Howdy, Stranger!

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

Millions never had the chance for first generation.

12467

Comments

  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 202
    I played UO and AC and saw little of the community in either of them myself. Not like in EQ or DAoC. 
    I think what most people want to get away from is the theme park style quest hub driven MMORPGs that actually encourage the solo play style over group play.  To encourage group style play you need classes with certain roles which EQ certainly did.
      I would like to see them do something like LOTRO did with its runekeeper.  Have classes not be able to totally change their role but be able to modify it somewhat before going adventuring. Like for example the group already has a healer and they don't need another. So you readjust before going adventuring to make your character do more DPS (but not as much as a primary DPS class) and also be able to do some minor backup healing. If at least some of the classes are able to fill more than one role then the problem of having to find a certain class for the group will be a lot less. Of course you should be able to only do this in a town and not during combat or after starting adventuring somewhere. In other words not on the fly
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,114
    Lokero said:
     
    The problem is that people don't seem capable of separating the two main features of the early games:

    1) Social Interdependence
    2) Gameplay mechanics

    So, whenever you hear these people wanting throwbacks like Pantheon, you hear people wanting to bring back all the horrible things we all ran away from to start with.  This isn't a facelift, it's a carbon copy.
    Just read these forums even.  People can't separate the two. 

    If developers could find a nice middle-ground where the gameplay is actually more evolved and "fun" and manage to create an actual economy and social-friendly ecosystem at the same time, they might actually draw a crowd.
    In reality, however, they are just bringing back the old, broken gameplay to cater to the nostalgia crowd.
    Maybe Pantheon has some grand tricks up its sleeves that will bring it into the modern era(I doubt it, from what we've seen so far).  We'll see.  ATM, Pantheon largely feels like an EQ emulator server.  Which, while great for those nostalgic, will not draw in many newer players.

    I think the old mechanic I actually liked the most in EQ was the travel system, primarily the wizard/druid teleporting system.  I suppose I'm old-school in the regard that I feel instant fast-travel everywhere at will makes the world feel small and shallow.
    I thought having those classes that could teleport made it so that fast travel was somewhat possible, but also created an interesting networking mechanic amongst players.  It also contributed to the economy.  Since you couldn't just instantly warp to any location, but only specific portal locations, it kept the world from shrinking too much, also. 

    It was a nice balance... and a nice balance is what's needed to salvage the "good" older mechanics without dredging up the rancid ones that were abandoned for good reason.

    All that said, as you've probably seen @blueturtle13 say, EQ actually had many of the worst mechanics of the old-school era.  Games like UO and AC had much more interesting and diverse systems while also having the community aspect.  Using EQ as a base probably isn't the best foundation to try and build from if we want to evolve first-gen mechanics.  EQ was probably the most one-dimensional game(as far as systems go) as there could be.

    TBH, if I want to go full hardcore old-gen, then I have to say that Saga of Lucimia sounds far more interesting than Pantheon, to me.  Seems Pantheon wants to force you into the straight-up "grind" mentality like EQ, whereas SoL wants to make a game that's "hard" or challenging.
    The 'good older mechanics' never disappeared.  Almost every new game has them to some degree, maybe not in the same configuration that EQ1 provided.  Tanking, healing and dps are still the most important mechanics, although some games went a bit heavy into AE instead of single target effects.  But even EQ1 had a selection of AE mechanics.

    What has changed was the 'not-quite-as-good older mechanics'.  Many of the features evolved into modern equivalents, while some were discarded.  Locked doors, begging and other pointless systems have been discarded by almost every game.

    Pantheon is planning to resurrect the long, draining grind.  I agree that many modern games are simply to easy, with mobs standing no real chance against a player.  But the grind, requiring multiple players for multiple minutes to fight a single fight, is unlikely to attract new customers.  The big problem that I see in the Pantheon videos is reverting many systems back to EQ1 standards, essentially discarding all changes that have been made over the past 20 years.

    I can imagine a substantial portion of those that try Pantheon being turned off by the old, slow mechanics of an age gone by.  A game requiring a massive attention span and brings up feelings of deja vu isn't likely to appeal to new customers.  There's a real danger that VR may succeed in duplicating EQ1 only to find the modern marketplace isn't interested.

    ----------
    For the record, I prefer a multi-tier travel system.  Walking is the most basic, but might take hours to get to a specific destination.  A fast travel system, similar to the DAoC horse routes, could cut this time to 20-30 minutes at a cost.  Or portals, either player spells or static places in the environment could transfer a character to fixed locations around the globe.

    ----------
    In response to @delete5230's comment about 'first gen MMOs stopped'.  They never stopped.  They evolved.



    KyleranMrMelGibson

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

  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 202
    Mendel said:
    Lokero said:
     
    The problem is that people don't seem capable of separating the two main features of the early games:

    1) Social Interdependence
    2) Gameplay mechanics

    So, whenever you hear these people wanting throwbacks like Pantheon, you hear people wanting to bring back all the horrible things we all ran away from to start with.  This isn't a facelift, it's a carbon copy.
    Just read these forums even.  People can't separate the two. 

