Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Detailed breakdown of the 4/27/2017 stream: Phantheon

1235

Comments

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member LegendaryPosts: 9,095

    Mendel said:





    Joppa jumped in the official forums and addressed the acclimation system.
    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/5063/opinion-on-acclimation-system/view/post_id/108541

    This is the first iteration of a feature.  People need to chill out.




    If it's the first iteration of a feature, why display it so prominently?  To show how little they've accomplished?  First impressions are important.  I think the 'pre-pre-pre-alpha' and 'first iteration' language from developers are simply ways of saying "we're further behind that we'd like to admit" without upsetting the fans.


    You always find the negative slant to look at things. Or you could look at it like this... WOW, thats Pre-Pre Alpha and it looked that good? Teaming dynamic went so well for player skills still not being flushed out. Or just go with that other thing, what ever lol 
    Catibrie
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 29,239

    Mendel said:





    Joppa jumped in the official forums and addressed the acclimation system.
    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/5063/opinion-on-acclimation-system/view/post_id/108541

    This is the first iteration of a feature.  People need to chill out.




    If it's the first iteration of a feature, why display it so prominently?  To show how little they've accomplished?  First impressions are important.  I think the 'pre-pre-pre-alpha' and 'first iteration' language from developers are simply ways of saying "we're further behind that we'd like to admit" without upsetting the fans.


    Well, it's several things.

    Part of the problem is "they are damned if they do and damned if they don't".

    They've accepted money from players and they want to show work they've done. They also want the game to find their audience, people who want this type of game, so it's helpful to keep it in topics of conversation.

    However, the players can also be part of the problem. They need to be realistic about this (or similar) projects and understand what an indy game with a small budget can and cannot do.

    Unfortunately this is one of the biggest battles for indy developers as players want "indy games" but they want these games to be AAA quality in scope and detail and polish.

    I think anyone who is actually serious about this game will know this. It's the people who aren't the demographic who will be asking the questions that you are asking.
    Catibrie
  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
    My heart goes out to indy developers like VR. If you don't show your work and your progress, people will say you are too insubstantial to warrant investment. But if you do show your work early, people will pick the feathers off of what you show as lacking polish. And then if you point out that you are still in pre-pre alpha and not at the polish stage, people will say you are making excuses and are too far from final to ever finish. What a depressing dilemma. 

    Momma says this is why we can't have nice things. 

    Personally, I think VR has done a way better than average job of sharing new things as they go, and it looks great to me. 

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • AraduneAradune Sigil Games CEOMember RarePosts: 294
    edited May 2017


    Amathe said:


    My heart goes out to indy developers like VR. If you don't show your work and your progress, people will say you are too insubstantial to warrant investment. But if you do show your work early, people will pick the feathers off of what you show as lacking polish. And then if you point out that you are still in pre-pre alpha and not at the polish stage, people will say you are making excuses and are too far from final to ever finish. What a depressing dilemma. 

    Momma says this is why we can't have nice things. 

    Personally, I think VR has done a way better than average job of sharing new things as they go, and it looks great to me. 




    It is a bit of a challenge and it took a while to get used to (very different from the way EQ and VG were built).

    The biggest difference is showing off the game in a far earlier state than one would in the old days when there was really no choice but to be funded by a large publisher.  In those cases you would hold off on advertising, getting the word out, showing off the game, etc. until the game itself was much further along.

    Showing the game earlier (which we've done primarily via twitch streams, although this will be expanding) has overall been a very positive experience.  That said, there's often comment and criticism interspersed with a vast majority of positive feedback, complaining about visual fidelity (graphics, models, animations, etc) even though we are always clear that the game is in a pre-alpha state.  Some people listen, some people don't and/or don't care.  Either way, we're fine with it as we're able to show significant progress each and every time.  

    All in all, once we got used to this 'new way of building an MMO', it's really been quite a fun ride.  I remember when working on EQ, when it was in a pre-alpha or alpha state, and having a burning desire to start showing it off.  But from a marketing and PR standpoint that would have been the wrong call so we of course waited until later before showing off the game (usually by visiting different game magazines, showing off the game to them and at trade shows like E3, and then hopefully receiving some coverage).  With both EQ and VG we were blessed with quite a bit of coverage including one cover for each game.  Back then this was a big deal and how you got the word out.

