Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

A Pledge

13

Comments

  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 6,270
    Goodness this became nasty a bit too quick . Shall we just wait and see for now instead of all this speculation. I have my reservations too but I'm waiting for the game patiently without starting these types of discussions that just devolve in the end. 

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505

    Dullahan said:



    And?  For it to be a true passion project, they would only ask for contributions as they incurred costs, they would refund any money made above strictly what is needed to keep the bills paid.  Are they doing this?  No?  Do they expect to continue taking in money after release above and beyond operations costs?  Yes?  Then it's business.

    Ask them to finish the project pro bono, see how passionate they are about THAT project.

    I'm all for a genre renaissance.  I just refuse to let my emotional desire for such a renaissance blind me to reality.  The reality is they're a for-profit business that wouldn't be spending their time on this if they didn't think it would support their studio.  That's not evil, but it doesn't deserve such high praise, and it certainly doesn't mean we owe them a damn thing for it.  Once they qualify as a charity, then I'll make an emotional investment.  Until then, I expect goods and/or services in return for any cash I hand them, and it is completely absurd to make the argument that we should just be grateful for whatever "gifts" they offer us.  Nah buddy, YOU can think that way if you like; I'll save my cash for a product that has shown it's worth the price of admission when I lay my money down on it, not a second before.

    EDIT- I should add here that I approached crowdfunding with an optimism akin to Erillion's optimism for SC.  I've since seen the system abused and squeezed for every red cent a developer can get for an unfinished project.  I've since decided crowdfunding is just code for developers to skip paying the middle-man (AAA publishers); nothing more.  They're, generally, as greedy as any other for-profit business.  They just make a very special appeal to emotion to try and fleece their customers for as much cash as possible, all the while they don't even need a completed project.  In fact, one might argue that, in some cases, a finished project would actually limit their continued earning potential.


    Okay, for this to be a passion project, they have to do it for the rest of their lives without pay? Right.

    That isn't how it works. Sacrifice is sacrifice. They have committed a lot by way of time and money/potential money to get Pantheon off the ground, for what may not be especially profitable even under the best of circumstances.

    Eventually, should things go well it will turn into a career for all of them, but for years now, and probably years to come, they are making a lot of sacrifices to make this game a reality. It's a huge gamble, and their careers and livelihood hangs in the balance.

    Your narrowly defining what constitutes a project of passion is both ridiculous and insulting.


    Even if we widen the definition, how does that change anything?  It's a for-profit endeavor.  They would not be pursuing this if they did not believe it would result in profits for their studio.  Let me repeat that: if they did not think they could make money off of you and others with this endeavor, they wouldn't even consider it.  Again, nobody thinks this is evil or sneaky.  But it doesnt warrant worship.  It warrants skepticism, quite honestly, because we've yet to see anyone's "return on investment" in the form of a fully released, crowdfunded MMORPG.  If you remember, your original response to me was quoting a post in which I was commenting on a poster submitting we should be grateful for any ole bullshit the company thinks is warranted for $50, $100, $1000+ contributions to their "passion project".

    Please, that's both ridiculous and insulting.  Next time you head into a retail store, write them a fat check, hold out your hand, and say "just gimme whatever you think I've earned by giving you my money.  I know you guys are real passionate about the work you do here, so I'm sure you're being fair".  What?  As I said, delusional.

    image
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534


    Even if we widen the definition, how does that change anything?  It's a for-profit endeavor.  They would not be pursuing this if they did not believe it would result in profits for their studio.  Let me repeat that: if they did not think they could make money off of you and others with this endeavor, they wouldn't even consider it. 
    That is a silly hypothetical. It requires money to create the game. Now, once they get money to make it, it's no longer a project of passion because it's not entirely self-funded? If they had the ability to make the game without funding, how do you know they wouldn't make it? I can tell you, for a long time they actually were making the game with no funding, followed by very little funding and still they marched on.

    Again, nobody thinks this is evil or sneaky.  But it doesnt warrant worship.  It warrants skepticism, quite honestly, because we've yet to see anyone's "return on investment" in the form of a fully released, crowdfunded MMORPG.  If you remember, your original response to me was quoting a post in which I was commenting on a poster submitting we should be grateful for any ole bullshit the company thinks is warranted for $50, $100, $1000+ contributions to their "passion project".