    If developers could find a nice middle-ground where the gameplay is actually more evolved and "fun" and manage to create an actual economy and social-friendly ecosystem at the same time, they might actually draw a crowd.
    In reality, however, they are just bringing back the old, broken gameplay to cater to the nostalgia crowd.
    Maybe Pantheon has some grand tricks up its sleeves that will bring it into the modern era(I doubt it, from what we've seen so far).  We'll see.  ATM, Pantheon largely feels like an EQ emulator server.  Which, while great for those nostalgic, will not draw in many newer players.

    I think the old mechanic I actually liked the most in EQ was the travel system, primarily the wizard/druid teleporting system.  I suppose I'm old-school in the regard that I feel instant fast-travel everywhere at will makes the world feel small and shallow.
    I thought having those classes that could teleport made it so that fast travel was somewhat possible, but also created an interesting networking mechanic amongst players.  It also contributed to the economy.  Since you couldn't just instantly warp to any location, but only specific portal locations, it kept the world from shrinking too much, also. 

    It was a nice balance... and a nice balance is what's needed to salvage the "good" older mechanics without dredging up the rancid ones that were abandoned for good reason.

    All that said, as you've probably seen @blueturtle13 say, EQ actually had many of the worst mechanics of the old-school era.  Games like UO and AC had much more interesting and diverse systems while also having the community aspect.  Using EQ as a base probably isn't the best foundation to try and build from if we want to evolve first-gen mechanics.  EQ was probably the most one-dimensional game(as far as systems go) as there could be.

    TBH, if I want to go full hardcore old-gen, then I have to say that Saga of Lucimia sounds far more interesting than Pantheon, to me.  Seems Pantheon wants to force you into the straight-up "grind" mentality like EQ, whereas SoL wants to make a game that's "hard" or challenging.
    The 'good older mechanics' never disappeared.  Almost every new game has them to some degree, maybe not in the same configuration that EQ1 provided.  Tanking, healing and dps are still the most important mechanics, although some games went a bit heavy into AE instead of single target effects.  But even EQ1 had a selection of AE mechanics.

    What has changed was the 'not-quite-as-good older mechanics'.  Many of the features evolved into modern equivalents, while some were discarded.  Locked doors, begging and other pointless systems have been discarded by almost every game.

    Pantheon is planning to resurrect the long, draining grind.  I agree that many modern games are simply to easy, with mobs standing no real chance against a player.  But the grind, requiring multiple players for multiple minutes to fight a single fight, is unlikely to attract new customers.  The big problem that I see in the Pantheon videos is reverting many systems back to EQ1 standards, essentially discarding all changes that have been made over the past 20 years.

    I can imagine a substantial portion of those that try Pantheon being turned off by the old, slow mechanics of an age gone by.  A game requiring a massive attention span and brings up feelings of deja vu isn't likely to appeal to new customers.  There's a real danger that VR may succeed in duplicating EQ1 only to find the modern marketplace isn't interested.

    ----------
    For the record, I prefer a multi-tier travel system.  Walking is the most basic, but might take hours to get to a specific destination.  A fast travel system, similar to the DAoC horse routes, could cut this time to 20-30 minutes at a cost.  Or portals, either player spells or static places in the environment could transfer a character to fixed locations around the globe.

    ----------
    In response to @delete5230's comment about 'first gen MMOs stopped'.  They never stopped.  They evolved.



    I guess I don't get where its more of a grind fighting one mob with say a 1000x hp which takes some strategy  and a few minutes to kill verses killing 1000 mobs with 1x hp that you just AE through. If I want that I go play a diablo type game. I guess it does take more of an attention span in the longer battle as opposed to just spamming your AE skills. I enjoyed the longer battles in EQ, you had time to communicate with your group, joke around, ect. You are not constantly running all the time from one group of mobs to AE to the next. To me that is much more of a grind. 

    I did go look at the Saga of Lucimia website. Looks like they are real early in development. The classless system has its pluses and but I didn't see any examples of combat (maybe I missed them). I guess they will have some way for you to determine what a characters masteries are so that you know this guy is really a healer and not pretending to be one. I did find a stream from there alpha 4 and it looked like a bunch of people beating on one mob for a while. Didn't look much different than Pantheon other than the graphics were not as good. They do seem to have a bard so thats a plus. 
  • VorthanionVorthanion Member RarePosts: 2,637
    edited November 2018
    Mendel said:
    Lokero said:
     
    The problem is that people don't seem capable of separating the two main features of the early games:

    1) Social Interdependence
    2) Gameplay mechanics

    So, whenever you hear these people wanting throwbacks like Pantheon, you hear people wanting to bring back all the horrible things we all ran away from to start with.  This isn't a facelift, it's a carbon copy.
    Just read these forums even.  People can't separate the two. 

    If developers could find a nice middle-ground where the gameplay is actually more evolved and "fun" and manage to create an actual economy and social-friendly ecosystem at the same time, they might actually draw a crowd.
    In reality, however, they are just bringing back the old, broken gameplay to cater to the nostalgia crowd.
    Maybe Pantheon has some grand tricks up its sleeves that will bring it into the modern era(I doubt it, from what we've seen so far).  We'll see.  ATM, Pantheon largely feels like an EQ emulator server.  Which, while great for those nostalgic, will not draw in many newer players.