    Of course the world is a different place now, over a decade later.  Not only are we showing the game off earlier than what was the norm in the past, but the way you reach people is very different.  Interviews and coverage in paper magazines is pretty much obsolete.  Working with online web game sites is still part of the equation, but the more effective way is to have youtube personalities showcase the game in live twitch streams and pre-recorded coverage.  Putting together videos, doing podcasts, etc. are also a key part of the equation.

    Honestly any negativity or skepticism actually fills us with adrenaline as we look forward to showing off the game in the near future and sharing with the community the progress we have made.  If you look at the streams we have done over the last year you can clearly see the significant progress we have made (and made with an unheard of low amount of money spent).  Being an 'indie' developer means being extra careful with funds, planning very carefully, and running lean and mean.  I think this is a good thing as this project is by far the best planned out, organized, filled with incredibly talented people, and frugal development effort that I've ever been involved with, and I've been doing this 20+ years.  Showing off the game, incomplete, with temporary assets and plenty of warts, is still a total blast and fun because we're able to do so earlier than with previous projects.  Answering the skeptics with measurable and significant forward progress is also rewarding :)  

    One of the tricks learned early on is to plan very carefully such that the game is being worked on and making progress and also every so many months in a state where we can show it off live.  Thanks to engines like Unity, the cloud for hosting servers, and the maturity of remote tools (skype, etc), we've been able to build Pantheon up to a point that simply would have been impossible even a decade ago without a lot more money, people, and time.   This has made us better planners, better stewards of the funds we have, and enabled us to bring on talent from all of the world -- we don't have to hire people already living in San Diego or to somehow entice them to move here.   While I've worked with some very talented and dedicated teams over the years, the Visionary Realms team is by far the most committed, hard working, self-motivated and driven I've ever had the honor to work with.  Couple that with much better game (as opposed to merely graphics) engines (Unity in our case), the cloud, Bizspark, etc. plus the knowledge gained from building two MMOs before and what we've been able to do thus far is unprecedented.  

    Sure, sometimes you need a thick skin, and you definitely need to be extremely stubborn and tenacious.  From a management standpoint, learning how to coordinate collaborative development remotely was initially very challenging as well.  But, as with most things, practice is what it's all about.  The more you do it, the better you get at it.  The ultimate mandate for a start-up company is to *survive*, but we've been able to do more than that, to thrive and become extremely efficient in our use of funds and other resources.  Personally I love it and the freedom that comes with being an indie developer is very rewarding.  Taking on the most challenging genre of game to develop (the massively multiplayer online game) is probably kind of crazy... crazy like a fox :)  But Pantheon fills a need, an empty space in the MMO genre right now that has been sorely neglected.  Bringing back group oriented gameplay, significantly more challenging content, supporting a community that is already growing even before pre-alpha launch, etc. is very rewarding as there are many MMO players out there who feel orphaned amongst the typically only casual, easy to play, and often pay to win games that are prevalent right now.  Likewise, reaching out to younger players who have never experienced a true cooperative and social MMO is a gratifying challenge.  

    Times change, and so must we game developers.  So far, so good.  When we launch and taste success I think many people will be astounded by the amount of money spent to develop Pantheon.  Gone are the days of mega-bucks MMO projects possible only by support or even ownership of major publishers.  We are in an MMO renaissance now with multiple indie MMOs in development, each focused on their own target audience as opposed to trying to be the next WoW-killer and somehow appealing to everyone all of the time.  Instead we can serve our chosen audience better than ever before by focusing on making a great MMO for them specifically.  Combine that with the fact that Pantheon is also the game we on the development team have been craving to play as well, and life is pretty darn good :)
    Catibrie1AD7

    --

    --------------------------------------------------------------
    Brad McQuaid
    CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc.
    www.pantheonmmo.com
    --------------------------------------------------------------

  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 4,024


    We'll see how it goes but by comparison I'm already excited about crowfall but pantheon hasn't managed to grab my attention yet....and I backed both...and crowfall is even newer in terms of development.  Not a great sign, or perhaps a testament to how well crowfall is coming along.


