Trickle release is my concern

delete5230

This is a matter that shouldn't be taken lightly,

I don't know the exact definition of a kickstarter or crowdfunding.  What I do know is that people are allowed to donate money to help fund development of the game with a promises of early access........Please, this is NOT a topic about a definition, BUT MORE about early access.

As coming closer and closer to release time, the company will allow members to test and play the game. Their will be bugs, their will be underdeveloped zones, there will be nonbalance......It could reach a point that everyone that is planning on playing the game will be jumping in a different points during the undone Bata process......BUT THE GAME WILL NOT BE DONE !....People don't like this, there not understanding either.

 This will be toxic: 

- Players, posters and critic's will degrade the game, even with the understanding of under development.  People don't care.  There are many that would love to say " See the game sucks ".

- No shock and awe.  Opening day.  MMO's need this.  Everyone one online at once, with everyone fresh to the game at the same time.  Sure, this sucks for developers with crashes and such, but this is what the RUTHLESS players demand. This alone proves how toxic the community can be.  Every release of every mmo has a bad opening day.  Players are fast to say " bad game, see I told you ".  Yet you still need the shock and awe of opening day.

- Players attract players.  With a Trickle release, they will come and go.  Say what you feel, but full servers matter, people like to see that.  It makes them feel good.  They feel like their where they are supposed to be.

I for some reason do more than just play mmos.  I study populations using various methods.  For years I've studied many populations of many mmos such as World of Warcraft, Vanguard, D&D Online, EQ2 and many others. 

It's ironic that Vanguard is the best example.  Vanguard I found the most intriguing, later on shortly after SOE owned it is when I jumped in.  At this point the population was always at a low, continually at a low.  YET, IT HAD A LARGE FOLLOWING.  MANY ACCUALLY LOVED THE GAME.  So what happened ?.......Well, I totally nailed it !......

New players were constantly starting.  Every night at least one or two.  But and I have to stress the word BUT, others were quitting evenly as fast as new players were starting.....This kept the population at 600....No one stayed because no one to play with ! 

Large population. A rock hard large population all the time is more important than anything. You need the shock and awe !

delete5230

Mega servers sound inviting on paper.  This would sound like a good solution !

But, they have extremely bad effects, by keeping the community disjointed......Mega servers can kill an mmo ! 

Dullahan

Its always a little risky to allow early access. Issues do arise like players getting tired or revealing the game before its actually ready to be seen or even tested.

All we can hope is that they don't open the doors to any portion of the game too early and to too many people. You don't want the first experience to be a rude awakening. I'm actually not a fan of allowing people to "Alpha test" for this very reason.

I do think they intend to allow a smaller number (only those who pledged early or higher amounts) to come in at first, so hopefully that will filter out the riff raff that would be freaked out by bugs and run off saying "I told you so."

Rattenmann

I second this.
Early access is done wrong like 99% of the time. And is harmful to the games reputation about 90% of the time. 

Made up numbers? Sure. But damn close to what it feels like. Pantheon is the only hope for EQ Vets like me. If does not have a huge enough following (yet) to be able to loose people over these kind of development errors that every game seems to do nowadays.

tom_gore

I agree. Early Access is a plague that needs to go away fast. Letting big amount of paying customers in one year or more before the actual release will mean that a lot of the playerbase will not even play the game on release, because they're already fed up with the game, having spent countless hours playing the EA already.

Add in this the usual wipe at release and most players will not start over, instead huddling to the next Early Access game (or another game that releases at the same time).

Betas are ok. Keep them short, and really close to the release. That way, they both allow the developer to stress test their servers and find some bugs, and also prevent people from getting bored with the game even before it has released.

SpottyGekko

I think developers have come to the conclusion that the majority of players only stay for a month or two, regardless of whether it's alpha or launch, or even if the game is "good" or "bad".

But it's easier to persuade players to pay upfront for "Early Access", specially if it is going to be an F2P game anyway.

Better to get a guaranteed $20 right now than the vague possibility that you might be able to get $40 a year from now...

tom_gore

SpottyGekko said:

I think developers have come to the conclusion that the majority of players only stay for a month or two, regardless of whether it's alpha or launch, or even if the game is "good" or "bad".

But it's easier to persuade players to pay upfront for "Early Access", specially if it is going to be an F2P game anyway.

Better to get a guaranteed $20 right now than the vague possibility that you might be able to get $40 a year from now...

Or nothing, for an F2P title that can be tried and tested for free at launch.