    Please, that's both ridiculous and insulting.  Next time you head into a retail store, write them a fat check, hold out your hand, and say "just gimme whatever you think I've earned by giving you my money.  I know you guys are real passionate about the work you do here, so I'm sure you're being fair".  What?  As I said, delusional.


    False representation and false equivalence.

    While some fans may have "worship" level devotion to the game and it's creators, I consider myself one of, if not the biggest fan of the game and I scrutinize and criticize everything I have a problem with.

    Next time I head into the retail store? Retail being the operative word. This project wouldn't even make it retail without contributions to help get it where it is. If people want to help make it a reality because they share a love of what they're making, they can do so and effectively pre-order. If that is asking too much, then simply don't.

    There's nothing wrong with being skeptical. In your case, you probably want to wait until after the game has been launched, or maybe even a few years longer -- just to be safe.


  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,240




    Dullahan said:





    And?  For it to be a true passion project, they would only ask for contributions as they incurred costs, they would refund any money made above strictly what is needed to keep the bills paid.  Are they doing this?  No?  Do they expect to continue taking in money after release above and beyond operations costs?  Yes?  Then it's business.

    Ask them to finish the project pro bono, see how passionate they are about THAT project.

    I'm all for a genre renaissance.  I just refuse to let my emotional desire for such a renaissance blind me to reality.  The reality is they're a for-profit business that wouldn't be spending their time on this if they didn't think it would support their studio.  That's not evil, but it doesn't deserve such high praise, and it certainly doesn't mean we owe them a damn thing for it.  Once they qualify as a charity, then I'll make an emotional investment.  Until then, I expect goods and/or services in return for any cash I hand them, and it is completely absurd to make the argument that we should just be grateful for whatever "gifts" they offer us.  Nah buddy, YOU can think that way if you like; I'll save my cash for a product that has shown it's worth the price of admission when I lay my money down on it, not a second before.

    EDIT- I should add here that I approached crowdfunding with an optimism akin to Erillion's optimism for SC.  I've since seen the system abused and squeezed for every red cent a developer can get for an unfinished project.  I've since decided crowdfunding is just code for developers to skip paying the middle-man (AAA publishers); nothing more.  They're, generally, as greedy as any other for-profit business.  They just make a very special appeal to emotion to try and fleece their customers for as much cash as possible, all the while they don't even need a completed project.  In fact, one might argue that, in some cases, a finished project would actually limit their continued earning potential.



    Okay, for this to be a passion project, they have to do it for the rest of their lives without pay? Right.

    That isn't how it works. Sacrifice is sacrifice. They have committed a lot by way of time and money/potential money to get Pantheon off the ground, for what may not be especially profitable even under the best of circumstances.

    Eventually, should things go well it will turn into a career for all of them, but for years now, and probably years to come, they are making a lot of sacrifices to make this game a reality. It's a huge gamble, and their careers and livelihood hangs in the balance.

    Your narrowly defining what constitutes a project of passion is both ridiculous and insulting.




    Even if we widen the definition, how does that change anything?  It's a for-profit endeavor.  They would not be pursuing this if they did not believe it would result in profits for their studio.  Let me repeat that: if they did not think they could make money off of you and others with this endeavor, they wouldn't even consider it.  Again, nobody thinks this is evil or sneaky.  But it doesnt warrant worship.  It warrants skepticism, quite honestly, because we've yet to see anyone's "return on investment" in the form of a fully released, crowdfunded MMORPG.  If you remember, your original response to me was quoting a post in which I was commenting on a poster submitting we should be grateful for any ole bullshit the company thinks is warranted for $50, $100, $1000+ contributions to their "passion project".

    Please, that's both ridiculous and insulting.  Next time you head into a retail store, write them a fat check, hold out your hand, and say "just gimme whatever you think I've earned by giving you my money.  I know you guys are real passionate about the work you do here, so I'm sure you're being fair".  What?  As I said, delusional.


    You have to admire many of the fans devotion to believing in the philanthropy of developers, @MadFrenchie.  There's definitely an aura of worship surrounding Pantheon and it comes from fans.