    Its the latter tbh. I've been playing pre alpha Crowfall for quite some time and the progress they are making is astounding, especially with the limited funds they have. Crowfall development is insanely fast and of high quality. Their pre alpha is better then several (real) Beta's I have partaken in. Pantheon is coming along nicely, Crowfall is the special case here  ;)

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • mezhumezhu Member UncommonPosts: 24
    I actually chuckled when this one guy started rumbling about how they can't answer questions and play at the same time as the game got extremely challenging. All the while, we've been watching 6 people repeatedly taking 3 minutes to beat down a single mob, while perma-cc'ing the occasional additional aggro. Then to top it off, this same guy claims there's tactics involved in the facerolling we're observing, and these "tactics" would be different if the group had a different class.

    Sure, I get the nostalghia and I appreciate the principles behind this game; however the sort of gameplay they presented is not just outdated but rather just plainly bad. And if the developers themselves are considering this to be 'challenging' and 'tactical', I have absolutely no trust in their ability to design actually engaging and teamwork-reliant combat. (PS: No, needing to trade buffs once every 30 minutes does not consitute cross-class play or teamwork, neither does casting a year-long lasting hard cc spell, nor rotating the same 3 buttons repeatedly to eventually do damage.)

  • XodicXodic Member EpicPosts: 1,257
    edited May 2017



    mezhu said:



    I actually chuckled when this one guy started rumbling about how they can't answer questions and play at the same time as the game got extremely challenging. All the while, we've been watching 6 people repeatedly taking 3 minutes to beat down a single mob, while perma-cc'ing the occasional additional aggro. Then to top it off, this same guy claims there's tactics involved in the facerolling we're observing, and these "tactics" would be different if the group had a different class.

    Sure, I get the nostalghia and I appreciate the principles behind this game; however the sort of gameplay they presented is not just outdated but rather just plainly bad. And if the developers themselves are considering this to be 'challenging' and 'tactical', I have absolutely no trust in their ability to design actually engaging and teamwork-reliant combat. (PS: No, needing to trade buffs once every 30 minutes does not consitute cross-class play or teamwork, neither does casting a year-long lasting hard cc spell, nor rotating the same 3 buttons repeatedly to eventually do damage.)







    Strategy is the overall plan, encompassing factors that lead to completing an objective. Such as putting together a team capable of meeting a certain challenge, as in bringing a Shaman to slow a particular hard hitting target or an Enchanter for the chaotic multi-threat engagements. There were several levels of strategy represented in games like EQ that allowed you to accomplish things in different ways. That's something you don't see anymore, most modern games have automated macro game-play to where you don't need to think, you just need to show up and smash keys 1 - 9, and sometimes 0, or jump around clicking the left mouse button in a variety of patterns. Which brings us to tactics.

    Tactics in games such as EQ were dynamic, it not only changed from fight to fight, but during the fight as well. People that didn't pay attention or apply their personal skill and knowledge of the game unknowingly wiped their group. The difference was night and day between a mediocre player and one that knew every tactic their class was able to apply in a multitude of situations. Games like this allowed for deep tactical play on mechanics and I see the same possibilities with Pantheon. 

    An example of this: The group gets a caster add during a fight that kills the Enchanter, Ranger 'A' continues to beat on the primary target as one-by-one the group dies.

    "Ahh, we wiped. There was nothing we could do.".

    Same scenario, Ranger 'B' reacts quickly and taunts the caster add, then breaks line of sight to pull the add around a pillar/wall and roots it in-place to prevent it from nuking the group, then Ranger 'B' returns to help finish up their current target.

    "Good job, Ranger! That was an impressive save.".  