I myself have fallen to the EA pit too many times, and I still do it. I doubt if I'll ever learn.

delete5230

The nature of the beast,

The $600 investing players will see the game at it's worst, with first shot at the game.

I hope their not gonna be too pissed with alpha !

People say there ok with bugs, understanding and all, but deep down inside their not.

Shaigh

delete5230 said:

The nature of the beast,

The $600 investing players will see the game at it's worst, with first shot at the game.

I hope their not gonna be too pissed with alpha !

People say there ok with bugs, understanding and all, but deep down inside their not.

I'm totally fine feeding on tears from people investing $600 without understanding what an alpha is.

Kyleran

I think if you look at how Elite Dangerous is going you will see a good model for how many Kickstarters are going to release and grow over time. 

The early MMOs were actually released with very little content. Eve, Dark Age of Camelot and some others were released in very limited form with small player bases to start and grew from there.

You could even argue that they had trickle in players as well in the form of alpha and beta testers and it didn't seem to hurt the game or prevent them from going forward.  Difference being of course they didn't charge those alpha and beta players to do this but really it's not that much different.

Back in the early days of the genre the player base learned to adapt to the game conditions not the other way around.  

I believe we are heading back to that time with smaller audiences less appeal to the mass market players that will work to adapt to the game again rather than worry about their own preferences.

True this market is much smaller than the ones that have been catered to in the past 10 years but I think it'll be a good thing overall for fans of the early genre.

Charlie.Cheswick

delete5230 said:

Players attract players.... With a Trickle release... it is when I jumped in........Well, I totally nailed it

Large population. A rock hard large population all the time is more important than anything. You need the shock and awe !

OP. You had me at hello...

Raidan_EQ

It is a concern, especially for a subscription based game.  However, this is where I think Pantheon's reputation will actually help it.  Because many people won't support the game until a successful launch is observed.  I'd wager that there will be quite a few more supporters in beta, but, there will be enough that will want to see the finished product that I think Pantheon will be outside the norm here.

Shaigh

If there is something of interest within the game people will be excited and show up for the full release. If the game is crap with development just not improving it enough people will abandon it during early access and the full release will tank.

Even if they open up the game its just a few individuals that hit beta-burnout,  the masses don't aim to reach cap during a beta, they just want to learn enough of the game and wait for release to fully experience the game.

The real problem with early access are games that has slow development and just never reach a finished state. If VR do their job it will never become a problem.

joeslowmoe

What? I don't get the point of this post.  They are selling early access to the game as an incentive to fund the game, and you don't want those who have paid for it to have it because.... well I didn't see a good reason really.  Just a bunch of nonsense that is going to occur in a world with a 24/7 video game news cycle.  The reviewers are going to have early access to the game regardless of the crowd funding packages; they always do.  It is part of how spin/buzz is generated for games. 

BTW this game isn't going to have a "rock hard large population" if you can't figure that out by now, based on what games do have large populations and what those communities ask for from those games, idk what to tell you. 

Amathe

I don't think early access testers will be a problem, unless (as could happen) they log in, see a beta quest NPC with a floaty exclamation point , and run screaming to the boards that Pantheon is a WoW clone. That, and things like that, are much more of a concern than bugs and incomplete content. 

Sinist

Amathe said:

I don't think early access testers will be a problem, unless (as could happen) they log in, see a beta quest NPC with a floaty exclamation point , and run screaming to the boards that Pantheon is a WoW clone. That, and things like that, are much more of a concern than bugs and incomplete content. 

That would never happen. It would be suicide of them to even attempt such.

Zarriya

There is no Early Access ....

currently, to my knowlege. Right now there is no pledge that allows people play the game before launch with character that will not be wiped at launch. There is only access to test that you get with a pledge : https://www.pantheonmmo.com/join/pledge/

Wizardry

When you slap a 40 dollar price tag on testing and months later your game is still the same,you lose all respect as an honest businessman.
Manipulating terms and ideals to simply benefit your own business is lame beyond words.

This site is every bit as bad supporting this crap because of $$$$.Look at the Skyforge advert still advertising Beta access lmao.Open Beta july 16,soooo 5 months later still claims Beta,wow must be lots of changes over that time.H1Z1 is every bit as bad,9 months later a female model,a gun a bow wow nice work for one guy in one week.

EVERY single one of these are cash grabs,grab your money then your stuck with a vacated game not worth a dime.Developers won't stop this nonsense,if people are stupid enough to keep supporting lame business practices,they will gladly take your money.

