Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Pantheon or Bust

2

Comments

  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 6,512
    Vesavius said:
    Saga of Lucimia or Pantheon for me.

    Saga has the philosophy that I am looking for in my MMORPG design as well. The two teams have, it seems, a strong mutual respect, which I get. Both are doing stellar work.

    IF both of these fail to land, which I sincerely doubt, then, yeah, I will stick with EQ until I finally get worn out on the genre for good.
    Anybody else? Hard to believe noone? Are they THAT special?


    Yet, they are that special.

    Everything else is an abomination of the word MMO.  Even the ones that used to be mmos had sold the meaning out ( cash shops, easy ).

    Of the two, I have way more faith in Pantheon than Saga of Lucima.  But who knows Saga may be a surprise too.

  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,698
    I think Pantheon may be my last hope of a PvE MMORPG.
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited March 2016
    SlyLoK said:
    I think Pantheon may be my last hope of a PvE MMORPG.
    This worries me at the same time.

    See, there are a lot of people out there who tire of mainstream game designs (note mainstream is not a "bad word", just a term that defines the "convenience and entertainment" style focus of games) , but... also have become accustomed to such and so may argue for such features while claiming they desire more "game play" focused ones. This can lead to mainstream feature creep and have a negative effect on the game (if the developers listen too much to demands).

    So, as the game becomes more popular due to the consistent tiring of mainstream games, it also runs the risk of becoming more like a mainstream game due to that point.

  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,698
    Sinist said:
    SlyLoK said:
    I think Pantheon may be my last hope of a PvE MMORPG.
    This worries me at the same time.

    See, there are a lot of people out there who tire of mainstream game designs (note mainstream is not a "bad word", just a term that defines the "convenience and entertainment" style focus of games) , but... also have become accustomed to such and so may argue for such features while claiming they desire more "game play" focused ones. This can lead to mainstream feature creep and have a negative effect on the game (if the developers listen too much to demands).

    So, as the game becomes more popular due to the consistent tiring of mainstream games, it also runs the risk of becoming more like a mainstream game due to that point.

    I have always thought that a well made PvE MMORPG would still be huge these days. The amount of people that play an MMORPG because it has PvP is just a fraction.
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited March 2016
    SlyLoK said:
    Sinist said:
    SlyLoK said:
    I think Pantheon may be my last hope of a PvE MMORPG.
    This worries me at the same time.

    See, there are a lot of people out there who tire of mainstream game designs (note mainstream is not a "bad word", just a term that defines the "convenience and entertainment" style focus of games) , but... also have become accustomed to such and so may argue for such features while claiming they desire more "game play" focused ones. This can lead to mainstream feature creep and have a negative effect on the game (if the developers listen too much to demands).

    So, as the game becomes more popular due to the consistent tiring of mainstream games, it also runs the risk of becoming more like a mainstream game due to that point.

    I have always thought that a well made PvE MMORPG would still be huge these days. The amount of people that play an MMORPG because it has PvP is just a fraction.
    PvP is not relevant to the point I was making.

    It is the concepts of "convenience" in play (ie fast travel, fast leveling, content designed for "everyone", which means it caters to the lowest common denominator, etc... ).

    What makes a mainstream game is all of those elements of design that cater to that desire for "entertainment" over that of a game. Again, it isn't a negative thing, just the nature as to what people seek.

    After playing WoW and many other games over the years, I found that when I went back to games that did not cater to mainstream design focus, that I struggled, developed many bad habits and became frustrated due to it. I had become accustomed to features that removed my responsibility in game play and provided me with convenience, guidance, and very forgiving play.

    I noticed this even going back to old PC games I loved, I would rush through the quest text, missing vital information which would cause me issues. I would rush head first into a fight, being used to taking on multiple opponents and be obliterated. I would rely on damage as my go to strategy and be quickly shown it as a failure. I would head out into the world, disregarding the need to pay attention to my surroundings and would end up getting lost quickly (try playing Wizardry 6 without mapping it as you play).

    What I found is that I had become very lax in my game play because the mainstream games focus in design was to entertain me, to give me the feeling of always progressing, always moving forward without any major obstacles, always winning.

    Like I experienced, there are people out there who have become accustomed to the games of today and may not be aware of this and so this forms the perception as to what is desired or expected in game play.

    My point is... you can easily end up with people who want a solid game, but keep asking for entertainment. I have seen this same thing over and over for over a decade with games being released and how they eventually changed over time to fit mainstream expectation.