    I could go on for pages explaining the potential tactical depth of a combat system like this, but it does little for people that believe their presence should be enough contribution. Sure, you can stand there and beat on things and feel as if your 'rotation' is operating at 100% efficiency and there is nothing more you can do, but you'll never be playing at your best, because you're not aware of what that is. 
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,249

    mezhu said:

    I actually chuckled when this one guy started rumbling about how they can't answer questions and play at the same time as the game got extremely challenging. All the while, we've been watching 6 people repeatedly taking 3 minutes to beat down a single mob, while perma-cc'ing the occasional additional aggro. Then to top it off, this same guy claims there's tactics involved in the facerolling we're observing, and these "tactics" would be different if the group had a different class.

    Sure, I get the nostalghia and I appreciate the principles behind this game; however the sort of gameplay they presented is not just outdated but rather just plainly bad. And if the developers themselves are considering this to be 'challenging' and 'tactical', I have absolutely no trust in their ability to design actually engaging and teamwork-reliant combat. (PS: No, needing to trade buffs once every 30 minutes does not consitute cross-class play or teamwork, neither does casting a year-long lasting hard cc spell, nor rotating the same 3 buttons repeatedly to eventually do damage.)



    I noticed that 'answers and playing' moment, too.  It suggested to me that there was an awful lot of button mashing going on.  Tactics involve decisions, and it is next to impossible to determine what decisions were being made, or how they were enacted.  Were the developers having to mouse-select the add?  Were they issuing typed commands to make an attack (like many of the / commands that very early EQ1 had for warrior special abilities)?  From what I could see of the combat text scrolling past (too small in the stream, and some 'presenter' thought it would be more constructive to have a video feed of himself overlaid across the game), they couldn't have been scanning the text for important events that required their attention.

    I agree with the seeming duration of the CC, although I couldn't tell if the rogue was re-applying the CC.  Half the time, the PoV character (the monk) wasn't looking at the add.  The effectiveness of the taunt / agro mechanism was completely unbalanced.  Where was this in 2000 when I was mezzing for a living, and I would die whenever a tank did not taunt at least 2 times, preferably 3?

    The 6-on-1 play was boring from the start.  I had hoped that 20 years into the MMORPG era, I would be seeing new ideas in how combat plays out.  I guess I'll just have to hope I live another 20 years.

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

  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 282
    edited May 2017


    Mendel said:





    mezhu said:



    I actually chuckled when this one guy started rumbling about how they can't answer questions and play at the same time as the game got extremely challenging. All the while, we've been watching 6 people repeatedly taking 3 minutes to beat down a single mob, while perma-cc'ing the occasional additional aggro. Then to top it off, this same guy claims there's tactics involved in the facerolling we're observing, and these "tactics" would be different if the group had a different class.

    Sure, I get the nostalghia and I appreciate the principles behind this game; however the sort of gameplay they presented is not just outdated but rather just plainly bad. And if the developers themselves are considering this to be 'challenging' and 'tactical', I have absolutely no trust in their ability to design actually engaging and teamwork-reliant combat. (PS: No, needing to trade buffs once every 30 minutes does not consitute cross-class play or teamwork, neither does casting a year-long lasting hard cc spell, nor rotating the same 3 buttons repeatedly to eventually do damage.)







    I noticed that 'answers and playing' moment, too.  It suggested to me that there was an awful lot of button mashing going on.  Tactics involve decisions, and it is next to impossible to determine what decisions were being made, or how they were enacted.  Were the developers having to mouse-select the add?  Were they issuing typed commands to make an attack (like many of the / commands that very early EQ1 had for warrior special abilities)?  From what I could see of the combat text scrolling past (too small in the stream, and some 'presenter' thought it would be more constructive to have a video feed of himself overlaid across the game), they couldn't have been scanning the text for important events that required their attention.

    I agree with the seeming duration of the CC, although I couldn't tell if the rogue was re-applying the CC.  Half the time, the PoV character (the monk) wasn't looking at the add.  The effectiveness of the taunt / agro mechanism was completely unbalanced.  Where was this in 2000 when I was mezzing for a living, and I would die whenever a tank did not taunt at least 2 times, preferably 3?

    The 6-on-1 play was boring from the start.  I had hoped that 20 years into the MMORPG era, I would be seeing new ideas in how combat plays out.  I guess I'll just have to hope I live another 20 years.




