Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

EQ1 Vets Get in Here

24

Comments

  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,329
    NorseGod said:
    It's easy to find people that basically describe this game as "EQ1, but with a new world and graphics". Now, before I let that get me excited, I want to know how does it differ.

    Do any of you, as EQ1 Vets, see any hidden negatives? If yes, can you list them with citations?

    Have you thrown any money their way?
    EQ1 vet here, I went in on the lifetime sub package back right after the KS failed.  

    I'm not in the pre-alpha, but for me, the hidden negatives are that a lot of the mechanics are still undecided. AFIK they haven't finalized things like death penaltys, raid sizes, leveling speed, etc. Until they do, it's a bit of a gamble and you might get disappointed if a mechanic falls in a direction you don't like. 

    Also, the game is described as being the spiritual successor to EQ1 and Vanguard. So, if it's just a EQ1 clone your looking for, with updated graphics, you'll probably be disappointed. 


    SovrathNorseGodArteriusGraySealdcutbi001Hawkaya399
    --------------------------------------------
  • NorseGodNorseGod Member EpicPosts: 2,634
    NorseGod said:
    It's easy to find people that basically describe this game as "EQ1, but with a new world and graphics". Now, before I let that get me excited, I want to know how does it differ.

    Do any of you, as EQ1 Vets, see any hidden negatives? If yes, can you list them with citations?

    Have you thrown any money their way?
    EQ1 vet here, I went in on the lifetime sub package back right after the KS failed.  

    I'm not in the pre-alpha, but for me, the hidden negatives are that a lot of the mechanics are still undecided. AFIK they haven't finalized things like death penaltys, raid sizes, leveling speed, etc. Until they do, it's a bit of a gamble and you might get disappointed if a mechanic falls in a direction you don't like. 

    Also, the game is described as being the spiritual successor to EQ1 and Vanguard. So, if it's just a EQ1 clone your looking for, with updated graphics, you'll probably be disappointed. 


    Thank you. This was the kind of response I was looking for.
    To talk about games without the censorship, check out https://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/
  • WarEnsembleWarEnsemble Member UncommonPosts: 252
    The "hidden" negative for me is raiding. I hate having an activity scheduled for 7pm tha requires 40 people. People dont show up on time, so the raid finally moves out at 8:15. Pointless and mind clearing of mobs until 9:30 when the first boss is engaged. The first encounter is a failure, people mysteriously have thunderstorms now and "disconnect" and now the next try is with 6 less people. NExt engage is at 10:00 and the puller makes a mistake and more people "mysteriously" have thunderstorms and 7 more people drop. Everyone ressed at 10:20 now with a raid force of 27 instead of 40, so people put out feelers looking for outsiders to fill a role. 11:00 more people show up and we try again. I always hated raiding.
    AmatheKyleransakin13
  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,140
    The single biggest drawback I see to this type of game is the death penalty.  I think corpse runs like how they use to be isn't a good thing (imo).  My hope is that there will be enough ways to mitigate a true corpse run.  Holding a second and third set of armor in your bank 20 minutes real time run back to doesn't sound that appealing to me.  They need to find a balance without making death trivial.  And honestly, I think that's one of the hardest parts of an MMO.  Risk vs Reward.  I'm pretty impressed with what I've seen from Chris Perkins so far, hopefully they'll be able to come up with something.
    I like the way VAngaurd did it.
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 13,304
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:
    If they are going to have corpse runs that does sound as if they are keeping in old school gameplay without thinking of the effect that will have. I assumed this was not just going to be a copy and paste exercise from EQ1. Not everything about old school is better than what we have now and that's pretty obvious.
    For many EQ fans corpse runs are a defining pillar of an old school game so removing them completely would be perilous. 

    My guess is they'll go with a modified version which gives players some way recover their character without a corpse run but with some significant penalty. (Besides total loot and gear loss)

    I thought Vanguard had something similar as I described, but it's been so long since I've played perhaps I'm remembering another game.