    I think the old mechanic I actually liked the most in EQ was the travel system, primarily the wizard/druid teleporting system.  I suppose I'm old-school in the regard that I feel instant fast-travel everywhere at will makes the world feel small and shallow.
    I thought having those classes that could teleport made it so that fast travel was somewhat possible, but also created an interesting networking mechanic amongst players.  It also contributed to the economy.  Since you couldn't just instantly warp to any location, but only specific portal locations, it kept the world from shrinking too much, also. 

    It was a nice balance... and a nice balance is what's needed to salvage the "good" older mechanics without dredging up the rancid ones that were abandoned for good reason.

    All that said, as you've probably seen @blueturtle13 say, EQ actually had many of the worst mechanics of the old-school era.  Games like UO and AC had much more interesting and diverse systems while also having the community aspect.  Using EQ as a base probably isn't the best foundation to try and build from if we want to evolve first-gen mechanics.  EQ was probably the most one-dimensional game(as far as systems go) as there could be.

    TBH, if I want to go full hardcore old-gen, then I have to say that Saga of Lucimia sounds far more interesting than Pantheon, to me.  Seems Pantheon wants to force you into the straight-up "grind" mentality like EQ, whereas SoL wants to make a game that's "hard" or challenging.
    The 'good older mechanics' never disappeared.  Almost every new game has them to some degree, maybe not in the same configuration that EQ1 provided.  Tanking, healing and dps are still the most important mechanics, although some games went a bit heavy into AE instead of single target effects.  But even EQ1 had a selection of AE mechanics.

    What has changed was the 'not-quite-as-good older mechanics'.  Many of the features evolved into modern equivalents, while some were discarded.  Locked doors, begging and other pointless systems have been discarded by almost every game.

    Pantheon is planning to resurrect the long, draining grind.  I agree that many modern games are simply to easy, with mobs standing no real chance against a player.  But the grind, requiring multiple players for multiple minutes to fight a single fight, is unlikely to attract new customers.  The big problem that I see in the Pantheon videos is reverting many systems back to EQ1 standards, essentially discarding all changes that have been made over the past 20 years.

    I can imagine a substantial portion of those that try Pantheon being turned off by the old, slow mechanics of an age gone by.  A game requiring a massive attention span and brings up feelings of deja vu isn't likely to appeal to new customers.  There's a real danger that VR may succeed in duplicating EQ1 only to find the modern marketplace isn't interested.

    ----------
    For the record, I prefer a multi-tier travel system.  Walking is the most basic, but might take hours to get to a specific destination.  A fast travel system, similar to the DAoC horse routes, could cut this time to 20-30 minutes at a cost.  Or portals, either player spells or static places in the environment could transfer a character to fixed locations around the globe.

    ----------
    In response to @delete5230's comment about 'first gen MMOs stopped'.  They never stopped.  They evolved.



    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    blueturtle13delete5230

    image
  • ThaneThane Member RarePosts: 3,334
    this whole post is like "millions never had the chance to be offline!"

    been there, done that, let's not repeat it (and yes, talking 1st gen now)
    blueturtle13MendelMrMelGibson

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,768
    "deep and complex"

    that's funny. Nothing about this game is deep and complex. Nor should it be. 
    Vorthanionceratop001MrMelGibson

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,114
    Mendel said:
    Lokero said:
     
    The problem is that people don't seem capable of separating the two main features of the early games:

    1) Social Interdependence
    2) Gameplay mechanics

    So, whenever you hear these people wanting throwbacks like Pantheon, you hear people wanting to bring back all the horrible things we all ran away from to start with.  This isn't a facelift, it's a carbon copy.
    Just read these forums even.  People can't separate the two. 

    If developers could find a nice middle-ground where the gameplay is actually more evolved and "fun" and manage to create an actual economy and social-friendly ecosystem at the same time, they might actually draw a crowd.
    In reality, however, they are just bringing back the old, broken gameplay to cater to the nostalgia crowd.
    Maybe Pantheon has some grand tricks up its sleeves that will bring it into the modern era(I doubt it, from what we've seen so far).  We'll see.  ATM, Pantheon largely feels like an EQ emulator server.  Which, while great for those nostalgic, will not draw in many newer players.

    I think the old mechanic I actually liked the most in EQ was the travel system, primarily the wizard/druid teleporting system.  I suppose I'm old-school in the regard that I feel instant fast-travel everywhere at will makes the world feel small and shallow.
    I thought having those classes that could teleport made it so that fast travel was somewhat possible, but also created an interesting networking mechanic amongst players.  It also contributed to the economy.  Since you couldn't just instantly warp to any location, but only specific portal locations, it kept the world from shrinking too much, also. 

    It was a nice balance... and a nice balance is what's needed to salvage the "good" older mechanics without dredging up the rancid ones that were abandoned for good reason.

    All that said, as you've probably seen @blueturtle13 say, EQ actually had many of the worst mechanics of the old-school era.  Games like UO and AC had much more interesting and diverse systems while also having the community aspect.  Using EQ as a base probably isn't the best foundation to try and build from if we want to evolve first-gen mechanics.  EQ was probably the most one-dimensional game(as far as systems go) as there could be.

