Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Pantheon will have impeccable timing on it's side

1234568»

Comments

  • ZardayneZardayne Member UncommonPosts: 66
    edited September 2016
    Torval said:
    Kyleran said:
    Amathe said:
    delete5230 said:

    Early mmos such as UO, EQ1, and so on were shells of what was to come.  
    I do not agree with this. To the contrary, one of the reasons I am here is that EQ had so many things that later games lacked. EQ was far from being a "shell." 
    Pretty sure the OP never played any of the pre-WOW titles in their heydays, or he would know how feature rich and diverse so many were.

    We've gone backwards so far.....
    Literally they were not as feature rich as their current iterations or other modern games are.

    Brokers/auction houses/safe trading systems - not there - people had to use chat in order to trade.
    Grouping tools - and I'm not talkng about LFD. I'm talking about tools built into games to help groups.
    Account/character - between creation, renaming, etc - account and character features are much more robust now.

    What features were present in early games that aren't present now?
    Community
    Right there man! That's the #1 answer of why the old games were so much better than they are now..

    All of these built in group finders,  dungeon teleporting, Flying mounts (WoW), have  eliminated interaction between players. I tried to go back to WoW a year ago and everyone was in Ogrimmar like it was a lobby game. I rode back out across the world and I don't think I saw a soul. I gave in and used the dungeon finder a few times and everyone rushed to the end like a rat looking for cheese. There was no talking, discussions, anything. It was a borefest. Some of these newer ones are the same exact way...

    "people had to use chat in order to trade."
    That was part of the community and it was fun. There was times in Asheron's call I'd sit in Qualibar listening to chat for items that were for sell. I'd barter for armors that would match other armor pieces I had. Monday morning I'd go over all of the loot lists people would post on the VN forums, contact them with offers, and then meet in game after work. I made some great friends back then.

    Anyone remember in Asheron's call where you would meet with your guild or just a random group that formed in game via chat, to go get their Atlan fire stone. It was a group (not solo instant gratification) effort. It was challenging, and we had to communicate to make it. People would fall to their death among a horde of mobs and multiple players would jump down there, risking their chance and progress, just to help someone. They cared about their fellow player as a person and not just a npc in their  world.  It wasn't faceroll easy like most of these games nowadays either.


    Anyone remember in Daoc when you made it out to the frontier and you were just exploring and you got rolled by a nightblade or a roving group and just about the time you were going to release a group came by, rezzed you, and threw you a group invite for no other reason than you were a realm mate? I made many a friend that way. We had realm pride and we fought together even when we were outnumbered 3 to 1 and holding the lords room. I can't tell you how many times I've laid dead in ESO only to have people run right past you, chasing those points..


    The only thing I will agree with you on Torval was Account/character - between creation, renaming, etc - account and character features are much more robust now. Then again some companies still take 2+ years to add some of the basic features (renaming, barber shops). ESo anyone..
    Post edited by Zardayne on

    image
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    Loke666 said:
    svann said:
    Loke666 said:
    The problem with that logic is that Vanguard was close to unplayable at launch and took a long time to fix, if Wow would have released in that shape and taken so long time fixing up it would too have a small playerbase.

    We have zero clue how well a well polished Vanguard would have done because of that (well, it wouldn't have done Wow good anyways so we maybe have a little clue) so explaining it's failure with that it was niche is unfair. 
    Id say I have some clue.  At release vanguard was so popular that all 8 faction starting areas were crowded-full of people.  If people had not left because of buggy programming it would have been a huge success.  The failure was not at all because of niche or it would not have had that many at start.
    As I remember it they sold around 250K copies around launch which was fine for it's time but not super impressive. If it wasn't buggy it could have gained more players (back then MMOs still gained players after launch instead of hitting peak 3 weeks after launch) or not but since it didn't happen your situation is theoretical and can't be proved either way.

    But the number it had on start was probably partly due to some hype and the rest were former EQ players who enjoy that type of gameplay.