    Being a long time EVE  player concerns about corpse runs largely escape me, it isn't often one can recover much of anything after getting killed, even in safer high sec space.
    Indeed, but are they expecting the game to get of the ground just from ex EQ1 vets signing up?

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • ArteriusArterius Member EpicPosts: 2,834
    wanderica said:
    Arterius said:
    As someone who has pledged to get into Alpha my biggest fear is this... That it is too much like EQ. I think Pantheon needs to stand on its own. I think it is fine if they use EQ as the blueprint but I think they need to expand it from there. I just hope that all the people who are in PA because they paid the big bucks realize this as well.

    We don't need a EQ clone. I think a game like that would fail now a days as a lot of people just don't have the time to dedicate to a game like that. I mean most people I know now a days play MMO's for 3-4 hours a day because they work two jobs or more. I want it to be good and I want it to be EQ like but not a EQ clone.

    I also don't want them to give up on there vision for the game because people complain as BGZ said above. I however hope that the vision they have is at least 40% EQ and %60 there own ideas.
    You and I, my friend, seem to be in a very small boat of people.  While I did play at EQ back in the day, it wasn't nearly as much as I did FFXI (modeled after EQ).  I certainly enjoyed it, but that time is past.  I'm not 19 anymore, and I'm just not interested in the time commitment that those 2 games demanded.  However, I certainly want the social aspect they had.

    I too donated to Pantheon, and eagerly await more news and the chance to play Alpha.  My greatest concern is, like you, that it will be too much like EQ.  We had a many page thread on the official forums dedicated to whether there should be an in-game map.  The general attitude from the majority of folks there was simply "no."  People don't want maps at all.  In any form.  Far be it from me to tell someone their opinion is wrong, but I can disagree.  That told me one thing: Most of Pantheon's contributor base mostly just wants EQ-redux (2020 version).  I think that's a mistake for many reasons that I won't rehash here.

    There is hope though.  Devs have stated that Pantheon will draw inspiration from EQ, FFXI, and Vanguard for its development.  If, for example, we get Vanguard style boss fights in open dungeons that make use of modern technology, such as phasing, then it could present with enough of a departure from 1999 without destroying all of the social aspects that were a key part of EQ.  FFXI had quests that capped your level requiring you to toss on lower level gear to complete in a group with similarly capped players.  Why not explore something similar like a mentoring feature or a form of level scaling to support Pantheon's stated goal of horizontal progression?  Many hardcore EQ purists would be against this idea from the outset simply because it wasn't in EQ.

    In the end, I trust that the devs know what they're doing, and getting more people actually in-game may begin to clear up a bit of that rose tinting on those glasses.  I hope we end up with the spirit of EQ guiding the ship without ignoring all of the amazing things we can do with MMOs these days.  You CAN have an amazing social experience in a group focused MMO without ignoring many of the amazing technological advancements of the last 20 years.
    I agree with the no maps thing. Everything else you said is gravy
    Currently playing: Outer Worlds (Xbox One X)

    Currently Reading: Skaven Slayer (Gotrek and Felix Book 2)

    Currently Writing: Champions of Legend Book 1 (3rd Draft)

    Currently Watching: Oz (Season 4), Soprano's (Season 1)


  • PalebanePalebane Member RarePosts: 3,930
    edited January 2019
    I think that old social aspect from EQ was largely due to the internet being new. For the first time people from all over the world could play D&D together in a 3d space. This small subset of people already had a lot in common so social interaction was more fluid. Combine this with a new frontier to explore, both game-wise and technology-wise, and its understandable why there was something really magical in early MMOs.

    Today the internet is old news and every type of person under the sun enjoys video games and RPG content. How on earth are they going to recreate these dynamics without virtual reality or extraterrestrials?
    SovrathConstantineMerusPottedPlant22dcutbi001wanderica

    Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.

  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,899
    Scot said:
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:
    If they are going to have corpse runs that does sound as if they are keeping in old school gameplay without thinking of the effect that will have. I assumed this was not just going to be a copy and paste exercise from EQ1. Not everything about old school is better than what we have now and that's pretty obvious.
    For many EQ fans corpse runs are a defining pillar of an old school game so removing them completely would be perilous. 