    TBH, if I want to go full hardcore old-gen, then I have to say that Saga of Lucimia sounds far more interesting than Pantheon, to me.  Seems Pantheon wants to force you into the straight-up "grind" mentality like EQ, whereas SoL wants to make a game that's "hard" or challenging.
    The 'good older mechanics' never disappeared.  Almost every new game has them to some degree, maybe not in the same configuration that EQ1 provided.  Tanking, healing and dps are still the most important mechanics, although some games went a bit heavy into AE instead of single target effects.  But even EQ1 had a selection of AE mechanics.

    What has changed was the 'not-quite-as-good older mechanics'.  Many of the features evolved into modern equivalents, while some were discarded.  Locked doors, begging and other pointless systems have been discarded by almost every game.

    Pantheon is planning to resurrect the long, draining grind.  I agree that many modern games are simply to easy, with mobs standing no real chance against a player.  But the grind, requiring multiple players for multiple minutes to fight a single fight, is unlikely to attract new customers.  The big problem that I see in the Pantheon videos is reverting many systems back to EQ1 standards, essentially discarding all changes that have been made over the past 20 years.

    I can imagine a substantial portion of those that try Pantheon being turned off by the old, slow mechanics of an age gone by.  A game requiring a massive attention span and brings up feelings of deja vu isn't likely to appeal to new customers.  There's a real danger that VR may succeed in duplicating EQ1 only to find the modern marketplace isn't interested.

    ----------
    For the record, I prefer a multi-tier travel system.  Walking is the most basic, but might take hours to get to a specific destination.  A fast travel system, similar to the DAoC horse routes, could cut this time to 20-30 minutes at a cost.  Or portals, either player spells or static places in the environment could transfer a character to fixed locations around the globe.

    ----------
    In response to @delete5230's comment about 'first gen MMOs stopped'.  They never stopped.  They evolved.



    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    If you're going to invoke the "so many of us old schoolers are looking for" then I'm going to ask you point blank, where are these people now?  What are they playing?

    Unless someone can come up with a reasonable answer to those types of questions, I can safely assume that there's likely not a significant group of hidden people from 2000 waiting around for a game reminiscent of EQ1 to appear.  So, the argument follows that since there isn't a glut of identifiable players currently outside the gaming marketplace, that Pantheon and similar games will need to attract players from other games.  How is VR planning to do that?  What about Pantheon is going to attract people to it, both new players and old school players?

    Games evolve.  Is it really such a stretch to imagine that the player have evolved too?  No matter how hard VR tries, it won't be able to put Pantheon on the shelf next to EQ1 in 1999.   Pantheon will not draw that same new-to-online-gaming crowd who was brought up in the face-to-face RP gaming tradition.  I don't know what you expect from Pantheon, but the experience it will provide will be vastly different from the old days.



    blueturtle13VorthanionGyva02MrMelGibson

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

  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 202
    Well just because you can't identify that a population of a certain type player exist does not mean that they don't exist. Until you find a way to determine that they either do or don't exist any statement made either way is just a guess. I am sure the game will be publicized more when it is nearer to release but as to what attracts people to it, well I guess that depends of what the "people" are looking for in a game. People being what they are, I figure this varies from person to person. 
      The pool of potential players is a lot bigger now days that it was when EQ was released but also a lot more games exist in the MMORPG field. Most of them are not very good but I guess that is just matter of opinion as I am sure many people love the themepark cash shops games that currently dominate the MMORPG area.
    craftseeker
  • VorthanionVorthanion Member RarePosts: 2,637
    edited November 2018
    Mendel said:

    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    If you're going to invoke the "so many of us old schoolers are looking for" then I'm going to ask you point blank, where are these people now?  What are they playing?

    Unless someone can come up with a reasonable answer to those types of questions, I can safely assume that there's likely not a significant group of hidden people from 2000 waiting around for a game reminiscent of EQ1 to appear.  So, the argument follows that since there isn't a glut of identifiable players currently outside the gaming marketplace, that Pantheon and similar games will need to attract players from other games.  How is VR planning to do that?  What about Pantheon is going to attract people to it, both new players and old school players?

    Games evolve.  Is it really such a stretch to imagine that the player have evolved too?  No matter how hard VR tries, it won't be able to put Pantheon on the shelf next to EQ1 in 1999.   Pantheon will not draw that same new-to-online-gaming crowd who was brought up in the face-to-face RP gaming tradition.  I don't know what you expect from Pantheon, but the experience it will provide will be vastly different from the old days.



    I'm not looking for a nostalgia game, I'm looking for a modern game that offers a slower paced, virtual world, with character building and a social heavy gaming experience which seems to be disappearing from recent MMORPG's. The constant barrage of criticism against "old school" gaming and labeling it as "outdated and boring" is ridiculous.  Twitchy and mindless gaming have been around just as long, yet the detractors can't seem to see that as "outdated and boring".

