Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

I'll say it again, Pantheon will be huge

1910121415

Comments

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 36,485
    Lokero said:
    Kyleran said:
    Gdemami said:

    iirc, VR are aiming for 30-50k subs, which is somewhat realistic but imo still grossly optimistic. 
     -We agree on something! VR is a non starter in my book, gamers are basically lazy and don't want to be moving all about.


    Oh, Kyleran, you silly cat... :lol:
    Well I am definitely lazy....perhaps i should have been more specific.  ;)

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

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

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing FO76 at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

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






  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 8,761
    Distopia said:
    Xodic said:
    Niche doesn't mean small...
    And yes, I would rather it be focused on a certain type of player rather than trying to shoehorn every possible player into the same game. 
    A "certain" type of player sounds rather showhorned to me. I'd argue it's probably harder to gain a good solid longterm base if you're just attractive to a certain type of player. This is the central issue with many MMOs today, they're hyper-focused on story or achievement based game-play, there's no care given to other aspects of the game. The same issue permeates the indie scene in their PVP focused titles, that just devolve into wolves hunting wolves. Older MMO's weren't so solitary in their focus, there was more often than not, a more diverse playing field. 
       It dose not need be huge to succeed. Having a game be it small or large, focusing on great game play and reply value. That alone will break the current market model. Most developers have become so lost on making every MMO for every gamer, they lost sight of what kept MMO fans gaming. 

    I see Pantheon more like a small snowball. If pushed down the right hill side, could end up like EQ1. A large enough supporters to make this a long term profitable project, over what we have been getting as MMO fans, large box sales. Launching in waves globally to fast track sales. Ending up with a skeleton of gamers a few years later. Most MMOs seem to be shooting stars. 

    Developer need to start to learn to build MMOs from the ground up with attrition in mind. Stop making classes and content that need no other class to support them. If your not doing so, you're not really building an MMO for MMO fans. You are at that point making a game to consume and walk away from. 
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kyleran said:
    Gdemami said:
    I think it will do fine. Well enough for Brad and Co to consider it a success. It is a niche game within a niche genre so I would project 150,000 to 225,000 average subs at best. Which is a success according to Brad. They don't need WOW numbers. They are not working with a WOW budget. 
    Even for AAA mainstream titles subscription model is unsustainable. 150k subs for Pantheon is awfully delusional.
    Yet CCP/EVE manages to do so, weird isn't it?

    FFXIV, SWTOR, L1, heck maybe even AA or BDO likely have that many subs or patrons.

    Give players a game with features they really want for which there few options and people will pay for it.

    $15 a month just isn't that much money.

    To be fair, though, you're quoting AAA titles and EVE, who was once the second most subbed game is now seeing subscriptions fall off to 2012 levels. I agree with both @Gdemami and @blueturtle13 though. I agree that 150k subs is delusional, but I agree with BlueTurtle that 150k is probably the absolute, best-case scenario cap for a niche market. So it really comes down to this, "Will Pantheon be the greatest game of all time?" That's how Pantheon gets to 150k subs. The problem is the North American market. Nobody wants to pay for shit! Has there even been an MMO that's lasted 1 year on the subscription-only model in the last 5 years? Shit, SWTOR didn't even make it a year, did it? 

    This game won't fly in the massive Asia-Pacific market, because it's being designed specifically for the North American market, so it should be interesting to see if America will step up and make MMOs great again in 2017!
    Nobody wants to pay for shit, you're absolutely right. When someone releases an MMO that's not, a willingness to pay will not be an issue.


  • Pyde-PyperPyde-Pyper Member UncommonPosts: 32
    Distopia said:

    That said, it's no secret it was a push by players that did away with things like corpse runs, regression, mob camping, open free for all dungeons etc... Most of that push took place pre-WOW. WOW simply took many of those steps farther. 

    I remember the hardcore push to rid SWG of corpse runs as an example, as well as the many complaints about fighting over mobs/bosses/ dungeons in early MMORPGs. Those were some of the main complaints about the genre back then, as well as bemoaning mob grinding and wanting it replaced with something of more substance (hence questing).... 

    Was everyone complaining about those things? Probably not... Yet it was enough to push for major changes in the design of these games going forward.
    The vocal minority won this battle. It's always been the vocal minority that pushes for change. Because the other 90% of the player base is enjoying themselves so much they don't care to even look at forums and see what is being moaned about.