    My guess is they'll go with a modified version which gives players some way recover their character without a corpse run but with some significant penalty. (Besides total loot and gear loss)

    I thought Vanguard had something similar as I described, but it's been so long since I've played perhaps I'm remembering another game.

    Being a long time EVE  player concerns about corpse runs largely escape me, it isn't often one can recover much of anything after getting killed, even in safer high sec space.
    Indeed, but are they expecting the game to get of the ground just from ex EQ1 vets signing up?
    An interesting observation, @Scot.  I'm beginning to think that all the Pantheon team ever considered.  I don't really see anything in the early game videos that would appeal to players who like other types of games.  Realistically, that's where all the EQ1 players are at currently.  We aren't in EQ1 anymore.  Absorbed into all manner of other games.  I certainly haven't seen anything from Pantheon that would entice anyone who isn't an EQ1 vet to put down their phone or turn off their console to play a PC game.

    How does a game attract players from other games?  More precisely, how does Pantheon plan to attract a Call of Duty player to leave their game and come to visit Pantheon?  I'm sure that a new game release will attract some attention, but retention is key to a subscription-only MMORPG.



    MrMelGibson

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

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 28,607
    Mendel said:
    Scot said:
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:
    If they are going to have corpse runs that does sound as if they are keeping in old school gameplay without thinking of the effect that will have. I assumed this was not just going to be a copy and paste exercise from EQ1. Not everything about old school is better than what we have now and that's pretty obvious.
    For many EQ fans corpse runs are a defining pillar of an old school game so removing them completely would be perilous. 

    My guess is they'll go with a modified version which gives players some way recover their character without a corpse run but with some significant penalty. (Besides total loot and gear loss)

    I thought Vanguard had something similar as I described, but it's been so long since I've played perhaps I'm remembering another game.

    Being a long time EVE  player concerns about corpse runs largely escape me, it isn't often one can recover much of anything after getting killed, even in safer high sec space.
    Indeed, but are they expecting the game to get of the ground just from ex EQ1 vets signing up?
    An interesting observation, @Scot.  I'm beginning to think that all the Pantheon team ever considered.  I don't really see anything in the early game videos that would appeal to players who like other types of games.  Realistically, that's where all the EQ1 players are at currently.  We aren't in EQ1 anymore.  Absorbed into all manner of other games.  I certainly haven't seen anything from Pantheon that would entice anyone who isn't an EQ1 vet to put down their phone or turn off their console to play a PC game.

    How does a game attract players from other games?  More precisely, how does Pantheon plan to attract a Call of Duty player to leave their game and come to visit Pantheon?  I'm sure that a new game release will attract some attention, but retention is key to a subscription-only MMORPG.



    Do they have to attract the call of duty player? Seems a somewhat ridiculous proposition.

    It's true they think they will attract people "other" than original eq players. I can only assume that they are players who would have liked a similar type of game had they the chance or inclination to try it.

    The last thing they want to do is attract "call of duty players" who are looking for a call of duty (or equivalent) experience.

    And that speaks to the problem with studios: trying to cater to everyone but not being able to do it.

    What they need to do is be realistic about the number of players they will get, cater to and market to those players.

    Be clear what the game is about for players who normally wouldn't think of playing this game but who might give it a chance based on what it is.

    RhoklawcraftseekerSheawannadcutbi001
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,899
    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    Scot said:
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:
    If they are going to have corpse runs that does sound as if they are keeping in old school gameplay without thinking of the effect that will have. I assumed this was not just going to be a copy and paste exercise from EQ1. Not everything about old school is better than what we have now and that's pretty obvious.
    For many EQ fans corpse runs are a defining pillar of an old school game so removing them completely would be perilous. 

    My guess is they'll go with a modified version which gives players some way recover their character without a corpse run but with some significant penalty. (Besides total loot and gear loss)

    I thought Vanguard had something similar as I described, but it's been so long since I've played perhaps I'm remembering another game.