    We, as the gaming community, should be leery of anyone asking for money well in advance of a product; we've seen entirely too many products that weren't much more than a weak concept being passed off for full price but under delivering on the promises.  Instead, we hemorrhage money, put developers on a pedestal and attack anyone who bothers to ask "Why?".  There is blind faith in place of observation, and any conclusion that doesn't conform with the majority is routinely shouted down.  Whenever this community does engage in a debate about a specific feature, the winning side is invariably "whatever the developers produce".  It is neither honest nor constructive.

    Some fights are worth fighting.

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

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 9,081

    Mendel said:








    Dullahan said:







    And?  For it to be a true passion project, they would only ask for contributions as they incurred costs, they would refund any money made above strictly what is needed to keep the bills paid.  Are they doing this?  No?  Do they expect to continue taking in money after release above and beyond operations costs?  Yes?  Then it's business.

    Ask them to finish the project pro bono, see how passionate they are about THAT project.

    I'm all for a genre renaissance.  I just refuse to let my emotional desire for such a renaissance blind me to reality.  The reality is they're a for-profit business that wouldn't be spending their time on this if they didn't think it would support their studio.  That's not evil, but it doesn't deserve such high praise, and it certainly doesn't mean we owe them a damn thing for it.  Once they qualify as a charity, then I'll make an emotional investment.  Until then, I expect goods and/or services in return for any cash I hand them, and it is completely absurd to make the argument that we should just be grateful for whatever "gifts" they offer us.  Nah buddy, YOU can think that way if you like; I'll save my cash for a product that has shown it's worth the price of admission when I lay my money down on it, not a second before.

    EDIT- I should add here that I approached crowdfunding with an optimism akin to Erillion's optimism for SC.  I've since seen the system abused and squeezed for every red cent a developer can get for an unfinished project.  I've since decided crowdfunding is just code for developers to skip paying the middle-man (AAA publishers); nothing more.  They're, generally, as greedy as any other for-profit business.  They just make a very special appeal to emotion to try and fleece their customers for as much cash as possible, all the while they don't even need a completed project.  In fact, one might argue that, in some cases, a finished project would actually limit their continued earning potential.




    Okay, for this to be a passion project, they have to do it for the rest of their lives without pay? Right.

    That isn't how it works. Sacrifice is sacrifice. They have committed a lot by way of time and money/potential money to get Pantheon off the ground, for what may not be especially profitable even under the best of circumstances.

    Eventually, should things go well it will turn into a career for all of them, but for years now, and probably years to come, they are making a lot of sacrifices to make this game a reality. It's a huge gamble, and their careers and livelihood hangs in the balance.

    Your narrowly defining what constitutes a project of passion is both ridiculous and insulting.






    Even if we widen the definition, how does that change anything?  It's a for-profit endeavor.  They would not be pursuing this if they did not believe it would result in profits for their studio.  Let me repeat that: if they did not think they could make money off of you and others with this endeavor, they wouldn't even consider it.  Again, nobody thinks this is evil or sneaky.  But it doesnt warrant worship.  It warrants skepticism, quite honestly, because we've yet to see anyone's "return on investment" in the form of a fully released, crowdfunded MMORPG.  If you remember, your original response to me was quoting a post in which I was commenting on a poster submitting we should be grateful for any ole bullshit the company thinks is warranted for $50, $100, $1000+ contributions to their "passion project".

    Please, that's both ridiculous and insulting.  Next time you head into a retail store, write them a fat check, hold out your hand, and say "just gimme whatever you think I've earned by giving you my money.  I know you guys are real passionate about the work you do here, so I'm sure you're being fair".  What?  As I said, delusional.




    You have to admire many of the fans devotion to believing in the philanthropy of developers, @MadFrenchie.  There's definitely an aura of worship surrounding Pantheon and it comes from fans.

    We, as the gaming community, should be leery of anyone asking for money well in advance of a product; we've seen entirely too many products that weren't much more than a weak concept being passed off for full price but under delivering on the promises.  Instead, we hemorrhage money, put developers on a pedestal and attack anyone who bothers to ask "Why?".  There is blind faith in place of observation, and any conclusion that doesn't conform with the majority is routinely shouted down.  Whenever this community does engage in a debate about a specific feature, the winning side is invariably "whatever the developers produce".  It is neither honest nor constructive.

    Some fights are worth fighting.