    So, as I said... I am worried at the same time that while there is a desire for something different than mainstreams current design, there is still a conditioned nature that some may have difficulty shaking from their evaluations.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,865
    edited March 2016
    I really hope this game can turn out good enough,i have a long wait for COE and even that game being pvp focused is not high on my radar.

    This game is doing an awful lot of good things,ideas that i like to see,it also has little chance of pissing me off like Korean designs/UI do so there is a good chance i may end up liking this game.

    My biggest concern is this game's longevity design.I am pretty sure it is going to still have certain design flaws that the EQ and VG franchise had that will end up boring me within the first month.
    Those design flaws are altaholic,linear questing and/or hand holding.Simple tiered crafting also bores me,i don't like looking at any system and seeing the same repetitive crafting ideas at every tier,i like to see each tier as being different form the last not just a replacement tier.

    I would also like to see brad steer away from simple one class design,you need to havce versatility with multi class.

    What it will come down to with this game is do all the good things weigh enough to allow me to handle the bad ideas,time will tell,i hope so.

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

  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,698
    edited March 2016
    DMKano said:
    SlyLoK said:
    Sinist said:
    SlyLoK said:
    I think Pantheon may be my last hope of a PvE MMORPG.
    This worries me at the same time.

    See, there are a lot of people out there who tire of mainstream game designs (note mainstream is not a "bad word", just a term that defines the "convenience and entertainment" style focus of games) , but... also have become accustomed to such and so may argue for such features while claiming they desire more "game play" focused ones. This can lead to mainstream feature creep and have a negative effect on the game (if the developers listen too much to demands).

    So, as the game becomes more popular due to the consistent tiring of mainstream games, it also runs the risk of becoming more like a mainstream game due to that point.

    I have always thought that a well made PvE MMORPG would still be huge these days. The amount of people that play an MMORPG because it has PvP is just a fraction.

    A well made pve mmorpg would be huge for the first month. 

    Even the best mmorpgs have terrible retention rates (wow being an exception).

    The AAA cost and time involved coupled with low retention rates = no go for any dev studio today.

    If you have market research to prove otherwise, show us.


    Otherwise future mmorpgs are to remain indie endeavors for the forseable future. 
    The FACT is that the vast majority of MMORPG players prefer PvE content over PvP. FACT. FACT.FACT. It has been proven over and over and over again. The OPTION of PvP as SIDE content is the only way if PvP even made it in ( outside of duels ).

    Edit : But I will humor you since you are still butthurt over the big failure that is ArcheAge.

    UO was dropping players left and right to a PvE competitor. They come out with Felucca and hit population numbers they never had before. 

    EQ1 had many PvE servers and only a handful of PvP.

    Only a fraction of players in DAoC were ever in the Frontier. On servers that had 3-5k capacity there were maybe 300-500 players on the frontiers at any given time. They also came out with a PvP server since you know DAoC was a PvP game ( ahhahahaha ). It died near instantly. They also came out with a PvE Server which exploded and had a higher population than any other server.

    Only a fraction of the 10m people actually PvPed in WoW.. Werent the numbers similar to that of Raiders? A fraction of a fraction. Dominated by PvE servers.

    EQ2 again dominated by PvE servers.

    I can go on and on if I wanted. PvE MMORPGs have dominated PvP MMORPGs even when they have been " good ". That is a fact that no one can deny. Not even those that have their heads in a different place than on their shoulders.
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    DMKano said:
    A well made pve mmorpg would be huge for the first month. 

    Even the best mmorpgs have terrible retention rates (wow being an exception).

    The AAA cost and time involved coupled with low retention rates = no go for any dev studio today.

    If you have market research to prove otherwise, show us.


    Otherwise future mmorpgs are to remain indie endeavors for the forseable future. 
    PvP has a history of consistent failure over and over throughout the years. If the game is full on PvP focused, it usually dies in short time. There are some exceptions of "niche" focused ones, but they are niche and this conflicts with your point that PvP is what people want.
  • epoqepoq Member UncommonPosts: 394
    All of my hopes for the genre currently rest with Pantheon for PvE content and Camelot Unchained for RvR.  Everything else that is currently on the market or upcoming is the same BS, all this hype over Black Desert -- blah.  Games like this are solo friendly with hardly any group content, focused on a single player grind and then some PvP, no substance, very little true variety and lack of trinity.  It's so surprising to me that it takes an indie developer to "risk" going back to the original MMO formula where people actually played together.  Brad knows this, and hopefully he will come through for the old school crowd.
  • HedeonHedeon Member UncommonPosts: 997
    am excited for Pantheon but they need to show alot more for me to " throw all chips" at them. But the hype is real for me indeed 
  • baphametbaphamet Member RarePosts: 3,308
    i like some of the "single player" type mmo's but as far as in development goes, this is literally the only game that sounds interesting to me, possibly CU.