    Being a long time EVE  player concerns about corpse runs largely escape me, it isn't often one can recover much of anything after getting killed, even in safer high sec space.
    Indeed, but are they expecting the game to get of the ground just from ex EQ1 vets signing up?
    An interesting observation, @Scot.  I'm beginning to think that all the Pantheon team ever considered.  I don't really see anything in the early game videos that would appeal to players who like other types of games.  Realistically, that's where all the EQ1 players are at currently.  We aren't in EQ1 anymore.  Absorbed into all manner of other games.  I certainly haven't seen anything from Pantheon that would entice anyone who isn't an EQ1 vet to put down their phone or turn off their console to play a PC game.

    How does a game attract players from other games?  More precisely, how does Pantheon plan to attract a Call of Duty player to leave their game and come to visit Pantheon?  I'm sure that a new game release will attract some attention, but retention is key to a subscription-only MMORPG.



    Do they have to attract the call of duty player? Seems a somewhat ridiculous proposition.

    It's true they think they will attract people "other" than original eq players. I can only assume that they are players who would have liked a similar type of game had they the chance or inclination to try it.

    The last thing they want to do is attract "call of duty players" who are looking for a call of duty (or equivalent) experience.

    And that speaks to the problem with studios: trying to cater to everyone but not being able to do it.

    What they need to do is be realistic about the number of players they will get, cater to and market to those players.

    Be clear what the game is about for players who normally wouldn't think of playing this game but who might give it a chance based on what it is.

    Call of Duty was a singular example.  You can substitute ESO or Fortnight or Crusader King II or Path of Exile, if you like.  EQ1 players have scattered, fragmented and scattered again.  There isn't a block of players that are 'old school EQ1 players' in any one location.  Point is, what is VR planning to do to 'get the band back together'?



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

  • GraySealGraySeal Member UncommonPosts: 26
    My concern is that the game will be using the same static spawn model from Everquest.  I have hope that we will get a dynamic world.  If we still have static spawn, tactics will evolve around response to game timers.

    The game could be so much more if the challenge is not playing against the timer but overcoming a powerful foe.  Teams should be able to clear an area of foes.  This would be a necessary step towards getting to the homebase of some NPCs which are strong with nice goodies.  Camps of enemy can be reestablished but by mandering mobs, not by pop ups on a timer.

    Defeating a dragon should end that dragon.  Other dragon foe should be entered into the game in other sensible locations (right terrain, limited access).

    Expanding the world should be a challenge.  It should take cooperation to accomplish.  Accomplishments should not be wiped out by a timer.

    The foe should be able to overrun the players.  NPCs, like chars, should be able to expand their area of control or lose area of control.

    Static spawn is such old game design.  We do not need a MMOG with  updated graphics, team cooperation combat, to shoot down pop 'em up targets.  Such a game will get old quickly.

    craftseeker
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 2,697
    Palebane said:
    I think that old social aspect from EQ was largely due to the internet being new. For the first time people from all over the world could play D&D together in a 3d space. This small subset of people already had a lot in common so social interaction was more fluid. Combine this with a new frontier to explore, both game-wise and technology-wise, and its understandable why there was something really magical in early MMOs.

    Today the internet is old news and every type of person under the sun enjoys video games and RPG content. How on earth are they going to recreate these dynamics without virtual reality or extraterrestrials?
    I believe this is correct. I used to be like OMG OTHER REAL PEOPLE YAY and now I am like oh fuck, fucking people again. 

    Yeah I'm a delight! 
    PalebaneKyleran
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
    • Song of the Week: Blackfield by Blackfield from Blackfield (2005)
    • Currently Playing: Devil May Cry 1
    • Favorite Drink: Bruichladdich Black Art 5th 1992
    • Gaming Timeline: Arcade, Commodore 64, Amiga 500, SEGA, IBM, PS, PC, PS2, More PCs, PS3, Giant PC, PS4, No More PCs, PS4 Pro.
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 7,131
    Palebane said:
    I think that old social aspect from EQ was largely due to the internet being new. For the first time people from all over the world could play D&D together in a 3d space. This small subset of people already had a lot in common so social interaction was more fluid. Combine this with a new frontier to explore, both game-wise and technology-wise, and its understandable why there was something really magical in early MMOs.