    I doubt they have the taunts and CC balanced yet as far as duration and resists go.
    As far as the 6 on 1 goes, I see this stated often and am not sure what people want? Should it be 6 on 2, 6 on 6, 6 on 20 or even 6 on 100 ? I get the impression probably wrongly that some people want something like Diablo in a MMORPG form where you are jumping around fighting masses of mobs at once.

    Perhaps you mean scripted events like some other games have had on Raid bosses. Like for example at :  X% health the mob calls for adds or cast some special skill or whatever
    Other games like LOTRO did this kind of thing and I hope we see something similar in this game later in development.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    6v1 with adds works well because it makes pulling and cc important. It's easier to balance, especially in a game where mobs aren't locked in encounters. This system provides opportunities to make use of all roles without rigidly requiring multiple tanks or multiple cc classes.

    Taunts and the threat system will probably be changed more between now and launch than anything else. It's not something you can perfect this early on, because new abilities, new AI (dispositions), as well as weapons and even content and classes will change so many variables. It will constantly have to be refined.

    In EQ, damage was the most important factor for threat. If you went way over on aggro, and taunt would do little but turn the mob for a fraction of a second. As long as taunt isn't ignoring threat tables and forcing mobs to attack the tank, I'd say it's working pretty well all things considered.
    Catibrie


  • genaknoscgenaknosc Member UncommonPosts: 112

    Gyva02 said:



    LIOKI said:


    Nice work!
    Why are they still making games for 2004 though? Call me when devs remove their rose colored glasses.




    We've had our fill of cash shop dps bunny jump jamboree... Oldschool FTW... 


    I think what you really mean by "oldschool" is that Pantheon is being designed for old people to play it. Which is all well and good, when there is a niche, market to the niche.
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited May 2017
    The rationale that only "old people" will play Pantheon isn't exactly sound, considering young people don't seem to be very keen on all of these "new" and "innovative" mmos currently being offered either.
    Catibrie


  • KajidourdenKajidourden Member EpicPosts: 3,026

    lahnmir said:





    We'll see how it goes but by comparison I'm already excited about crowfall but pantheon hasn't managed to grab my attention yet....and I backed both...and crowfall is even newer in terms of development.  Not a great sign, or perhaps a testament to how well crowfall is coming along.




    Its the latter tbh. I've been playing pre alpha Crowfall for quite some time and the progress they are making is astounding, especially with the limited funds they have. Crowfall development is insanely fast and of high quality. Their pre alpha is better then several (real) Beta's I have partaken in. Pantheon is coming along nicely, Crowfall is the special case here  ;)

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir



    This is true.  As it develops more perhaps it will draw me in but right now it's just....same old thing.
  • mezhumezhu Member UncommonPosts: 24
    edited May 2017


    Mylan12 said:


     snip



    The scripted behavior system you're describing is also static and dull, and it's quite a shame that it has been established as the norm. Yet at the same time it's the bare minimum amount of work we've learned to expect when it comes to combat and NPC AI, and the stream presented failed to match even that.

    Your hyperbole claim of people expecting 'diablo-like 6v200 combat' is just not helpful towards any sort of discussion. What I was hoping for (not naive enough to expect, though) would be encountering progressively larger enemy groups within the same order of magnitude as the player group, consisting of varying individual mob instances which exhibit different behaviors and produce different fight dynamics.

    e.g. a zone could start with encounters skewed in the player group's favor, both in terms of enemy numbers and enemy group lineup, then slowly build up towards an inversely skewed fight versus a larger, well-built and efficiently synergistic enemy group. Such an approach gives players the time and space needed to learn individual enemies' behaviors, strengths and weaknesses at their own pace, while at the same time providing a rewarding and challenging ground for coordinated play. Certainly sounds way more interesting than damage-sponge auto-attacking mobs that emulate mechanically, emotionally and strategically dead tanks.
  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 282
    edited May 2017


    mezhu said:






    Mylan12 said:




     snip





    The scripted behavior system you're describing is also static and dull, and it's quite a shame that it has been established as the norm. Yet at the same time it's the bare minimum amount of work we've learned to expect when it comes to combat and NPC AI, and the stream presented failed to match even that.