    It's obvious you aren't interested in this type of game, why are you here exactly?  You have plenty of recently new and upcoming games that meet "your" standards of fun, why are you arguing against this one?
    Gyva02craftseekerMrMelGibson

    image
  • ceratop001ceratop001 Member RarePosts: 1,580
    Another wasted thread about a game that has a very uncertain future.
    VorthanionKyleranblueturtle13MrMelGibson
     
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 5,678
    Mendel said:

    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    If you're going to invoke the "so many of us old schoolers are looking for" then I'm going to ask you point blank, where are these people now?  What are they playing?

    Unless someone can come up with a reasonable answer to those types of questions, I can safely assume that there's likely not a significant group of hidden people from 2000 waiting around for a game reminiscent of EQ1 to appear.  So, the argument follows that since there isn't a glut of identifiable players currently outside the gaming marketplace, that Pantheon and similar games will need to attract players from other games.  How is VR planning to do that?  What about Pantheon is going to attract people to it, both new players and old school players?

    Games evolve.  Is it really such a stretch to imagine that the player have evolved too?  No matter how hard VR tries, it won't be able to put Pantheon on the shelf next to EQ1 in 1999.   Pantheon will not draw that same new-to-online-gaming crowd who was brought up in the face-to-face RP gaming tradition.  I don't know what you expect from Pantheon, but the experience it will provide will be vastly different from the old days.



    I'm not looking for a nostalgia game, I'm looking for a modern game that offers a slower paced, virtual world, with character building and a social heavy gaming experience which seems to be disappearing from recent MMORPG's. The constant barrage of criticism against "old school" gaming and labeling it as "outdated and boring" is ridiculous.  Twitchy and mindless gaming have been around just as long, yet the detractors can't seem to see that as "outdated and boring".

    It's obvious you aren't interested in this type of game, why are you here exactly?  You have plenty of recently new and upcoming games that meet "your" standards of fun, why are you arguing against this one?
    @Vorthanion ;
    I think you covered and gave a GREAT overall synopsis of the big argument we have here on this site. 

    We truly have two types of mmorpg's and a shit load of peoples definitions of the same.  

    But one thing is clear,  and you covered that too.... We have one style that overwhelms the other and people will not allow EVEN ONE slower paced, virtual world with character building game. 

    They seem to insist on only having it one way, many are here on the Pantheon forums to squash others dreams !!!! 
    blueturtle13craftseekerKyleranMrMelGibsonnk362y
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,114
    Mendel said:

    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    If you're going to invoke the "so many of us old schoolers are looking for" then I'm going to ask you point blank, where are these people now?  What are they playing?

    Unless someone can come up with a reasonable answer to those types of questions, I can safely assume that there's likely not a significant group of hidden people from 2000 waiting around for a game reminiscent of EQ1 to appear.  So, the argument follows that since there isn't a glut of identifiable players currently outside the gaming marketplace, that Pantheon and similar games will need to attract players from other games.  How is VR planning to do that?  What about Pantheon is going to attract people to it, both new players and old school players?

    Games evolve.  Is it really such a stretch to imagine that the player have evolved too?  No matter how hard VR tries, it won't be able to put Pantheon on the shelf next to EQ1 in 1999.   Pantheon will not draw that same new-to-online-gaming crowd who was brought up in the face-to-face RP gaming tradition.  I don't know what you expect from Pantheon, but the experience it will provide will be vastly different from the old days.



    I'm not looking for a nostalgia game, I'm looking for a modern game that offers a slower paced, virtual world, with character building and a social heavy gaming experience which seems to be disappearing from recent MMORPG's. The constant barrage of criticism against "old school" gaming and labeling it as "outdated and boring" is ridiculous.  Twitchy and mindless gaming have been around just as long, yet the detractors can't seem to see that as "outdated and boring".

    It's obvious you aren't interested in this type of game, why are you here exactly?  You have plenty of recently new and upcoming games that meet "your" standards of fun, why are you arguing against this one?
    Another poster with no answer to the questions I pose.  And another 'what-I-want-is-what-the-market-wants' argument.   I guess the only true test of this game will be launch + 1 year.

    I'm not deluding myself that Pantheon will be anything other than EQ1 with new graphics and new lore.  All pretenses of evolution post March 1999 stripped away.  It worked in 1999, but I don't think that it will have the same impact in today's market.  The more I see of Pantheon, the more it is nothing but a modern, remastered EQ1.  Maybe that's all that Brad is capable of; maybe not.  I'm not real sure.  However, it doesn't appear that he's aiming for anything beyond that.

    No matter how hard VR tries, Pantheon will not bring back those days.  The game may be great.  It may be wonderful.  It also may not attract enough of a player base from the modern competitors to remain financially stable.  There are already enough MMORPGs on their deathbeds.  No need to get everyone's hopes up for more disappointment.

    If I have to be that lone voice in the wilderness that says 'slow your roll', so be it.



    DMKanoblueturtle13Gyva02TorvalMrMelGibson

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

  • LokeroLokero Member RarePosts: 1,445
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:

    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    If you're going to invoke the "so many of us old schoolers are looking for" then I'm going to ask you point blank, where are these people now?  What are they playing?