    Today the internet is old news and every type of person under the sun enjoys video games and RPG content. How on earth are they going to recreate these dynamics without virtual reality or extraterrestrials?
    I believe this is correct. I used to be like OMG OTHER REAL PEOPLE YAY and now I am like oh fuck, fucking people again. 

    Yeah I'm a delight! 
    Just want to point out that I agree with that exact sentiment but only in certain games. Generally ALL PvP focused games, especially Esports and FPS games. There still exists games that have for the most part a very humble, cooperative and awesome community. Just off the top of my head, LOTRO being at the forefront of this as well as P99 and SWG: Legends. However, you'll get the occasional hardcore troll who will infest PvE focused games because their life revolves around attention seeking behavior for obvious reasons.
    ConstantineMeruscraftseekerKyleran

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 28,607
    Mendel said:
    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    Scot said:
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:
    If they are going to have corpse runs that does sound as if they are keeping in old school gameplay without thinking of the effect that will have. I assumed this was not just going to be a copy and paste exercise from EQ1. Not everything about old school is better than what we have now and that's pretty obvious.
    For many EQ fans corpse runs are a defining pillar of an old school game so removing them completely would be perilous. 

    My guess is they'll go with a modified version which gives players some way recover their character without a corpse run but with some significant penalty. (Besides total loot and gear loss)

    I thought Vanguard had something similar as I described, but it's been so long since I've played perhaps I'm remembering another game.

    Being a long time EVE  player concerns about corpse runs largely escape me, it isn't often one can recover much of anything after getting killed, even in safer high sec space.
    Indeed, but are they expecting the game to get of the ground just from ex EQ1 vets signing up?
    An interesting observation, @Scot.  I'm beginning to think that all the Pantheon team ever considered.  I don't really see anything in the early game videos that would appeal to players who like other types of games.  Realistically, that's where all the EQ1 players are at currently.  We aren't in EQ1 anymore.  Absorbed into all manner of other games.  I certainly haven't seen anything from Pantheon that would entice anyone who isn't an EQ1 vet to put down their phone or turn off their console to play a PC game.

    How does a game attract players from other games?  More precisely, how does Pantheon plan to attract a Call of Duty player to leave their game and come to visit Pantheon?  I'm sure that a new game release will attract some attention, but retention is key to a subscription-only MMORPG.



    Do they have to attract the call of duty player? Seems a somewhat ridiculous proposition.

    It's true they think they will attract people "other" than original eq players. I can only assume that they are players who would have liked a similar type of game had they the chance or inclination to try it.

    The last thing they want to do is attract "call of duty players" who are looking for a call of duty (or equivalent) experience.

    And that speaks to the problem with studios: trying to cater to everyone but not being able to do it.

    What they need to do is be realistic about the number of players they will get, cater to and market to those players.

    Be clear what the game is about for players who normally wouldn't think of playing this game but who might give it a chance based on what it is.

    Call of Duty was a singular example.  You can substitute ESO or Fortnight or Crusader King II or Path of Exile, if you like.  EQ1 players have scattered, fragmented and scattered again.  There isn't a block of players that are 'old school EQ1 players' in any one location.  Point is, what is VR planning to do to 'get the band back together'?



    I still stand by the statement. Do they want to really attract Elder Scrolls Online players? No. Do they want to attract Fortnight or Crusader King II or Path of Exiles players? NO!

    It's a ridiculous proposition.

    What they want to attract are people who want/are willing to entertain this type of game.

    If memory serves (from your past posts and correct me if I'm wrong) this game in its current incarnation/design is not your taste and you seem to be incredulous that there would be people who would want to play it/enough people who want to play it.

    Yes, there are people who would love this BUT depending on their expectations there might not be enough. Provided the game even launches.

    Sure there aren't a "block" of old school eq players but there are players who might still entertain this. I use my roommate as an example.