    Your hyperbole claim of people expecting 'diablo-like 6v200 combat' is just not helpful towards any sort of discussion. What I was hoping for (not naive enough to expect, though) would be encountering progressively larger enemy groups within the same order of magnitude as the player group, consisting of varying individual mob instances which exhibit different behaviors and produce different fight dynamics.

    e.g. a zone could start with encounters skewed in the player group's favor, both in terms of enemy numbers and enemy group lineup, then slowly build up towards an inversely skewed fight versus a larger, well-built and efficiently synergistic enemy group. Such an approach gives players the time and space needed to learn individual enemies' behaviors, strengths and weaknesses at their own pace, while at the same time providing a rewarding and challenging ground for coordinated play. Certainly sounds way more interesting than damage-sponge auto-attacking mobs that emulate mechanically, emotionally and strategically dead tanks.




    Ah well a lot of games have had mob density and difficulty get harder as you went in deeper. Even EQ did this in a very limited way. I hope this game has more complicated encounters than what we seen which are mostly tank and spank type. The run for help is nice but I like to see more.  I feel sure that they will develop the mob AI more as time goes on to make things more interesting. I did notice that some of the mobs would attack the healer instead of the tank and they did mention some other things in the stream. I have been in late alpha stages in a couple of other MMORPG  (Vanguard and LOTRO) in the past and Pantheon's combat seems fairly well along for this stage of development. 
     Of course this games looks to be a trinity style combat. So the basic goal in most encounters is for the tank to get aggro and keep aggro, the cleric or healer class to heal, the DPS classes to DPS, and CC to CC.

    That is why I enjoyed my Bard in early EQ, no one knew what in the heck we were supposed to do which made playing one much more interesting.
  • ScummScumm Member UncommonPosts: 78
    I hate to wade back in to a topic we seem to have moved past, but I found the Gating/Locking/Progression conversation interesting.  

    I do think that in its current iteration, the acclimation system appears simple. The icy windblown corridor is basically a Door and the infusion is the Key. There isn't much variation, either you have the key or you don't.  I find this similar to a game like old-school Zelda, where content is gated behind certain items.  Either you have the hookshot and can access the next dungeon, or you don't. 

    I am hoping that in its final form this is a system with options and room for emergent gameplay, more akin to Dark Souls.  For example: that same icy corridor could be overcome with any combination of a strong regen, run speed buff, warming potion, a warm cloak, excessively high hit points, climbing a wall and levitating over, and other things that we won't even anticipate until some creative player discovers it.  I see the infusions as an alternate method for players who are motivated enough to pursue it. Like Joppa said, the high level infusions may be rewards to progressively more epic quests. I hope that doesn't mean it's the only solution to the puzzle.

    Ultimately, these kind of MMOs are based on stats.  As long as there are stats there will be some form of shallow Door/Key locking and I'm ok with that.  We've seen with Everquest that it's possible to layer enough complexity on top of that system to keep things interesting.   
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182

    Dullahan said:

    The rationale that only "old people" will play Pantheon isn't exactly sound, considering young people don't seem to be very keen on all of these "new" and "innovative" mmos currently being offered either.


    Who truly knows what make up of age groups any game's community holds or attracts? Why make statements like this at all?
    Catibrie

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


  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534

    Distopia said:



    Dullahan said:


    The rationale that only "old people" will play Pantheon isn't exactly sound, considering young people don't seem to be very keen on all of these "new" and "innovative" mmos currently being offered either.




    Who truly knows what make up of age groups any game's community holds or attracts? Why make statements like this at all?


    It's not rocket science to deduce that new mmos aren't doing well period. That would include younger demographics.
    Catibrie


  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,538
    edited May 2017


    Dullahan said:



    It's not rocket science to deduce that new mmos aren't doing well period. That would include younger demographics.