    What about all of us that absolutely loved Corpse Runs and Hardcore mechanics ?  
  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 281
    I saw the same complaining when Vanguard was being developed. To be successful it need this feature or that or it couldn't do something this way and so on. I beta tested that game from late alpha to release and it seem to me that they listen too much to the masses. To me at least the game was more fun early in beta than it was later on. They seem to keep trying to add things to please the masses (that probably were never going to play the game anyway) and the result was a less fun and unfinished game. 
     I am glad that the official forum is behind a pay window and I hope VR sticks to the vision they have for the game and release polished game for the players that the game is designed for.

     As far as for SWTOR not making a year in the subscription model. I doubt any single player MMORPG will ever be successful as other than a FTP model. And people playing single player MMORPG will do as I did, go play them when they have new content and leave when you have finished.
    Not many group based PVE MMORPG around so I think Pantheon will have a decent market.
  • JacobinJacobin Member RarePosts: 1,009
    edited February 2017
    The kickstarter occurred right when Kickstarter was really popular and still only attracted around 3100 backers.

    Even if the game sold 10 TIMES that amount, the ceiling is 30k most of whom will leave after the free month.

    A PVE based mmorpg with no budget can't work and the vast majority of people are not interested in a slow grind and sitting in town spamming LF tank for 5 hours.

    The lead also has a terrible reputation and track record and already stole money from the project.

    Only a few diehards actually care about this game and all you are doing is sponsoring Brads lifestyle. The rest of us are here just to watch it crash and burn just like the kickstarter so we can finally see this dilapidated game design that was rejected a decade ago die.

    Just play FF14 if you want an ultra traditional mmo. There is no way Pantheon can get to even 1% of what that game offers with its present budget,
  • drivendawndrivendawn Member RarePosts: 2,144
    As I have said before, I think many will be eating their words when the game does well. No I don't mean 500k to 1 mil. subs, I mean maybe anywhere from 50 up to 150k. I think it is reasonable but hey we will see I guess.
  • AmsaiAmsai Member UncommonPosts: 299
    Jacobin said:
    The kickstarter occurred right when Kickstarter was really popular and still only attracted around 3100 backers.

    Even if the game sold 10 TIMES that amount, the ceiling is 30k most of whom will leave after the free month.

    A PVE based mmorpg with no budget can't work and the vast majority of people are not interested in a slow grind and sitting in town spamming LF tank for 5 hours.

    The lead also has a terrible reputation and track record and already stole money from the project.

    Only a few diehards actually care about this game and all you are doing is sponsoring Brads lifestyle. The rest of us are here just to watch it crash and burn just like the kickstarter so we can finally see this dilapidated game design that was rejected a decade ago die.

    Just play FF14 if you want an ultra traditional mmo. There is no way Pantheon can get to even 1% of what that game offers with its present budget,

    What are you even talking about? This game just keeps picking up more steam. And each day they prove that they can do it. That's why the negativity about this game has decreased so dramatically. And hey this game might not be to your liking, but I think you are being a bit dramatic in your ................speculation.


    FFXIV is nothing like what this game will be so I really don't understand your angle. I mean it is a pretty game, but its about as deep as the kiddie pool. Rundgeons and dance-dance revolution encounters with ultra gamified mechanics. That isn't a world of adventure, its a series of game matches.


  • HrimnirHrimnir Member RarePosts: 2,414
    As I have said before, I think many will be eating their words when the game does well. No I don't mean 500k to 1 mil. subs, I mean maybe anywhere from 50 up to 150k. I think it is reasonable but hey we will see I guess.

    Nah, they'll just go and delete posts and do mental gymnastics and say things like "well, I said X, but what I "meant" was Y". Etc etc.

    "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

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited February 2017
    drivendawn said:
    As I have said before, I think many will be eating their words when the game does well. No I don't mean 500k to 1 mil. subs, I mean maybe anywhere from 50 up to 150k. I think it is reasonable but hey we will see I guess.
    I'm not sure if 50 to 150k is worth eating words for. 
  • ShaighShaigh Member RarePosts: 2,069
    As I have said before, I think many will be eating their words when the game does well. No I don't mean 500k to 1 mil. subs, I mean maybe anywhere from 50 up to 150k. I think it is reasonable but hey we will see I guess.
    Good sales, poor initial retention. Lots of people will jump on the train because people buy mmorpg without even knowing what game they bought which starts endless complaints. Fans will talk about how much the game sold, detractors will say that the game failed because people left, no-one will care of reality unless it fits their narrative.