    He'd never play an mmorpg and isn't a gamer by any stretch of the imagination. He only plays the elder scrolls games. Usually for a year or so and then he plays the next installation.

    He is always asking for features that make them more survival based. His tastes do not align with current market trends for popular online games. He's not part of any block of players or even a "gamer" but he does like a certain type of gaming experience that would be considered somewhat niche.

    Like my friend, I believe there are players out there who are looking for certain experiences regardless of their gaming history.
    craftseekercheyaneMrMelGibsondcutbi001
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 2,697
    Rhoklaw said:
    Palebane said:
    I think that old social aspect from EQ was largely due to the internet being new. For the first time people from all over the world could play D&D together in a 3d space. This small subset of people already had a lot in common so social interaction was more fluid. Combine this with a new frontier to explore, both game-wise and technology-wise, and its understandable why there was something really magical in early MMOs.

    Today the internet is old news and every type of person under the sun enjoys video games and RPG content. How on earth are they going to recreate these dynamics without virtual reality or extraterrestrials?
    I believe this is correct. I used to be like OMG OTHER REAL PEOPLE YAY and now I am like oh fuck, fucking people again. 

    Yeah I'm a delight! 
    Just want to point out that I agree with that exact sentiment but only in certain games. Generally ALL PvP focused games, especially Esports and FPS games. There still exists games that have for the most part a very humble, cooperative and awesome community. Just off the top of my head, LOTRO being at the forefront of this as well as P99 and SWG: Legends. However, you'll get the occasional hardcore troll who will infest PvE focused games because their life revolves around attention seeking behavior for obvious reasons.
    So basically any game that fine younger lads don't play. I'm with you brother. 
    RhoklawKyleran
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
    • Song of the Week: Blackfield by Blackfield from Blackfield (2005)
    • Currently Playing: Devil May Cry 1
    • Favorite Drink: Bruichladdich Black Art 5th 1992
    • Gaming Timeline: Arcade, Commodore 64, Amiga 500, SEGA, IBM, PS, PC, PS2, More PCs, PS3, Giant PC, PS4, No More PCs, PS4 Pro.
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,899
    edited January 2019
    Sovrath said:

    I still stand by the statement. Do they want to really attract Elder Scrolls Online players? No. Do they want to attract Fortnight or Crusader King II or Path of Exiles players? NO!

    It's a ridiculous proposition.

    What they want to attract are people who want/are willing to entertain this type of game.
     
    Not as ridiculous as you might think.  They stated that they want to capture their market from wherever they might be.  Mostly, that includes other games.  Like it or not, EQ1 players have adapted to other games and styles.  Their expectations about games likely have changed.

    So, VR will have to attract players who may have once loved EQ1 back from their current addition and into Pantheon.  It's going to be a very broad and expensive undertaking.  My guess is that they are planning on word of mouth to draw customers to them.

    Sovrath said:

    If memory serves (from your past posts and correct me if I'm wrong) this game in its current incarnation/design is not your taste and you seem to be incredulous that there would be people who would want to play it/enough people who want to play it.

    Yes, there are people who would love this BUT depending on their expectations there might not be enough. Provided the game even launches.
    Correction.  I've never had doubts about Pantheon drawing a certain crowd.  I've expressed doubts about the size of that customer base.  I'm also doubtful about the longevity of a game design that is 20 years old in the current market.  A half dozen people standing around to kill a single mob over three to five minutes was old a dozen years ago.

    My biggest concern with Pantheon is (and always has been) that they are satisfied with merely repeating the past and aren't pushing new experiences.  There's simply not enough MMORPGs being released in a given year to be satisfied with more-of-the-same.  Innovation is what drives people.  They want new experiences, not a rehash of things they have seen and done before.  That (innovation) is something that I haven't seen coming from Pantheon.  It is likely to be a wasted opportunity.



    craftseekerMrMelGibson

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

  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,329
    Mendel said:
    Sovrath said:

    I still stand by the statement. Do they want to really attract Elder Scrolls Online players? No. Do they want to attract Fortnight or Crusader King II or Path of Exiles players? NO!