Wizardry

Bottom line is if a game and it's concepts are solid,an investor will support the game.It holds the developer accountable and forces them to get something done and makes sure they are not just pocketing the money and running to the casino.

That is how  life works.you start small,earn your position in life,then you build off of your own merits.Blizzard earned their money,they can build their own games there is no need to rip off naive consumers,that is how it should be done,you earn your way up the ladder.

No matter how good i think a game and it's concepts are,i will never give any free money to a game developer.

Sinist

Wizardry said:

Bottom line is if a game and it's concepts are solid,an investor will support the game.It holds the developer accountable and forces them to get something done and makes sure they are not just pocketing the money and running to the casino.

That is how  life works.you start small,earn your position in life,then you build off of your own merits.Blizzard earned their money,they can build their own games there is no need to rip off naive consumers,that is how it should be done,you earn your way up the ladder.

No matter how good i think a game and it's concepts are,i will never give any free money to a game developer.

Having an investor does not mean the product is solid. An investor usually cares about how much they will get out of their investment and that can mean selling a hyped product that will lure in the masses, gain a healthy profit before the masses catch on to being sold a lemon. That is how most mainstream games these days are made. They sell hype, they promise the world, then they lure in the idiot masses, profit off the bulk of that hype, the bleed out the stragglers through various concepts (FTP with PTW, etc....).

The whole idea of "merits" is a suckers gimmick that companies use to catch people and sell them junk. Blizzard was in a slow death near the release of WoW. By the time WoW was released, most of the original crew who "built the name" had already moved on. Various marketing companies took that name and marketed to the ignorant masses who don't bother to check anything other than a name and a promise.

The fact is, people who follow by "name" and don't research who, what, why and where of those who are building the games, well.. they are just more cattle being led to slaughter and to be honest, why we are in the state we are today with not only games, but many other aspects of consumer business these days. When you have a market full of irresponsible dupes, they are ripe for the picking with fad schemes.

Hrimnir

Sinist said:

Wizardry said:

Bottom line is if a game and it's concepts are solid,an investor will support the game.It holds the developer accountable and forces them to get something done and makes sure they are not just pocketing the money and running to the casino.

That is how  life works.you start small,earn your position in life,then you build off of your own merits.Blizzard earned their money,they can build their own games there is no need to rip off naive consumers,that is how it should be done,you earn your way up the ladder.

No matter how good i think a game and it's concepts are,i will never give any free money to a game developer.

Having an investor does not mean the product is solid. An investor usually cares about how much they will get out of their investment and that can mean selling a hyped product that will lure in the masses, gain a healthy profit before the masses catch on to being sold a lemon. That is how most mainstream games these days are made. They sell hype, they promise the world, then they lure in the idiot masses, profit off the bulk of that hype, the bleed out the stragglers through various concepts (FTP with PTW, etc....).

The whole idea of "merits" is a suckers gimmick that companies use to catch people and sell them junk. Blizzard was in a slow death near the release of WoW. By the time WoW was released, most of the original crew who "built the name" had already moved on. Various marketing companies took that name and marketed to the ignorant masses who don't bother to check anything other than a name and a promise.

The fact is, people who follow by "name" and don't research who, what, why and where of those who are building the games, well.. they are just more cattle being led to slaughter and to be honest, why we are in the state we are today with not only games, but many other aspects of consumer business these days. When you have a market full of irresponsible dupes, they are ripe for the picking with fad schemes.

If i could give you a very manly, machismo... hug... i would.

Hit it right on the nailhead.  WoW was something that bothered me so much because of how much they constantly retconned the lore to fit their "everything has to be awesome" house of sticks they managed to develop.

The other more important issue you touched on is this unfounded brand loyalty.  There's nothing wrong with brand loyalty when its justified.  You know, someone who buys BMWs because he bought a BMW originally and it was great, and then he bought another and IT was great, and so on and so on.  Is fine.  However, Blizzard has had quite a few missteps along the way, and like you said, none of the people from Blizzard North exist in the company and havent for a long time.  Same thing with BioWare.  Its a lot of this blind loyalty that has put gaming in general in the state that its in.  Call of Duty 1 and 2 were some of the best FPS ever made.  But you couldn't pay me 500 dollars to buy a modern call of duty game.  Yes, someone could say "I will give you 500 bucks if you go and buy the newest CoD game", and i would say no purely as a matter of principle.