    I do agree this is a business and their goal is not just to make us happy but first off they want to keep their family in the goodies we all want and that takes money. Pantheon has proved beyond the stage of as you put it "products that weren't much more than a weak concept" They have shown us they can make something EQ1 and VG fans can get excited about. This game is worth investing in if 1. This is the type of game you are looking for 2. Know you are backing a game and should not be spending money you can afford to.
  • TwoTubesTwoTubes Member UncommonPosts: 281
    Saga of Lucemia seems like it might be more of the "passion project" some people are looking for.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505

    Dullahan said:





    Even if we widen the definition, how does that change anything?  It's a for-profit endeavor.  They would not be pursuing this if they did not believe it would result in profits for their studio.  Let me repeat that: if they did not think they could make money off of you and others with this endeavor, they wouldn't even consider it. 
    That is a silly hypothetical. It requires money to create the game. Now, once they get money to make it, it's no longer a project of passion because it's not entirely self-funded? If they had the ability to make the game without funding, how do you know they wouldn't make it? I can tell you, for a long time they actually were making the game with no funding, followed by very little funding and still they marched on.

    Again, nobody thinks this is evil or sneaky.  But it doesnt warrant worship.  It warrants skepticism, quite honestly, because we've yet to see anyone's "return on investment" in the form of a fully released, crowdfunded MMORPG.  If you remember, your original response to me was quoting a post in which I was commenting on a poster submitting we should be grateful for any ole bullshit the company thinks is warranted for $50, $100, $1000+ contributions to their "passion project".

    Please, that's both ridiculous and insulting.  Next time you head into a retail store, write them a fat check, hold out your hand, and say "just gimme whatever you think I've earned by giving you my money.  I know you guys are real passionate about the work you do here, so I'm sure you're being fair".  What?  As I said, delusional.




    False representation and false equivalence.

    While some fans may have "worship" level devotion to the game and it's creators, I consider myself one of, if not the biggest fan of the game and I scrutinize and criticize everything I have a problem with.

    Next time I head into the retail store? Retail being the operative word. This project wouldn't even make it retail without contributions to help get it where it is. If people want to help make it a reality because they share a love of what they're making, they can do so and effectively pre-order. If that is asking too much, then simply don't.

    There's nothing wrong with being skeptical. In your case, you probably want to wait until after the game has been launched, or maybe even a few years longer -- just to be safe.

    Well, we have to admit something Dullahan- the fact that it wouldn't even make it to retail without crowdfunding is already strike number one, to be honest.


    And don't mistake my argument to imply you're guilty of anything I described- again, you were responding to my post quoting another poster.  I continued arguing my case with you, but I didn't mean to imply you personally were guilty of the behavior I'm arguing against.  Your tone is much different than delete's.

    I encourage you to reread the post I originally responded to.  I make no apologies for my skepticism, but understand not everyone will take my stance.  I've said before that I think folks should only buy in when they consider the product they're getting worth the price at that very moment.  That obviously brings subjectivity into the matter, but to submit that we should be grateful to receive anything in return for literally floating these projects for developers is crazy.  As far as I know, pledges aren't tax-deductible charitable donations, and these developers aren't running charities.

    And I totally agree with your last statement.  It's also why I'm not currently subbed or considering backing any MMORPG available.  Last MMORPG that received money from me was ESO.  To risk sounding like a former, infamous poster who has since been banned...  There are plenty of non-MMORPGs to hold me over until I can see some finished products (whatever that means in today's landscape) that I can assess the value of.

    As I mentioned elsewhere, folks are spending exponentially more on these dreams than they would've ever considered spending on a release title, and some of these titles can make more ahead of release than after (looking at you, SC).  I call them dreams because, no matter how tame, the resulting game will almost never fulfill the lofty ideals behind its inception.  That's a recipe for disaster, and I'm just not that hungry for an MMORPG to play.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited May 2017


    Mendel said:












    Dullahan said:









    And?  For it to be a true passion project, they would only ask for contributions as they incurred costs, they would refund any money made above strictly what is needed to keep the bills paid.  Are they doing this?  No?  Do they expect to continue taking in money after release above and beyond operations costs?  Yes?  Then it's business.

    Ask them to finish the project pro bono, see how passionate they are about THAT project.