    i'm still pissed WOD got cancelled :(
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited March 2016
    Hedeon said:
    am excited for Pantheon but they need to show alot more for me to " throw all chips" at them. But the hype is real for me indeed 
    They are better off staying in the shadows right now, working out the game as they want, and building a solid presentation. My guess is, when they step out of the shadows, people will get silly with anticipation and lavish much praise and support.

    Me personally, I want this game to "stay in the shadows" right up until it is ready to be released as I know how "hype" and "mainstream" can produce negative results to a game. Look at LoTRO and how much damage the WoW crowd did to the direction of that game.
  • AvanahAvanah Member RarePosts: 1,546
    I'm done with poser MMO's that are really single player RPG's on steroids.  After 15 years, it's about darn time for a real MMO.  Pantheon will deliver or not, but my chips are there.
    I was following Pantheon until I came across Chronicles of Elyria.
    So with that said....

    Pantheon is a Bust. :)

    "My Fantasy is having two men at once...

    One Cooking and One Cleaning!"

    ---------------------------

    "A good man can make you feel sexy,

    strong and able to take on the whole world...

    oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."





  • epoqepoq Member UncommonPosts: 394
    Sinist said:
    Hedeon said:
    am excited for Pantheon but they need to show alot more for me to " throw all chips" at them. But the hype is real for me indeed 
    They are better off staying in the shadows right now, working out the game as they want, and building a solid presentation. My guess is, when they step out of the shadows, people will get silly with anticipation and lavish much praise and support.

    Me personally, I want this game to "stay in the shadows" right up until it is ready to be released as I know how "hype" and "mainstream" can produce negative results to a game. Look at LoTRO and how much damage the WoW crowd did to the direction of that game.
    Yeah honestly at this point I have no interest in developers that give ultra-frequent updates asking for community input etc.  I want them to make the game they want to make, because let's be honest, the playerbase has no idea what they really want and people change their minds about stuff every single day.  Pick a direction, go that way, and release a finished product that caters to a certain crowd.  The idea of trying to please everyone has failed time and time again, we don't need more casual games that hardcore players and grandmothers can enjoy at the same time.  I'd market it as exactly what it is: If you aren't interested in hard PvE content that requires teamwork and communicating with other players, go somewhere else.
  • noodles6966noodles6966 Member UncommonPosts: 63
    Very excited for this game, a little concerned about the pledge prices. You can't get in the game for less than $100,which would explain why they are having trouble raising money. FFXI was the last game that encouraged teamwork and made it work. This game is bringing me back to those glory days of mmos,and I am def on board. As far as pvp,nobody cares.PVP is a very very small fraction of players today,and has not been successful yet. PVE is where its at.
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,865
    $100 is steep but we have to figure in value,weather or not we consider it a value game.That 100 bucks might not cover the cost of making the game and with no sub fee that won't cut it.So then what forced cash shop,,yuck.

    I just think for years we have been ripped off by developers,15 was too steep considering they were charging us for expansions.SO imo i would rather see 5 buck sub fees added in to cover ongoing costs,remember 500k players at 5 bucks is still 2.5 million dollars a month,that covers everything from staff/overhead to servers.SO then go ahead and charge us for expansions,25-30 million a year will also recoup most fo the development cost in just the first year,FFXI took 5 years to recoup the cost,devs just need to be confident in their own work.

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

  • noodles6966noodles6966 Member UncommonPosts: 63
    I am def ok with a sub fee,I have no problem paying for a game if I get a good value and have fun playing it. I still sub in FFXI and FFXIV because I get a lot of bang for my buck. If you go on Pantheon's website,the pledge to get in the game is no less than $100 and they also have monthly subs that does not give you access to the game,but they also have subs for $100 a month. To me there is just too much going on with them right now to invest that kind of money for a game we basically have no idea how it plays right now. It just seems a little suspicious to me that they are trying to grab massive amounts of money so quickly
  • HrimnirHrimnir Member RarePosts: 2,413
    DMKano said:
    SlyLoK said:
    Sinist said:
    SlyLoK said:
    I think Pantheon may be my last hope of a PvE MMORPG.
    This worries me at the same time.