    You can look at what GAMES are doing well, however and note what the younger demographics are playing there.  They're playing really fast paced instant gratification games like Overwatch and League of Legends and even various hack and slash games, which is like, the complete opposite of what Pantheon is.
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,657

    Tiamat64 said:




    Dullahan said:




    It's not rocket science to deduce that new mmos aren't doing well period. That would include younger demographics.






    You can look at what GAMES are doing well, however and note what the younger demographics are playing there.  They're playing really fast paced instant gratification games like Overwatch and League of Legends and even various hack and slash games, which is like, the complete opposite of what Pantheon is.

    Kids now like games like ARK, H1Z1, GTA Online, Battlefield 1, Black Ops, Rainbow Six Siege, Destiny, TF2, Dota2, LoL, etc.
    Catibrie
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 20,657
    It doesn't matter though. Trying to anticipate demographic details without any actual analysis to go on is just shooting in the dark.

    The important stuff is to keep on track and grow the core base and keep on improving the combat interaction, mechanics, and pacing. From outside appearances it seems they're making progress on that track. People are still talking and interested in the game and combat is moving forward.
    Catibrie
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • Gyva02Gyva02 Member RarePosts: 485
    edited May 2017


    Tiamat64 said:






    Dullahan said:





    It's not rocket science to deduce that new mmos aren't doing well period. That would include younger demographics.








    You can look at what GAMES are doing well, however and note what the younger demographics are playing there.  They're playing really fast paced instant gratification games like Overwatch and League of Legends and even various hack and slash games, which is like, the complete opposite of what Pantheon is.




    It's been said over and over again in these forums. The younger generation of gamers have never had a group dependent game like classic EQ to play so they have no idea how awesome and addictive its going to be until they finally get to play it. 
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534

    Tiamat64 said:




    Dullahan said:




    It's not rocket science to deduce that new mmos aren't doing well period. That would include younger demographics.






    You can look at what GAMES are doing well, however and note what the younger demographics are playing there.  They're playing really fast paced instant gratification games like Overwatch and League of Legends and even various hack and slash games, which is like, the complete opposite of what Pantheon is.


    I'd say apples and oranges, but apples and ambulances would be more appropriate.

    Comparing a genre of games that have always revolved around fast paced and easily accessible game modes of an entirely different genre is not a logical comparison. Even the correlation is weak.
    Catibrie


  • QuillimQuillim Member UncommonPosts: 83
    edited May 2017
    Scumm said:
    I hate to wade back in to a topic we seem to have moved past, but I found the Gating/Locking/Progression conversation interesting.  

    I do think that in its current iteration, the acclimation system appears simple. The icy windblown corridor is basically a Door and the infusion is the Key. There isn't much variation, either you have the key or you don't.  I find this similar to a game like old-school Zelda, where content is gated behind certain items.  Either you have the hookshot and can access the next dungeon, or you don't.
     
    I simply view it as their new take on the Resist System from EQ. Rather than just mobs popping out AE, they make it part of the environment and something you have to manage. PoP Raiding with resists below 300 to all was a completely different beast, so wasn't that a form of 'content lock'? Until you geared, the raiding was far harder.

    It could also have the ability to provide a penalty for overly long raids. Where there was no penalty in the original game for taking all day to kill stuff, in this new version it could cost you a decent amount to replenish infusions, something you save if you're efficient about getting stuff done.

    It could also make it far harder to zerg down(or corpse cannon if you will) bosses.
  • Mackaveli44Mackaveli44 Member RarePosts: 662
    edited March 2018
    Xodic said:



    mezhu said:



    I actually chuckled when this one guy started rumbling about how they can't answer questions and play at the same time as the game got extremely challenging. All the while, we've been watching 6 people repeatedly taking 3 minutes to beat down a single mob, while perma-cc'ing the occasional additional aggro. Then to top it off, this same guy claims there's tactics involved in the facerolling we're observing, and these "tactics" would be different if the group had a different class.

    Sure, I get the nostalghia and I appreciate the principles behind this game; however the sort of gameplay they presented is not just outdated but rather just plainly bad. And if the developers themselves are considering this to be 'challenging' and 'tactical', I have absolutely no trust in their ability to design actually engaging and teamwork-reliant combat. (PS: No, needing to trade buffs once every 30 minutes does not consitute cross-class play or teamwork, neither does casting a year-long lasting hard cc spell, nor rotating the same 3 buttons repeatedly to eventually do damage.)