    I'm all for a genre renaissance.  I just refuse to let my emotional desire for such a renaissance blind me to reality.  The reality is they're a for-profit business that wouldn't be spending their time on this if they didn't think it would support their studio.  That's not evil, but it doesn't deserve such high praise, and it certainly doesn't mean we owe them a damn thing for it.  Once they qualify as a charity, then I'll make an emotional investment.  Until then, I expect goods and/or services in return for any cash I hand them, and it is completely absurd to make the argument that we should just be grateful for whatever "gifts" they offer us.  Nah buddy, YOU can think that way if you like; I'll save my cash for a product that has shown it's worth the price of admission when I lay my money down on it, not a second before.

    EDIT- I should add here that I approached crowdfunding with an optimism akin to Erillion's optimism for SC.  I've since seen the system abused and squeezed for every red cent a developer can get for an unfinished project.  I've since decided crowdfunding is just code for developers to skip paying the middle-man (AAA publishers); nothing more.  They're, generally, as greedy as any other for-profit business.  They just make a very special appeal to emotion to try and fleece their customers for as much cash as possible, all the while they don't even need a completed project.  In fact, one might argue that, in some cases, a finished project would actually limit their continued earning potential.





    Okay, for this to be a passion project, they have to do it for the rest of their lives without pay? Right.

    That isn't how it works. Sacrifice is sacrifice. They have committed a lot by way of time and money/potential money to get Pantheon off the ground, for what may not be especially profitable even under the best of circumstances.

    Eventually, should things go well it will turn into a career for all of them, but for years now, and probably years to come, they are making a lot of sacrifices to make this game a reality. It's a huge gamble, and their careers and livelihood hangs in the balance.

    Your narrowly defining what constitutes a project of passion is both ridiculous and insulting.








    Even if we widen the definition, how does that change anything?  It's a for-profit endeavor.  They would not be pursuing this if they did not believe it would result in profits for their studio.  Let me repeat that: if they did not think they could make money off of you and others with this endeavor, they wouldn't even consider it.  Again, nobody thinks this is evil or sneaky.  But it doesnt warrant worship.  It warrants skepticism, quite honestly, because we've yet to see anyone's "return on investment" in the form of a fully released, crowdfunded MMORPG.  If you remember, your original response to me was quoting a post in which I was commenting on a poster submitting we should be grateful for any ole bullshit the company thinks is warranted for $50, $100, $1000+ contributions to their "passion project".

    Please, that's both ridiculous and insulting.  Next time you head into a retail store, write them a fat check, hold out your hand, and say "just gimme whatever you think I've earned by giving you my money.  I know you guys are real passionate about the work you do here, so I'm sure you're being fair".  What?  As I said, delusional.






    You have to admire many of the fans devotion to believing in the philanthropy of developers, @MadFrenchie.  There's definitely an aura of worship surrounding Pantheon and it comes from fans.

    We, as the gaming community, should be leery of anyone asking for money well in advance of a product; we've seen entirely too many products that weren't much more than a weak concept being passed off for full price but under delivering on the promises.  Instead, we hemorrhage money, put developers on a pedestal and attack anyone who bothers to ask "Why?".  There is blind faith in place of observation, and any conclusion that doesn't conform with the majority is routinely shouted down.  Whenever this community does engage in a debate about a specific feature, the winning side is invariably "whatever the developers produce".  It is neither honest nor constructive.

    Some fights are worth fighting.




    It just irks me when I perceive a consumer assuming such a self-defeating attitude as the one I responded to (EDIT- meaning the post I originally responded to in this thread).  I get these developers are the "last hope," but so do the developers, and many have shown no qualms with using that to fleece gamers for stupid amounts of cash without even presenting an actual finished project.  I find it disappointingly baffling that some consumers seem to think these developers are, on some kind of personal level, benevolent benefactors attempting to create THEIR dream game.  It's just not true.

    image
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 29,204




    Well, we have to admit something Dullahan- the fact that it wouldn't even make it to retail without crowdfunding is already strike number one, to be honest.
    Not really. There are so many things that exist that, without community funding, would not exist.

    But the community that revolves around these things "want them" and they give.

    A friend of mine was responsible for raising 24 million dollars each year for "just" operating costs for one particular organization. And she raised it every year she worked for that organization.

    I give additional funds to several local theaters so that they continue. I value what they do, but know that ticket sales alone doesn't cover the costs.