    See, there are a lot of people out there who tire of mainstream game designs (note mainstream is not a "bad word", just a term that defines the "convenience and entertainment" style focus of games) , but... also have become accustomed to such and so may argue for such features while claiming they desire more "game play" focused ones. This can lead to mainstream feature creep and have a negative effect on the game (if the developers listen too much to demands).

    So, as the game becomes more popular due to the consistent tiring of mainstream games, it also runs the risk of becoming more like a mainstream game due to that point.

    I have always thought that a well made PvE MMORPG would still be huge these days. The amount of people that play an MMORPG because it has PvP is just a fraction.

    A well made pve mmorpg would be huge for the first month. 

    Even the best mmorpgs have terrible retention rates (wow being an exception).

    The AAA cost and time involved coupled with low retention rates = no go for any dev studio today.

    If you have market research to prove otherwise, show us.


    Otherwise future mmorpgs are to remain indie endeavors for the forseable future. 


    That really only became that way when games started dumbing down the difficulty, increasing leveling speed, and adding in lots of supposed "quality of life" features like instant porting to dungeons, and dungeon finders, etc.

    If you turn your MMO into a single player online RPG.  Then people will play it like a single player RPG.  Which means they will get through the content, maybe try another play through with a different class, and move on to the next game.

    EQ, AC, SWG, UO, all had pretty good retention rates, keeping 60% or better of their initial playerbase years later.  WoW only (relatively) recently started seeing sharp declines in playerbase, and you can directly tie this into changes that have been made to make the game more "casual friendly".

    If you look even at single player games that have the most replay value, they are the ones that have the most complexity and the highest skill ceilings.  Games like CS:GO etc are still stupidly popular because they have a high skill ceiling, and people can continually try to improve themselves. Games like Dark Souls are still stupidly popular for the same reasons.

    When you create a glorified book, again, its something to be consumed and discarded.  Even books I REALLY loved, like Shogun, I can only read about a half a dozen times before it's not enjoyable anymore.

    On the AAA point, I agree, AAA hundred+ million dollar MMO's are a thing of the past, and thank god.  The only reason they existed is because these companies were trying to create a "one size fits all" MMO, and ultimately ended up being a case of "jack of all trades, master of none".  And resultingly couldn't keep players because they couldn't offer a compelling game for any of those sub types of players.

    MMO's really should have gone into a larger number of more specialized MMOs targeting certain playstyles.  Which is why I blame Blizzard for starting the ball rolling that derailed the MMO genre for over a decade from its correct path.

    Every other gaming genre has tons of smaller budget, smaller team games that target specific playstyles.  That's why you have so many different types of FPS for example. large scale battlefield types, small scale competitive like CS:GO, CTF type games like TF2, WW2 games, the list goes on.

    Instead MMO developers kept trying to create the next Justin Bieber or Backstreet Boys of the MMO industry.  It's really a sad state of affairs and hopefully Pantheon can be the start of fixing the MMO industry and getting it back on track.

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

  • HrimnirHrimnir Member RarePosts: 2,413
    Wizardry said:
    $100 is steep but we have to figure in value,weather or not we consider it a value game.That 100 bucks might not cover the cost of making the game and with no sub fee that won't cut it.So then what forced cash shop,,yuck.

    I just think for years we have been ripped off by developers,15 was too steep considering they were charging us for expansions.SO imo i would rather see 5 buck sub fees added in to cover ongoing costs,remember 500k players at 5 bucks is still 2.5 million dollars a month,that covers everything from staff/overhead to servers.SO then go ahead and charge us for expansions,25-30 million a year will also recoup most fo the development cost in just the first year,FFXI took 5 years to recoup the cost,devs just need to be confident in their own work.


    I don't have the links anymore, but some independent financial companies did some studies and came to the conclusion that Blizzard was making about 70 cents on the dollar when WoW was in its heyday around 2007 ish.  So, if you figure bandwidth costs were significantly higher back then, also Blizzard paid a LOT of money for customer service, $5 a month isn't unreasonable provided they charge for expansions.

    However, with a smaller budget MMO, the economies of scale aren't going to be quite the same, so something between $10 and $15 isn't entirely unreasonable.

    That being said, I'm still not quite so sure why so many people scoff at the idea of $15/mo for a game.  I spend that on dinner 4-6 times a month.  You can't even get a sandwich at a sub shop anymore for less than $7 or $8 bucks.  $15 is piddly.  It really is.