Shaigh

Sinist said:

Wizardry said:

Bottom line is if a game and it's concepts are solid,an investor will support the game.It holds the developer accountable and forces them to get something done and makes sure they are not just pocketing the money and running to the casino.

That is how  life works.you start small,earn your position in life,then you build off of your own merits.Blizzard earned their money,they can build their own games there is no need to rip off naive consumers,that is how it should be done,you earn your way up the ladder.

No matter how good i think a game and it's concepts are,i will never give any free money to a game developer.

Having an investor does not mean the product is solid. An investor usually cares about how much they will get out of their investment and that can mean selling a hyped product that will lure in the masses, gain a healthy profit before the masses catch on to being sold a lemon. That is how most mainstream games these days are made. They sell hype, they promise the world, then they lure in the idiot masses, profit off the bulk of that hype, the bleed out the stragglers through various concepts (FTP with PTW, etc....).

The whole idea of "merits" is a suckers gimmick that companies use to catch people and sell them junk. Blizzard was in a slow death near the release of WoW. By the time WoW was released, most of the original crew who "built the name" had already moved on. Various marketing companies took that name and marketed to the ignorant masses who don't bother to check anything other than a name and a promise. 

The fact is, people who follow by "name" and don't research who, what, why and where of those who are building the games, well.. they are just more cattle being led to slaughter and to be honest, why we are in the state we are today with not only games, but many other aspects of consumer business these days. When you have a market full of irresponsible dupes, they are ripe for the picking with fad schemes.

All games sell hype, Pantheon is no different. Brad is telling the community exactly the words they wish to hear. You can research the game how much you wish, you still just listen to their words on what the game will become, a game they haven't built yet. If you are extremely passionate about a game you can't know if you are the cattle being led to be slaughtered.

Make no doubts, Brad does has the right intentions and if Pantheon becomes the game its promised to be I will play it. At the same time its a small development studio with a small budget so I will be on the side of caution.

Sinist

Shaigh said:

All games sell hype, Pantheon is no different. Brad is telling the community exactly the words they wish to hear. You can research the game how much you wish, you still just listen to their words on what the game will become, a game they haven't built yet. If you are extremely passionate about a game you can't know if you are the cattle being led to be slaughtered.

Make no doubts, Brad does has the right intentions and if Pantheon becomes the game its promised to be I will play it. At the same time its a small development studio with a small budget so I will be on the side of caution.

Consider this. If Brad's game is really just "hype" and a trick approach such as I explained mainstream does, what possible reason could they have to justify turning away the masses to focus on a niche crowd? It would be the most bone headed business approach imaginable.

I think that they have honest intent, but remember, intent does not always produce result and there is that old saying " the road to hell is paved with good intentions". That said, I think that if you read what they have said in the podcasts, what they discuss in the forums, the way they have organized, and look at the results, I think  it is fair to say they are at least attempting to hold to the tenants they advertised.

Does that solve everything? Does that mean that we can all rest easy as the game will be everything they claimed with rainbows and unicorns raining candy down upon everyone? Nope, there is still a lot of risk in the process, and the biggest obstacle of their path has yet to test them. That is the allure of mainstream interest which will undoubtedly bring with it the cattle call for mainstream features and attention. While I respect VRs intent, mainstream is a very seductive mistress and her lair is littered with companies that she has seduced into the slaughter.

Pantheon will entice that crowd, of this I have no doubt. Works of love have a tendency to reflect such in the work produced and I think that anyone with a critical and honest eye can see that love in the work they are producing so far, that the "honest intent" as I mentioned is present with this game. You can already see mainstream hyping a bit over this game, which is my largest worry, because I know what it does to a game. The true test is if VR can hold to their honest intent and produce the game they initially set out to make.

goboygo

Your absolutely right and my fear as well.  Releasing a tiny version of the game will not bode well long term.

Dullahan

They aren't releasing a tiny part of the game. What they have planned for launch is full featured, even if there are some significant ideas, systems and content coming post-launch. Furthermore, we don't even know how alpha/beta access will work.

If it was me, I would only allow players to test certain parts at any given time. I'd also close down those parts to open other parts and have character wipes often to make sure people are actually testing rather than playing the game as if it was an early launch. There will be no "early launch" as described in this thread, and for all we know what I've proposed could be the approach they intend to take during testing phases (which is not pre-release or traditional early access).

muffins89

it's not Early Access killing these games.  The games aren't good.  if Pantheon is a good game it will succeed regardless of how they handle EA.  if it's a bad game it will fail.