    Now, Arts organizations "might" be able to continue just on ticket sales if they make everything as bare bones as possible but audiences want things to be as professional as possible which is the reason that these organizations ask for contributions.

    Of course, one can say "game development is different" and in many ways it is but in many ways it's very much the same, a very specific product that requires a lot of people with very specific knowledge to make certain games happen.

    Developers can either do without or see if the community will help make things happen and the community for many games has spoken.

    I realize some players are besides themselves with this system but none of this is foreign to me and the circles I run in, it's pretty much par for the course.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Be that as it may Sovrath, if the audience was readily available, these types of games wouldn't have fallen off the radar almost completely in favor of the newer "brand" of MMORPGs and hybrid multiplayer experiences.

    It's niche.  There's nothing wrong with that, until you get a group so desperate to have the niche filled that they start making business decisions (helping fund the project from inception) using purely emotional information.  Its why I argue that SC's constant rescheduling is deceptive; we all know when Chris says something will happen in X amount of time, there's a whole league of folks who will desperately believe this and give money based on that timeline, no matter how many disclaimers you throw on it.  They're making a business decision (continued funding of a business project) based solely on emotion.  That's bad for the consumers making that decision, but great if you happen to be the one asking for more, more, more cash.

    image
  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member RarePosts: 3,432


    Saga of Lucemia seems like it might be more of the "passion project" some people are looking for.



    If they prefer that game then that's up to them. If other prefer this game then it's also there choice. 

    Seems you want to decide what mmo's  others prefer to follow. Go follow your game and others will follow theirs. 

    You got a problem with that. 




  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 29,204


    Be that as it may Sovrath, if the audience was readily available, these types of games wouldn't have fallen off the radar almost completely in favor of the newer "brand" of MMORPGs and hybrid multiplayer experiences.

    It's niche.  There's nothing wrong with that, until you get a group so desperate to have the niche filled that they start making business decisions (helping fund the project from inception) using purely emotional information.  Its why I argue that SC's constant rescheduling is deceptive; we all know when Chris says something will happen in X amount of time, there's a whole league of folks who will desperately believe this and give money based on that timeline, no matter how many disclaimers you throw on it.  They're making a business decision (continued funding of a business project) based solely on emotion.  That's bad for the consumers making that decision, but great if you happen to be the one asking for more, more, more cash.


    I don't think the entire audience ever went away.

    I think World of Warcraft came out, enticed many players to try it, including people who weren't "mmo gamers", it made hordes of money and suddenly game companies realized that there was more money to be made.

    Budgets went up and for a small while they could get large amounts of players, but in the end, there aren't enough players (it seems) to support a plethora of big budget games. Especially games that don't offer significantly different experiences.

    The initial audience was still there and enjoyed the experiences that they had in those early games (myself including for Lineage 2) but as games moved away from features that supported more social play, they had fewer and fewer games that fit their taste.

    Then, some of them grew up, had families, realized that they didn't have x amount of hours per day to play a game like original Everquest and the audience shrunk further.

    There are still people who want these types of games but the audience isn't as large. However, they do have money and are willing to support these endeavors. As long as game companies can deliver what is expected I don't see an issue.

    As far as Star Citizen, that is in the same boat but "different". You are right, there is a lot of emotion going into it but it's not as if there isn't progress. There is. Is it enough? Don't know; in truth I think they didn't manage money well enough to give what was promised and since the project is ambitious they are having setbacks.

    My thought is that it doesn't matter "yet". As long as they continually get funding AND release a game AND one that resembles what was promised it really isn't going to be an issue for their core faithful.

    The real issue is if they CAN'T deliver.
  • drivendawndrivendawn Member RarePosts: 2,162
    edited May 2017
    People can say what they want but my bet is that this continues to be funded by the many that want it. Sure it's a niche but it's one that a lot of people want filled. More and more the Pantheon team prove they have passion for this niche and the ability to fill it.  
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    @Sovrath I don't take issue with any part of your latest post.  But as I mentioned to Dullahan; reread the post I originally responded to that sparked this lively debate.  You will immediately recognize a tone not shared by yourself and others debating with me.

