try.
People who prefer the type of game that is in oversupply will, or course, be convinced that all games must be F2P, because they see no value in a game that is different. So will players who can't imagine anything other than linear quests driven games that can be consumed and then discarded. I think Brad an Company realize that differentiation (whether done by them or someone else) is the key to capturing a portion of the market and is what will allow future game companies to charge a sub and get away with it, because you can't just go somewhere else. They have a captive market.
It's called niche marketing and it's been around for decades and widely employed in almost every industry. Books have been written on it as a way to position a smaller company against much larger rivals.
There's a simple rule: people will always pay for something they think is worth it. Game manufacturers just have to make games that some segment of the market deems worth it and they will attract subscribers.
It's a breath of fresh air to see a post from the sane posters here mixed in with all us crazy people
More so than not, were all searching for an mmo. Even one !
Some just simply ask on the site for another game, some just game hop around.....Seems very few can call one game home. Some are goody-two-shoes, they love everything. Wrap a rock in tin foil and fling in in the back yard and they'll play with it .
Mostare looking for a REAL MMO.
People get hyped for different things and care about different things. You should know better than to suggest that EVERYONE is suddenly gonna go over to this game. It won't happen.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Do you see the endless loop?
Mcquaid needs to deliver with this one just like Jacobs does with CU.
I'd luv to see both those games be successful.
For me personally, all I need is Anarchy Online, with modern graphics and UI, I would ban the devs from changing any aspect of the older game because they are bound to screw it up. They come in with their modern ideas of accessibility, everyone is a winner, must be quick, cash shop mentality and suddenly the game has lost all its charm. So please give me an old mmoRPG with modern UI and graphics and I ll pay you subscription as long there are people playing it. (Dont like solo) .
THis is proven by the numerous old RPG funded on kickstarter - Baldurs Gate, Shadowrun, Wasteland 2, POE and Divintity, etc etc etc.
There is a market for reskinned old games as long as you stay true to the model and dont mess with it too much. MMO developers for some reason refuse to do this - I get that its a big investment and you are hoping to catch some of the market by being innovative with a new story but somebody should try. Right now we just dont know if what the people on the forums really want would work or not because nobody has tried.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
I wouldn't go so far as to say it destroyed the industry, I mean it did bring in a massive number of players who wouldn't otherwise be here. However it lead to a glut of single player MMORPGs. I don't think we need the industry to move in a new direction, we need the industry to diversify, to try a lot of new directions. If new games come out and prove that they can be viable with a different model then things will change.
Please look up what that term exactly means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
There is a prototype of Vanguard, we've seen videos - and if you pay the 1000$ pledge you can probably already access it. Thus its not Vaporware.
And early next year, when the alpha starts, 100$ will be sufficient for access.