    Strategy is the overall plan, encompassing factors that lead to completing an objective. Such as putting together a team capable of meeting a certain challenge, as in bringing a Shaman to slow a particular hard hitting target or an Enchanter for the chaotic multi-threat engagements. There were several levels of strategy represented in games like EQ that allowed you to accomplish things in different ways. That's something you don't see anymore, most modern games have automated macro game-play to where you don't need to think, you just need to show up and smash keys 1 - 9, and sometimes 0, or jump around clicking the left mouse button in a variety of patterns. Which brings us to tactics.

    Tactics in games such as EQ were dynamic, it not only changed from fight to fight, but during the fight as well. People that didn't pay attention or apply their personal skill and knowledge of the game unknowingly wiped their group. The difference was night and day between a mediocre player and one that knew every tactic their class was able to apply in a multitude of situations. Games like this allowed for deep tactical play on mechanics and I see the same possibilities with Pantheon. 

    An example of this: The group gets a caster add during a fight that kills the Enchanter, Ranger 'A' continues to beat on the primary target as one-by-one the group dies.

    "Ahh, we wiped. There was nothing we could do.".

    Same scenario, Ranger 'B' reacts quickly and taunts the caster add, then breaks line of sight to pull the add around a pillar/wall and roots it in-place to prevent it from nuking the group, then Ranger 'B' returns to help finish up their current target.

    "Good job, Ranger! That was an impressive save.".  

    I could go on for pages explaining the potential tactical depth of a combat system like this, but it does little for people that believe their presence should be enough contribution. Sure, you can stand there and beat on things and feel as if your 'rotation' is operating at 100% efficiency and there is nothing more you can do, but you'll never be playing at your best, because you're not aware of what that is. 
    This is a fantastic and thought out response to Mezhu's comment.  Not only do you explain the issue that plagues todays MMO's, which is buttong mashing 1-9, not paying attention to any adds and just AoEing stuff down with zero presense of threat or danger to what EQ brought to the table in terms of tactics and strategy and how certain classes brought different strengths and weaknesses to a group and encounter. It's 100% correct.

    I played an Enchanter in EQ for over 6 years and I can tell you from experience, having a class like the Enchanter in a group, can potentially change the outcome of an encounter through debuffs, buffs to group members, crowd control, and what to use and when to use it.  Depending on the skill level of the person playing an Enchanter and his/her ability to know what spells/what cc abilities/what debuffs to use, drastically made a difference for the group and encounter. I still to this very day, think the Enchanter from Everquest was the weakest, yet, most powerful class in any mmo that I have played.  You could change the tides of a battle quick, you could control the battlefield, you could charm a mob that hit harder than any player could, you had so many tools at your disposal yet your own personal damage was laughable at best. The Enchanter was incredible. 

    You don't have that in today's world of MMO's.  It's 100% smash buttons, avoid some AoE's and done.  There's zero emphasis on buffs from players, zero emphasis on debuffs from players or mobs, zero emphasis on classes and their identity and uniqueness that sets them apart from others.   its all smash your face into a keyboard, avoid some stuff and win. 

    I can't wait to have that feeling back of debuffs actually making a difference, FEELING the difference debuffs and buffs make.  Attack speed debuffs making a difference, etc, etc.   I can't wait for Pantheon and I know many of my friends who love MMO's can't wait either.  Everyone agrees that the market is stale and that the current iteration of games we have today are boring with zero challenge. Most importantly, I certainly hope they can capture another aspect that made Everquest and Vanguard so special - Community. You actually got to know your fellow players on your server, you got to know NAMES of people and form friendships with them, you had reputations on your server, those who were good, those who were assholes, etc.  You had a community on your server that you got to know.  That is missing so badly today.  I certainly hope instancing and cross server bullshit isn't something Pantheon will do.  I ruins any sense of community within your own server. 




    Gyva02Mardukk1AD7
Sign In or Register to comment.