    The funniest part is these people will pay $60 for some console game that has 12 hours of gameplay and be perfectly fine with that.  But then that same $60 for 4 months of an MMO that they're getting dozens of hours out of, somehow is not OK and they're being ripped off.

    I really don't get it.

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

  • LokeroLokero Member RarePosts: 1,514
    Hrimnir said:
    Wizardry said:
    $100 is steep but we have to figure in value,weather or not we consider it a value game.That 100 bucks might not cover the cost of making the game and with no sub fee that won't cut it.So then what forced cash shop,,yuck.

    I just think for years we have been ripped off by developers,15 was too steep considering they were charging us for expansions.SO imo i would rather see 5 buck sub fees added in to cover ongoing costs,remember 500k players at 5 bucks is still 2.5 million dollars a month,that covers everything from staff/overhead to servers.SO then go ahead and charge us for expansions,25-30 million a year will also recoup most fo the development cost in just the first year,FFXI took 5 years to recoup the cost,devs just need to be confident in their own work.


    I don't have the links anymore, but some independent financial companies did some studies and came to the conclusion that Blizzard was making about 70 cents on the dollar when WoW was in its heyday around 2007 ish.  So, if you figure bandwidth costs were significantly higher back then, also Blizzard paid a LOT of money for customer service, $5 a month isn't unreasonable provided they charge for expansions.

    However, with a smaller budget MMO, the economies of scale aren't going to be quite the same, so something between $10 and $15 isn't entirely unreasonable.

    That being said, I'm still not quite so sure why so many people scoff at the idea of $15/mo for a game.  I spend that on dinner 4-6 times a month.  You can't even get a sandwich at a sub shop anymore for less than $7 or $8 bucks.  $15 is piddly.  It really is.

    The funniest part is these people will pay $60 for some console game that has 12 hours of gameplay and be perfectly fine with that.  But then that same $60 for 4 months of an MMO that they're getting dozens of hours out of, somehow is not OK and they're being ripped off.

    I really don't get it.

    I think this is just basic supply and demand and repetition.

    It's hard to convince people to pay some chunk of cash monthly when there's 300 free alternatives available. That's the supply and demand. 
    As for the repetition, we've just had the same payment model for so long now, that that's what people know and expect.

    $15 a month back then was probably some stellar profit for a studio(probably more than they needed to charge).  But, as the cost of living/salaries has gone up so much, I think $15-$20 bucks a month nowadays is a pretty fair transaction to both parties.

    On a personal note, however, I'm so used to all the B2P, no-sub stuff that I find it hard to convince myself to want to have a recurring charge on my credit card again.  I personally like the GW2/ESO model the best.
    Buy the base game, then buy the expansions, but have no sub. Or, have an option to choose either, much like ESO does.
  • ReMouRNReMouRN Member UncommonPosts: 11
    Along with many others, I have been awaiting the day that I believe only Pantheon promises to deliver. Brad was directly instrumental in 2/3 of the most influential mmorpg's that I've ever played. EQ1, and Vanguard. The third in that statistic is EQ2. Above all else, I regard Vanguard as the single most enjoyable and diverse mmorpg of all time with the utmost potential. I've been waiting years and will continue to wait, because I know good things take time. 2017 will be a game changer.

    image
  • inmysightsinmysights Member UncommonPosts: 413
    Pantheon and The Saga of Lucimia are the 2 that I am waiting on! The wait.....is killing me....

    I am so good, I backstabbed your face!

  • OscillateOscillate Member UncommonPosts: 238
    edited March 2016
    I'm done with poser MMO's that are really single player RPG's on steroids.  After 15 years, it's about darn time for a real MMO.  Pantheon will deliver or not, but my chips are there.
    Same

    Edit: To just say, I am not bashing BDO.  Glad I got it, still playing and having fun.  Although Pantheon: ROTF is bae.

    image
    (Akiraosc)

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    Thats because there is no money in making shallow, short-term clones of the same game that everyone has played for over a decade. My bet is that as soon as some of these indie games have success doing something different, we just might see some innovation in big studios.


  • IkisisIkisis Member UncommonPosts: 443
    Dullahan said:
    Thats because there is no money in making shallow, short-term clones of the same game that everyone has played for over a decade. My bet is that as soon as some of these indie games have success doing something different, we just might see some innovation in big studios.
    Im hoping for either Revival, Elysia, or Rerelease of Darkfall to be one of those hits.

    If AV didnt release Darkfall and then abandon it within the same week it would be a huge success, but sadly the Dev team didnt care or were burnt out letting it just crumble. 


Sign In or Register to comment.