    I would be extremely surprised if they could keep 100k subscribers a year after the full release, that prediction goes for Camelot Unchained as well.
    The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    edited February 2017
    Mylan12 said:
    I saw the same complaining when Vanguard was being developed. To be successful it need this feature or that or it couldn't do something this way and so on. I beta tested that game from late alpha to release and it seem to me that they listen too much to the masses. To me at least the game was more fun early in beta than it was later on. They seem to keep trying to add things to please the masses (that probably were never going to play the game anyway) and the result was a less fun and unfinished game. 
     I am glad that the official forum is behind a pay window and I hope VR sticks to the vision they have for the game and release polished game for the players that the game is designed for.

     As far as for SWTOR not making a year in the subscription model. I doubt any single player MMORPG will ever be successful as other than a FTP model. And people playing single player MMORPG will do as I did, go play them when they have new content and leave when you have finished.
    Not many group based PVE MMORPG around so I think Pantheon will have a decent market.
    It will certainly put many theories to task for sure, as game mechanics vs player tendency has been a long running debate here. As long as I can remember reading posts in these parts, that's been the main long running topic of debate.

     Considering the game is polished enough with a decent level of production value. It's success will largely depend on there being enough people who are driven by the mechanics to become social during their game-time. 

    I personally think it's people in general who have become more antisocial, due to tech opening up so many ways in the real world to avoid real communication. 

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    edited February 2017
    Hrimnir said:
    As I have said before, I think many will be eating their words when the game does well. No I don't mean 500k to 1 mil. subs, I mean maybe anywhere from 50 up to 150k. I think it is reasonable but hey we will see I guess.

    Nah, they'll just go and delete posts and do mental gymnastics and say things like "well, I said X, but what I "meant" was Y". Etc etc.
    Many? most seem to be expecting those numbers (50k-150K)... Only a couple people have said it will be less. I think you guys have to remember what the premise of this thread started out as. (Pantheon being HUGE).. That's what the "many" are really arguing against.

    I don't think it's a secret that this is going to be a niche title. It really boils down to whether 50-150k is to be considered a success. If that's the target that's fine. Personal subjective expectations aside, it's really what works for VR that matters.  

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member RarePosts: 3,432
    And 150k is just right imo. 




  • EvorasXEvorasX Member UncommonPosts: 6
    I suspect any independent developer would be happy with a core subscriber-base of 50-150k accounts. Remember, this is not F2P where you need high volume churn to generate ca$h via micro-transactions, but a monthly subscription model. This, then, becomes a question of content and longevity.

    Fun gameplay gets people hooked and both breadth of content and scale of social interaction determine longevity. If it can maintain these, it will outlast the more ephemeral titles that pop up today and are gone tomorrow ... not to mention the games which the jaded player base find lacking in challenge and swiftly grow bored of.

    Perhaps 50-150k is right ... perhaps not,
    ... but with longevity this can, and likely will, grow steadily.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited February 2017
    Pantheon will pull 150k if they launch early, missing features, but playable. If they launch with what they're gunning for, adequate content, polished and complete, 150 will be surpassed before they even get into open beta.


  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Dullahan said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kyleran said:
    Gdemami said:
    I think it will do fine. Well enough for Brad and Co to consider it a success. It is a niche game within a niche genre so I would project 150,000 to 225,000 average subs at best. Which is a success according to Brad. They don't need WOW numbers. They are not working with a WOW budget. 
    Even for AAA mainstream titles subscription model is unsustainable. 150k subs for Pantheon is awfully delusional.
    Yet CCP/EVE manages to do so, weird isn't it?

    FFXIV, SWTOR, L1, heck maybe even AA or BDO likely have that many subs or patrons.

    Give players a game with features they really want for which there few options and people will pay for it.

    $15 a month just isn't that much money.