    Unless someone can come up with a reasonable answer to those types of questions, I can safely assume that there's likely not a significant group of hidden people from 2000 waiting around for a game reminiscent of EQ1 to appear.  So, the argument follows that since there isn't a glut of identifiable players currently outside the gaming marketplace, that Pantheon and similar games will need to attract players from other games.  How is VR planning to do that?  What about Pantheon is going to attract people to it, both new players and old school players?

    Games evolve.  Is it really such a stretch to imagine that the player have evolved too?  No matter how hard VR tries, it won't be able to put Pantheon on the shelf next to EQ1 in 1999.   Pantheon will not draw that same new-to-online-gaming crowd who was brought up in the face-to-face RP gaming tradition.  I don't know what you expect from Pantheon, but the experience it will provide will be vastly different from the old days.



    I'm not looking for a nostalgia game, I'm looking for a modern game that offers a slower paced, virtual world, with character building and a social heavy gaming experience which seems to be disappearing from recent MMORPG's. The constant barrage of criticism against "old school" gaming and labeling it as "outdated and boring" is ridiculous.  Twitchy and mindless gaming have been around just as long, yet the detractors can't seem to see that as "outdated and boring".

    It's obvious you aren't interested in this type of game, why are you here exactly?  You have plenty of recently new and upcoming games that meet "your" standards of fun, why are you arguing against this one?


    No matter how hard VR tries, Pantheon will not bring back those days.  The game may be great.  It may be wonderful.  It also may not attract enough of a player base from the modern competitors to remain financially stable.  There are already enough MMORPGs on their deathbeds.  No need to get everyone's hopes up for more disappointment.
    Modern competitors aside, I think the real question is, "Can they draw the type of players they want away from the original old games?"

    Many of the people who want the older, slower-paced games are mostly already playing them, either directly or through emulators.  Will those people want to leave their roots for whatever Pantheon releases as?  Those types tend to stick around if you can get them on board, but unless Pantheon is just stellar, by comparison, will they really want to give up all their invested time?

    Can they draw the folks from P99, TLPs, other older games' emulators, FF14(I list this because I personally think it plays more at an EQ pacing), etc.?

    Even if Pantheon can actually draw the type of crowd they are hoping for, then I still envision a roughly 20-30k (steady) fan base.
    That should be enough to keep them alive, but would numbers like that allow for very much development?  Let's not forget that this will be subscription-based and how impatient most people are for new content to be released.
    If people cancel subs to wait for "the next content patch" or whatever, that could be a pretty big hit between releases, if their playerbase is low in numbers.  The smaller the population, the more it will hurt them when people take breaks.

    There are so many things working against this game(and most indie MMOs, tbh) that it'll be pretty hard to sustain interest after the initial launch month.

    The market is thin, not solely for Pantheon, but for all MMOs that release.  We've seen this proven many times.  Very few games actually retain a satisfying population.  No matter how small their dreams, they still have to pay their employees real salaries.  They still have to pay for hosting and maintenance.  And, so on.
    MendelTorvalMrMelGibson
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,114
    Lokero said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:

    Pantheon isn't trying to draw in new types of gamers.  They stated publicly and often that their target audience is the old school crowd and would be happy as long as the game was profitable if not popular.  EQ still remains profitable to this day, there is no reason why Pantheon can't do the same if they don't pull something like the original release of Vanguard or just fail in capturing that complex, in depth virtual world feeling so many of us old schoolers are looking for.

    There are a plethora of twitchy arcade style games out there in console and PC land and there is more than enough room for several if not more modern slow paced, deep and complex MMORPGs to exist in today's market.
    If you're going to invoke the "so many of us old schoolers are looking for" then I'm going to ask you point blank, where are these people now?  What are they playing?

    Unless someone can come up with a reasonable answer to those types of questions, I can safely assume that there's likely not a significant group of hidden people from 2000 waiting around for a game reminiscent of EQ1 to appear.  So, the argument follows that since there isn't a glut of identifiable players currently outside the gaming marketplace, that Pantheon and similar games will need to attract players from other games.  How is VR planning to do that?  What about Pantheon is going to attract people to it, both new players and old school players?

    Games evolve.  Is it really such a stretch to imagine that the player have evolved too?  No matter how hard VR tries, it won't be able to put Pantheon on the shelf next to EQ1 in 1999.   Pantheon will not draw that same new-to-online-gaming crowd who was brought up in the face-to-face RP gaming tradition.  I don't know what you expect from Pantheon, but the experience it will provide will be vastly different from the old days.



    I'm not looking for a nostalgia game, I'm looking for a modern game that offers a slower paced, virtual world, with character building and a social heavy gaming experience which seems to be disappearing from recent MMORPG's. The constant barrage of criticism against "old school" gaming and labeling it as "outdated and boring" is ridiculous.  Twitchy and mindless gaming have been around just as long, yet the detractors can't seem to see that as "outdated and boring".

    It's obvious you aren't interested in this type of game, why are you here exactly?  You have plenty of recently new and upcoming games that meet "your" standards of fun, why are you arguing against this one?


    No matter how hard VR tries, Pantheon will not bring back those days.  The game may be great.  It may be wonderful.  It also may not attract enough of a player base from the modern competitors to remain financially stable.  There are already enough MMORPGs on their deathbeds.  No need to get everyone's hopes up for more disappointment.
    Modern competitors aside, I think the real question is, "Can they draw the type of players they want away from the original old games?"