     The idea that anything that doesn't focus on the casual soloplayers will fail is wrong, you can't put the rather large group players together with small group like FFA full loot PvP or permadeathers, the group fans are still a few million players and those players are far more faithful with their game then the casuals.

    A good enough game focusing on these players can actually get a few million players, they were the main target of vanilla Wow (but that changed rather fast). I don't think Vanguard could have been that large even if it released in great shape, half a mil tops and I don't see Pantheon with 3.5M subs either nut if the game is good enough I could see it with 750K players which would be good and could prove that other player groups then super casuals matter as well.

    Vanguards failure was as I said earlier the crappy launch, anything else is just speculation.
    250k was actually incredibly good for Vanguard considering most of us knew it was in really bad shape. I was not one of those 250k, nor were most of my guildmates from WoW or EQ emu servers (Winter's Roar/Shards of Dalaya at that time).

    The fact is, they still managed to pull 250k even though anyone informed knew that game was being released in rough shape and way early. I'd speculate based on that number, that a far greater number of people would have played had it actually been ready for launch.


  • ThebeastttThebeasttt Member RarePosts: 1,130
    They wouldn't have sold 50k if the players knew the truth. Lucky for Smed they deleted the forums a few weeks before launch.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    They wouldn't have sold 50k if the players knew the truth. Lucky for Smed they deleted the forums a few weeks before launch.
    Actually, everyone knew. Deleting the forums didn't keep it from being said. All the most popular mmo websites and forums were talking about just how not ready Vanguard was to be launched.


  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Dullahan said:
    250k was actually incredibly good for Vanguard considering most of us knew it was in really bad shape. I was not one of those 250k, nor were most of my guildmates from WoW or EQ emu servers (Winter's Roar/Shards of Dalaya at that time).

    The fact is, they still managed to pull 250k even though anyone informed knew that game was being released in rough shape and way early. I'd speculate based on that number, that a far greater number of people would have played had it actually been ready for launch.
    Far from all people knew it was in such bad shape, several of my friends were very upset when they got the game and if the 250K would have accepted it's shape most of them wouldn't have quit so soon as they did.

    Now, if VG would have been in perfect shape they might have gotten some more initial players or not, impossible to say. Far more players would have stayed though, that I am certain of and maybe the subs would have increased as word got around.

    We all agree that far more people would have played it if it was in great shape at launch, but exactly how many is just speculation.

    But judging exactly how many players a game mechanic wise like VG but in better shape would get is not something you can guess, no matter what clues you see in Vanguard. You seriously need a game like that to actually launch in good shape to find that out, anything else is just wild speculation.

    I do back Pantheon, it sounds fun but I don't think Vanguard is a good example for anything besides that a game launching in bad shape usually fails.
  • klash2defklash2def Member EpicPosts: 1,794
    Pantheon is going to be interesting for sure, but let's not hype it up as the next coming of WoW based on timing alone. I agree we are getting close to a MMO revitalization but it's not quite here yet. A key thing that needs to happen timing wise is "Blizzard Shuts Down the cultural phenomenon WoW after xx Years"  
    (I say it goes to at least 25th year anniversary before it's even considered) 

    That's going to be a key factor for many reasons. 

    Our era in the late 90s early 2ks was a good time, but it's pretty much over outside of WoW and sadly more than likely never coming back.. hell WoW is even a shell of its former self.  But still time after time we see games come out with the same "Beat WoW" "BE the next WoW" mantra and it never works.

    WoW needs to go away in order for really FRESH ideas to thrive with the masses and change the Genre. Not just new Ideas, but Fresh takes on the ideas that also came before. That's what blizz did with WoW and that's why it worked out. The masses were ready for that level of change. It's almost at that point now but the issue is WoW still has a strangle hold on a market that's MUCH bigger than it was when it started. 