    Every project has such emotional backers, not just SC.  That's natural.  What's not been natural in the past is the vast amount of leeway given to developers to take money directly from consymers with no concrete obligations attached.  We literally have titles being renamed and rereleased in an almost identical state to skim more cash from unwary customers.  This isn't business as usual for the gaming industry.

    As jovial as producers may seem, the relationship between the producers (meaning those who create the product) and us consumers is inherently adversarial.  That doesn't mean we should be complete dicks to one another, but we should be skeptical of one another for sure.  And honestly, can we not all agree that taking cash for a half-assed project, "cancelling" it, then repackaging the same exact program and attempting to resell it is exactly a dick move?  Can we not all agree that paying exponentially more to wait around for a project to be done "when it's finished" is a net loss compared to the status quo of paying a much smaller amount to receive a finished project?  You pay more now, but you're getting less now because of a "promise" that, eventually, maybe, if the well doesn't run dry before the farm's watered, you'll get more.

    image
  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 9,081
    This conversation is getting silly. First off people who liked EQ1 have supported that game for over 18 years. Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. Many feel like myself that they want an updated 2017 game that plays like EQ1. If people want to support that, what makes you so brighter then any of us to say we should not? I will spend my money as I wish. Sovrath has been kind to point out people support what they like. I will punch you in the face with it. Unless someone is doing something dishonest. What right do you have to criticize anyone for it? 

    If someone wants to call Pantheon an awesome game. What right to you have to call into question their judgement? We all see the world with our own colored glasses. I hate AA and yet I do not spend hours on their forums questioning people's judgment for liking that game. 

    Unless I'm missing something and you seek to have your mind changed or looking for info?
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,212

    Nanfoodle said:

    Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. 


    So you want to play a game with graphics from 12 years ago?
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 12,698

    Nanfoodle said:

    This conversation is getting silly. First off people who liked EQ1 have supported that game for over 18 years. Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. Many feel like myself that they want an updated 2017 game that plays like EQ1. If people want to support that, what makes you so brighter then any of us to say we should not? I will spend my money as I wish. Sovrath has been kind to point out people support what they like. I will punch you in the face with it. Unless someone is doing something dishonest. What right do you have to criticize anyone for it? 

    If someone wants to call Pantheon an awesome game. What right to you have to call into question their judgement? We all see the world with our own colored glasses. I hate AA and yet I do not spend hours on their forums questioning people's judgment for liking that game. 

    Unless I'm missing something and you seek to have your mind changed or looking for info?


    I like to see passion from people about games released and upcoming. This hobby has some of the most passionate people in all the arts in my opinion and one of the reasons why forums like these are so fun to frequent. Pantheon my not be for me personally but I appreciate the fervor.   

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • drivendawndrivendawn Member RarePosts: 2,162




    Nanfoodle said:


    Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. 




    So you want to play a game with graphics from 12 years ago?


    Looks more like from 8 or so years ago to me but yes because its a better than 18. Not to mention a different world with different new mechanics.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505

    Nanfoodle said:

    This conversation is getting silly. First off people who liked EQ1 have supported that game for over 18 years. Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. Many feel like myself that they want an updated 2017 game that plays like EQ1. If people want to support that, what makes you so brighter then any of us to say we should not? I will spend my money as I wish. Sovrath has been kind to point out people support what they like. I will punch you in the face with it. Unless someone is doing something dishonest. What right do you have to criticize anyone for it? 

    If someone wants to call Pantheon an awesome game. What right to you have to call into question their judgement? We all see the world with our own colored glasses. I hate AA and yet I do not spend hours on their forums questioning people's judgment for liking that game. 

    Unless I'm missing something and you seek to have your mind changed or looking for info?


    Sorry, but I'm not sure where I ever mentioned Pantheon by name?  Nor where I specifically criticized Pantheon itself or any interested backers.  Again, for the 3rd time now...  Reread the post I originally responded to.  Read my response.  Now we can continue arguing two completely different topics, or you can recognize I'm speaking in general about what crowdfunding has become and stop with the knee-jerk reflex to defend your favorite crowdfunded title like I just claimed it was vaporware or something.

    We happen to be in the Pantheon subforum, sure.  But if you're reading two he content of my posts, it's quite obvious my argument isn't against a specific title, but a general argument against what crowdfunding has become.

    image
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,212









    Nanfoodle said:



    Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. 






    So you want to play a game with graphics from 12 years ago?