    Many of the people who want the older, slower-paced games are mostly already playing them, either directly or through emulators.  Will those people want to leave their roots for whatever Pantheon releases as?  Those types tend to stick around if you can get them on board, but unless Pantheon is just stellar, by comparison, will they really want to give up all their invested time?

    Can they draw the folks from P99, TLPs, other older games' emulators, FF14(I list this because I personally think it plays more at an EQ pacing), etc.?

    Even if Pantheon can actually draw the type of crowd they are hoping for, then I still envision a roughly 20-30k (steady) fan base.
    That should be enough to keep them alive, but would numbers like that allow for very much development?  Let's not forget that this will be subscription-based and how impatient most people are for new content to be released.
    If people cancel subs to wait for "the next content patch" or whatever, that could be a pretty big hit between releases, if their playerbase is low in numbers.  The smaller the population, the more it will hurt them when people take breaks.

    There are so many things working against this game(and most indie MMOs, tbh) that it'll be pretty hard to sustain interest after the initial launch month.

    The market is thin, not solely for Pantheon, but for all MMOs that release.  We've seen this proven many times.  Very few games actually retain a satisfying population.  No matter how small their dreams, they still have to pay their employees real salaries.  They still have to pay for hosting and maintenance.  And, so on.
    Even if VR manages 25k people playing Pantheon, is that going to pay the bills, allow them to develop any follow-on content and satisfy their mystery investor(s)?  I don't want another game in retirement mode.  My guestimate on the current number of current EQ1 accounts is between 25k and 35k.  A new game starting on its last legs isn't a good sign for either this particular game, or the future of the MMORPG genre.



    Gyva02

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

  • ceratop001ceratop001 Member RarePosts: 1,580
    "deep and complex"

    that's funny. Nothing about this game is deep and complex. Nor should it be. 
    Reminds me of a Whiskey review lol. Deep and Complex :)
    blueturtle13MrMelGibson
     
  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 202
    I am amazed that we have so many experts around here that know exactly how many people will play Pantheon. Maybe its some super power. They should be too busy to post here as they could make a fortune in marketing. 
     How do you know that this game will only pull from old games like EQ1 and similar? I am interested in it and I have not play EQ since 2002. I only play LOTRO occasionally because I have a lifetime account, otherwise single player games and mostly old ones of those.
    Well guess I should make a prediction hmmmm How many developers do they have? I guess that at least that many people will play.
     
     
    craftseeker
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,252
    Mylan12 said:
    I am amazed that we have so many experts around here that know exactly how many people will play Pantheon. Maybe its some super power. They should be too busy to post here as they could make a fortune in marketing. 
     How do you know that this game will only pull from old games like EQ1 and similar? I am interested in it and I have not play EQ since 2002. I only play LOTRO occasionally because I have a lifetime account, otherwise single player games and mostly old ones of those.
    Well guess I should make a prediction hmmmm How many developers do they have? I guess that at least that many people will play.
     
     
    So you hardly spend any money on gaming, much less MMORPGs, yet you are part of the target market for Patheon? 

    The Harbingers are correct it seems...
    delete5230MendelMrMelGibson

    "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 POE 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






  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 5,678
    Mylan12 said:
    I am amazed that we have so many experts around here that know exactly how many people will play Pantheon. Maybe its some super power. They should be too busy to post here as they could make a fortune in marketing. 
     How do you know that this game will only pull from old games like EQ1 and similar? I am interested in it and I have not play EQ since 2002. I only play LOTRO occasionally because I have a lifetime account, otherwise single player games and mostly old ones of those.
    Well guess I should make a prediction hmmmm How many developers do they have? I guess that at least that many people will play.
     
     
    Hay, good time to jump in again, 

    It's all a big-fat-guess: 
    -We have the negative people saying, none. 
    -We have the positive people saying niche, but will be a lot. 
    -We have the a self proclaimed expert w/inside tips saying it will fail. 
    -I say millions because it's different all over again. 

    A big-fat-guess, HOWEVER I'm right ;)
    Lokero
  • hamlathishamlathis Member UncommonPosts: 20
    edited November 2018
    We can expect almost 12 millions of subs for this great game. Seriously, when I see those people (kind of HC fanbase) coming I know it's time to escape: it's the 1st sign of a big fail. Last time I saw such a "community" it was on SOTA. SOTA a great success as we know it. Stay with your expensive dreams I stay with my real and not so expensive games.
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,252
    Mylan12 said:
    I am amazed that we have so many experts around here that know exactly how many people will play Pantheon. Maybe its some super power. They should be too busy to post here as they could make a fortune in marketing. 
     How do you know that this game will only pull from old games like EQ1 and similar? I am interested in it and I have not play EQ since 2002. I only play LOTRO occasionally because I have a lifetime account, otherwise single player games and mostly old ones of those.
    Well guess I should make a prediction hmmmm How many developers do they have? I guess that at least that many people will play.
     