    The simple presence of WoW makes it hard for fresh new ideas in MMOs to live and catch on with the masses when most are still satisfied with ideas from 2003. This is why I mentioned consoles. I think games like Destiny, and The Division, are onto something. What it is, I'm not sure but those are online games that have RPG like elements and lots of people enjoy playing them. The MMO is changing and Maybe consoles is the vehicle for the next great MMO. 

    There are some really great throwback single player- Co op RPG games on PC like Divinity Original Sin and Pillars of Eternity.. but the MMORPG we grew up with is long past.

    It's not gloomy, it's actually interesting and exciting to see what the next GREAT thing is considering we HAVE had games like WOW, AOC, EQ, EVE, etc to look at for inspiration. But again.. Blizz would have to loosen its grip a bit to see some of that inspiration be used in something really fresh then accepted by the masses.

    when WoW is gone.. people will truly hunger for the next one and then it will show up.
    Who knows when that will be? 


    "Everything that happens is a political act, and the only people that get to pretend otherwise are those privileged enough to not have politics impact them at all." ~Taliesin

    "What does it mean to be human? In a time when people's humanity is perennially called into question?"
    - Dr. Cornell West

    "Putting a woman, a person of color, a queer character, a disabled character (in games) isn't some agenda, it's making games that reflect the world we live in." 
     
    Currently: Games Audio Engineer
    You've heard what I've heard


  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,536
    edited October 2016
    This is the thing you see Brad had more money and a lot more people working on Vanguard and he still produced a game ridden with bugs. I cannot imagine how he can produce something better with the reduced finances and expertise at his disposal .  That is why I'm very sceptical about his ability to produce a good game and yet my poor Everquest heart hopes he does.
    Chamber of Chains
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited October 2016
    I don't think we will see another WoW until there is more wide reaching success in the genre. Some of these "niche" games need to turn a good profit and pave the way once again as it was early on.

    At that point, someone with big money will create a game that offers something new and appeals to explorers, achievers, killers and socializers (bartles 4 groups). It will likely have far greater depth than anything we've seen probably by way of advanced AI, dynamic content and an evolving world/story.

    Pantheon could be plenty big in its own right though. It will be much bigger than most people anticipate.


  • Scott23Scott23 Member UncommonPosts: 293
    cheyane said:
    This is the thing you see Brad had more money and a lot more people working on Vanguard and he still produced a game ridden with bugs. I cannot imagine how he can produce something better with the reduced finances and expertise at his disposal .  That is why I'm very sceptical about his ability to produce a good game and yet my poor Everquest heart hopes he does.
    Quite simply he ran out of money.  Microsoft pulled the plug and Sony stepped in.  I suspect that Sony didn't realize what state it was in when they acquired it.  I think they gave them a 6 month deadline to get it ready for release? (I'm going on shaky memory here, so I could be wrong).  Anyway it was not ready - but it was a fun game if you could avoid the bugs.
  • Charlie.CheswickCharlie.Cheswick Member UncommonPosts: 469
    This game will sire children. Smooth up in ya.
    -Chuckles
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,490
    If you think Pantheon has the slightest chance to be as big as WoW... I dunno how to even respond.

    WoW was more than a game it was for a time a social event.. it even had Coke Commercials..  (The drink lol)



    This is not really about WoW....It's about timing !
    I may be wrong, and at some point "the right timing" will come again, but all mmorpgs after WoW have had one thing in common... wrong timing.

    IMO, If developers lower their standard and decide that success doesn't mean 10+ million subs, then any time could be the right time. Just focus on making a good game.




  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 6,573

    You CANT chart mmos.


    How can you chart a game when ideas are forced on people.

    How can you chart games with cash shops.

    How can you chart a product knowing players will play everything.

    How can you chart knowing large marketing and advertisement tricks players into playing ( good game or bad ).

    How can you chart a product that worked well, then all aspects that worked well were removed permanently.


Sign In or Register to comment.