    Looks more like from 8 or so years ago to me but yes because its a better than 18. Not to mention a different world with different new mechanics.


    To me, it's very reminiscent of EQ2 which came out in 2004. These are two random pics, but I think that the quality is similar.




  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited May 2017




    @Sovrath I don't take issue with any part of your latest post.  But as I mentioned to Dullahan; reread the post I originally responded to that sparked this lively debate.  You will immediately recognize a tone not shared by yourself and others debating with me.

    Every project has such emotional backers, not just SC.  That's natural.  What's not been natural in the past is the vast amount of leeway given to developers to take money directly from consymers with no concrete obligations attached.  We literally have titles being renamed and rereleased in an almost identical state to skim more cash from unwary customers.  This isn't business as usual for the gaming industry.

    As jovial as producers may seem, the relationship between the producers (meaning those who create the product) and us consumers is inherently adversarial.  That doesn't mean we should be complete dicks to one another, but we should be skeptical of one another for sure.  And honestly, can we not all agree that taking cash for a half-assed project, "cancelling" it, then repackaging the same exact program and attempting to resell it is exactly a dick move?  Can we not all agree that paying exponentially more to wait around for a project to be done "when it's finished" is a net loss compared to the status quo of paying a much smaller amount to receive a finished project?  You pay more now, but you're getting less now because of a "promise" that, eventually, maybe, if the well doesn't run dry before the farm's watered, you'll get more.


    You're being intentionally naive here. Yes, the situation with crowdfunding sucks. In general, both consumers and developers think it sucks. Don't you think they would rather just get investment money day 1 and rent a studio and fill it with talented artists and developers? The game would probably already be out if that was an option.

    It wasn't an option.

    It wasn't an option for Garriot. It wasn't an option for Jacobs. It wasn't an option for Walton. It wasn't an option for Coleman. It wasn't an option for McQuaid either. Even Smedley crashed and burned via kickstarter before Amazon picked him up.

    None of the biggest names in mmos could procure enough funding to go the traditional route. It's not like they didn't try. The genre is currently in a really bad place, and confidence is low after billions were spent on mmos that failed to generate projected earnings.

    Enter crowdfunding. Though it sucks, it's something both developers and consumers are willing to endure if it means there's a chance for games that we want to play again. It's simply the only way we're going to see them. I guess you can pray that a developer you like will hit the lottery. For the rest of us, we're willing to risk some money for a game we are confident will provide many years of enjoyment.

    So can we just get past this? Yes it sucks. No, it's not inherently shady for someone to utilize it when people are willingly pledging their own money. Yes, some people will abuse the system. At this point, it's more than obvious that Pantheon is not one of them.



  • drivendawndrivendawn Member RarePosts: 2,162
















    Nanfoodle said:




    Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. 








    So you want to play a game with graphics from 12 years ago?






    Looks more like from 8 or so years ago to me but yes because its a better than 18. Not to mention a different world with different new mechanics.




    To me, it's very reminiscent of EQ2 which came out in 2004. These are two random pics, but I think that the quality is similar.






    I hope thats A joke because that is not a PANTHEON pic.
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,212

























    Nanfoodle said:





    Many (like myself) are sick of playing graphics and a UI that's also 18 years old. 










    So you want to play a game with graphics from 12 years ago?








    Looks more like from 8 or so years ago to me but yes because its a better than 18. Not to mention a different world with different new mechanics.






    To me, it's very reminiscent of EQ2 which came out in 2004. These are two random pics, but I think that the quality is similar.








    I hope thats A joke because that is not a PANTHEON pic.


    hehe, whoops.
  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread Member EpicPosts: 7,212



    I hope thats A joke because that is not a PANTHEON pic.


    Yeah, actually looking at Pantheon screenshots (the video does the game no justice in the graphics department), it does look more in the Rift range or so.
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,631
    You know at some point you just have to extend some trust in a project, or walk away. That's true regardless of how you're invested. It's not all about money.

    I hate how the past is sifted through for any wrong. No one can, or should have to stand up to that. If you don't think a business is trustworthy then don't buy in. It's that simple.

    The subversive innuendo are disgusting. It's not funny and people aren't clever for making their coy passive aggressive barbs at the studio or people who choose to support the project.
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


Sign In or Register to comment.