     
    Hay, good time to jump in again, 

    It's all a big-fat-guess: 
    -We have the negative people saying, none. 
    -We have the positive people saying niche, but will be a lot. 
    -We have the a self proclaimed expert w/inside tips saying it will fail. 
    -I say millions because it's different all over again. 

    A big-fat-guess, HOWEVER I'm right ;)
    A great deal of difference between predictions based on current facts or observable trends vs those based on hunches or faith which are more SWAGS (stupid wild ass guesses) than anything else.

    Long ago I (and many others) predicted the collapse of the genre due to its lack of variation.

    I believed at time it make room for a rise of smaller firms which would bring new innovation and life into MMORPGs.

    I never anticipated the financiers would completely walk away leading to the rise of the current crowd funding model which I remain skeptical if it can properly deliver an innovative, full featured MMORPG. (Just not enough dollars)


    LokeroMrMelGibson

    "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 POE 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






  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 202
    Kyleran said:
    Mylan12 said:
    I am amazed that we have so many experts around here that know exactly how many people will play Pantheon. Maybe its some super power. They should be too busy to post here as they could make a fortune in marketing. 
     How do you know that this game will only pull from old games like EQ1 and similar? I am interested in it and I have not play EQ since 2002. I only play LOTRO occasionally because I have a lifetime account, otherwise single player games and mostly old ones of those.
    Well guess I should make a prediction hmmmm How many developers do they have? I guess that at least that many people will play.
     
     
    So you hardly spend any money on gaming, much less MMORPGs, yet you are part of the target market for Patheon? 

    The Harbingers are correct it seems...
    Well for someone that dislikes the WoW model of MMORPGs that most have followed recently, not a lot of choices around in MMORPG area. Themepark cash shop style MMORPGs are about all that exist now days.  I played LOTRO for a long time because of the ip and story line but as it moved toward the cash shop deal, I moved away from it. I would spend more money on gaming if their was something worth spending it on.
  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 202
    As far as this game goes, I don't know how many people will play any more than anyone else posting here.
     I do know that I lot of the people that grew up on themepark cash shop free to play MMORPGs will have a hard time even trying a game that they actually have to pay a subscription to.
    I also don't know if the game will have any market in china where WoW gets most of its player base. I sort of doubt it.
     So it probably end up a North America and Europe game for the most part.
    If they deliver a good stable game with enough content, I could see possibly 50 to 100k eventually. That is of course a guess like all the others around here.
     
    Lokero
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 6,939
    The amazing thing about EQ was I actually got to know some of hte players....It was like a chat room where we could play while we talked...I often got to know about other players families, what they did for a living or what school they went to...I knew many of them by their RL first names..... I can honestly say this didnt happen in any other MMO...WHile WoW did pick up the pace of play, the community was poor....Many of the players were total jerks because you could solo so much of the game that they didnt need anyone.....Pantheon will be interesting to follow, but I fear that style of play has gone the way of the dodo.
  • LokeroLokero Member RarePosts: 1,445
    The amazing thing about EQ was I actually got to know some of hte players....It was like a chat room where we could play while we talked...
    That's sort of both the gift and the curse of EQ, though.  It really was as much chat room as a game.  Which, while great for being able to chat and hang out, didn't offer much in terms of actual game mechanics.
    In a lot of ways the game actually played itself while you watched.  Obviously, that was dependent upon class choice, to a large degree.
    Playing a Warrior, Rogue, Cleric, etc., in EQ might have been some of the most boring gameplay I've ever seen.  Clerics could largely just sit around doing nothing for long periods of time(which is why they ended up as mostly boxed characters later on).  The pure melee classes literally just watched auto-attack spam for the most part.

    I've never been a huge WoW fan, but they did do a great job of "fixing the boring" of those classes, which was one of their goals.  Of course, I think most of us have other complaints about WoW ;)

    I'm okay with having small spurts of downtime to take a break/catch your breath and such, but I think most people are playing a game because they actually want to play, also.

    This is where I think Pantheon is going to have issues:  if they put too much forced chat room and not enough game.
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,252
    Mylan12 said:
    Kyleran said:
    Mylan12 said:
    I am amazed that we have so many experts around here that know exactly how many people will play Pantheon. Maybe its some super power. They should be too busy to post here as they could make a fortune in marketing. 
     How do you know that this game will only pull from old games like EQ1 and similar? I am interested in it and I have not play EQ since 2002. I only play LOTRO occasionally because I have a lifetime account, otherwise single player games and mostly old ones of those.
    Well guess I should make a prediction hmmmm How many developers do they have? I guess that at least that many people will play.
     
     
    So you hardly spend any money on gaming, much less MMORPGs, yet you are part of the target market for Patheon? 

    The Harbingers are correct it seems...
    Well for someone that dislikes the WoW model of MMORPGs that most have followed recently, not a lot of choices around in MMORPG area. Themepark cash shop style MMORPGs are about all that exist now days.  I played LOTRO for a long time because of the ip and story line but as it moved toward the cash shop deal, I moved away from it. I would spend more money on gaming if their was something worth spending it on.
    I tell myself the same, yet after so many years I'm not so sure I really do want to play MMORPGs anymore.


    MrMelGibson

    "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 POE 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






Sign In or Register to comment.