    To be fair, though, you're quoting AAA titles and EVE, who was once the second most subbed game is now seeing subscriptions fall off to 2012 levels. I agree with both @Gdemami and @blueturtle13 though. I agree that 150k subs is delusional, but I agree with BlueTurtle that 150k is probably the absolute, best-case scenario cap for a niche market. So it really comes down to this, "Will Pantheon be the greatest game of all time?" That's how Pantheon gets to 150k subs. The problem is the North American market. Nobody wants to pay for shit! Has there even been an MMO that's lasted 1 year on the subscription-only model in the last 5 years? Shit, SWTOR didn't even make it a year, did it? 

    This game won't fly in the massive Asia-Pacific market, because it's being designed specifically for the North American market, so it should be interesting to see if America will step up and make MMOs great again in 2017!
    Nobody wants to pay for shit, you're absolutely right. When someone releases an MMO that's not, a willingness to pay will not be an issue.

    Honestly, I think that the biggest think that Pantheon has going for it is a strong and loyal fan base (to the game and also to Brad). So I feel like there will be a group of people who are more than willing to pay for the game. However, what is the size of that group? What is the size you need in order to remain viable? If your group of fans is larger than the size you need to remain viable, then you're probably going to be just fine. That's not putting specific numbers on it, though, because I think people are setting up the game to fail here, quoting numbers from thin air based on nothing more than speculation. Realistically, you need to create a game that can survive on minimal numbers, especially when it's a niche game like this. Also, you're delusional if you think this is a mainstream game. It isn't! So, really, all people are doing when they say shit like "Pantheon will be huge!!!" is setting the game up to fail, which is sad. It doesn't NEED to be huge. In fact, people shouldn't WANT it to be huge because that's when it needs to dilute itself and cater to the masses. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    DMKano said:
    EvorasX said:
    I suspect any independent developer would be happy with a core subscriber-base of 50-150k accounts. Remember, this is not F2P where you need high volume churn to generate ca$h via micro-transactions, but a monthly subscription model. This, then, becomes a question of content and longevity.

    Fun gameplay gets people hooked and both breadth of content and scale of social interaction determine longevity. If it can maintain these, it will outlast the more ephemeral titles that pop up today and are gone tomorrow ... not to mention the games which the jaded player base find lacking in challenge and swiftly grow bored of.

    Perhaps 50-150k is right ... perhaps not,
    ... but with longevity this can, and likely will, grow steadily.

    No MMORPG has demonstrated steady sustainable growth year after year.

    Even WoW which grew immensly hit the inevitable decline.

    So based on what model and data are you coming up with steady growth?
    Nobody said perpetual sustained growth. Both EQ and WoW had sustained growth for many years.


  • drivendawndrivendawn Member RarePosts: 2,144
    edited February 2017
    Distopia said:
    Hrimnir said:
    As I have said before, I think many will be eating their words when the game does well. No I don't mean 500k to 1 mil. subs, I mean maybe anywhere from 50 up to 150k. I think it is reasonable but hey we will see I guess.

    Nah, they'll just go and delete posts and do mental gymnastics and say things like "well, I said X, but what I "meant" was Y". Etc etc.
    Many? most seem to be expecting those numbers (50k-150K)... Only a couple people have said it will be less. I think you guys have to remember what the premise of this thread started out as. (Pantheon being HUGE).. That's what the "many" are really arguing against.

    I don't think it's a secret that this is going to be a niche title. It really boils down to whether 50-150k is to be considered a success. If that's the target that's fine. Personal subjective expectations aside, it's really what works for VR that matters.  
    There have been more than a couple in this thread who have claimed that the game wil flat out fail and said it would have below 50k. While I agree it won't be a run away hit I am certainly not going to agree with the more than a couple that are saying that it will fail when I believe otherwise. Although you are correct there are not as many nay sayers lately thanks to the Hard work of the VR team.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    DMKano said:
    Dullahan said:
    DMKano said:
    EvorasX said:
    I suspect any independent developer would be happy with a core subscriber-base of 50-150k accounts. Remember, this is not F2P where you need high volume churn to generate ca$h via micro-transactions, but a monthly subscription model. This, then, becomes a question of content and longevity.

    Fun gameplay gets people hooked and both breadth of content and scale of social interaction determine longevity. If it can maintain these, it will outlast the more ephemeral titles that pop up today and are gone tomorrow ... not to mention the games which the jaded player base find lacking in challenge and swiftly grow bored of.

    Perhaps 50-150k is right ... perhaps not,
    ... but with longevity this can, and likely will, grow steadily.

    No MMORPG has demonstrated steady sustainable growth year after year.

    Even WoW which grew immensly hit the inevitable decline.

    So based on what model and data are you coming up with steady growth?
    Nobody said perpetual sustained growth. Both EQ and WoW had sustained growth for many years.

    He clearly said "will grow steadily." 

    Thats the actual quote, didnt say for a few years, or anything, just period.

    WoW and EQ had sustained growth 10+ years ago, name a MMO in the last 5 years that even grew for 1 year post launch? (I am not talking about multiple platform launches as "growth")


    For someone who spends more hours posting about mmos a day than I spend at work, I'd think by now you would come to the realization that casualizing MMOs dramatically decreases their longevity. Yet you continue going around, seemingly with blinders on, spouting off about how it's the natural evolution or that people  "no longer have time" for a single game that requires a greater time devotion.

    You really seem like a nice guy Kano, but get a clue!


  • joeslowmoejoeslowmoe Member UncommonPosts: 127
    Lol, this game is going to have 50k players max ever.  Maybe it will peak to 75k-100k at launch but that will be the largest ground swell it will ever see.  

    Posts like this OP are moronic and willfully ignorant to market evidence.  

    Good try. 
  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 281
    DMKano said:
    Dullahan said:
    DMKano said:
    EvorasX said:
    I suspect any independent developer would be happy with a core subscriber-base of 50-150k accounts. Remember, this is not F2P where you need high volume churn to generate ca$h via micro-transactions, but a monthly subscription model. This, then, becomes a question of content and longevity.

    Fun gameplay gets people hooked and both breadth of content and scale of social interaction determine longevity. If it can maintain these, it will outlast the more ephemeral titles that pop up today and are gone tomorrow ... not to mention the games which the jaded player base find lacking in challenge and swiftly grow bored of.

    Perhaps 50-150k is right ... perhaps not,
    ... but with longevity this can, and likely will, grow steadily.

    No MMORPG has demonstrated steady sustainable growth year after year.

    Even WoW which grew immensly hit the inevitable decline.

    So based on what model and data are you coming up with steady growth?
    Nobody said perpetual sustained growth. Both EQ and WoW had sustained growth for many years.

    He clearly said "will grow steadily." 

    Thats the actual quote, didnt say for a few years, or anything, just period.

    WoW and EQ had sustained growth 10+ years ago, name a MMO in the last 5 years that even grew for 1 year post launch? (I am not talking about multiple platform launches as "growth")


    Yeah and you seem to be saying that they should make this game just like all them other MMO released in the last 5 years that according to you didn't grow post launch.

    That reminds me of something Albert Einstein said long ago:
    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

    Perhaps it is time to try something else and see if you can get a different result.
  • EvorasXEvorasX Member UncommonPosts: 6
    @Mylan12 : Thank you for making my point.
    @DMKano : I think you just made my point for me.

    The reason Pantheon is popular, even at this stage, is that it offers something wildly different from the current crop ... the very same current crop that dwindle after year #1.

    That is my rationale for considering it may, like EQ1 and EVE, sustain growth over time.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,259
    edited February 2017
    Mylan12 said:
    Perhaps it is time to try something else and see if you can get a different result.
    You do not see the irony in your post, do you...?
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,977
    EvorasX said:
    @Mylan12 : Thank you for making my point.
    @DMKano : I think you just made my point for me.

    The reason Pantheon is popular, even at this stage, is that it offers something wildly different from the current crop ... the very same current crop that dwindle after year #1.

    That is my rationale for considering it may, like EQ1 and EVE, sustain growth over time.
    At this stage, Pantheon isn't offering something wildly different.  It is promising some wildly different elements built on top of an old and familiar base.  The elements that have been promised aren't currently visible, just the old, familiar game play.

    Whether or not it will grow contrary to industry patterns is very much in question.  There are those that believe in this non-normal growth pattern, and those who don't.  Neither side has a view of the future, but historical precedence suggests that a conservative (maybe even a very conservative) projection of the future market is a safer bet.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

Sign In or Register to comment.