    It's a ridiculous proposition.

    What they want to attract are people who want/are willing to entertain this type of game.
     
    Not as ridiculous as you might think.  They stated that they want to capture their market from wherever they might be.  Mostly, that includes other games.  Like it or not, EQ1 players have adapted to other games and styles.  Their expectations about games likely have changed.

    So, VR will have to attract players who may have once loved EQ1 back from their current addition and into Pantheon.  It's going to be a very broad and expensive undertaking.  My guess is that they are planning on word of mouth to draw customers to them.

    Sovrath said:

    If memory serves (from your past posts and correct me if I'm wrong) this game in its current incarnation/design is not your taste and you seem to be incredulous that there would be people who would want to play it/enough people who want to play it.

    Yes, there are people who would love this BUT depending on their expectations there might not be enough. Provided the game even launches.
    Correction.  I've never had doubts about Pantheon drawing a certain crowd.  I've expressed doubts about the size of that customer base.  I'm also doubtful about the longevity of a game design that is 20 years old in the current market.  A half dozen people standing around to kill a single mob over three to five minutes was old a dozen years ago.

    My biggest concern with Pantheon is (and always has been) that they are satisfied with merely repeating the past and aren't pushing new experiences.  There's simply not enough MMORPGs being released in a given year to be satisfied with more-of-the-same.  Innovation is what drives people.  They want new experiences, not a rehash of things they have seen and done before.  That (innovation) is something that I haven't seen coming from Pantheon.  It is likely to be a wasted opportunity.



    Pantheon won't be for everyone that's for sure -- which for me, is a good thing. It's the MMOs that try to appeal to everyone, that end up appealing to no one. Stay to the course, Pantheon!
    craftseekerSheawannadcutbi001
    --------------------------------------------
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 13,304
    edited January 2019
    Mendel said:
    Sovrath said:
    Mendel said:
    Scot said:
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:
    If they are going to have corpse runs that does sound as if they are keeping in old school gameplay without thinking of the effect that will have. I assumed this was not just going to be a copy and paste exercise from EQ1. Not everything about old school is better than what we have now and that's pretty obvious.
    For many EQ fans corpse runs are a defining pillar of an old school game so removing them completely would be perilous. 

    My guess is they'll go with a modified version which gives players some way recover their character without a corpse run but with some significant penalty. (Besides total loot and gear loss)

    I thought Vanguard had something similar as I described, but it's been so long since I've played perhaps I'm remembering another game.

    Being a long time EVE  player concerns about corpse runs largely escape me, it isn't often one can recover much of anything after getting killed, even in safer high sec space.
    Indeed, but are they expecting the game to get of the ground just from ex EQ1 vets signing up?
    An interesting observation, @Scot.  I'm beginning to think that all the Pantheon team ever considered.  I don't really see anything in the early game videos that would appeal to players who like other types of games.  Realistically, that's where all the EQ1 players are at currently.  We aren't in EQ1 anymore.  Absorbed into all manner of other games.  I certainly haven't seen anything from Pantheon that would entice anyone who isn't an EQ1 vet to put down their phone or turn off their console to play a PC game.

    How does a game attract players from other games?  More precisely, how does Pantheon plan to attract a Call of Duty player to leave their game and come to visit Pantheon?  I'm sure that a new game release will attract some attention, but retention is key to a subscription-only MMORPG.



    Do they have to attract the call of duty player? Seems a somewhat ridiculous proposition.

    It's true they think they will attract people "other" than original eq players. I can only assume that they are players who would have liked a similar type of game had they the chance or inclination to try it.

    The last thing they want to do is attract "call of duty players" who are looking for a call of duty (or equivalent) experience.

    And that speaks to the problem with studios: trying to cater to everyone but not being able to do it.

    What they need to do is be realistic about the number of players they will get, cater to and market to those players.

    Be clear what the game is about for players who normally wouldn't think of playing this game but who might give it a chance based on what it is.

    Call of Duty was a singular example.  You can substitute ESO or Fortnight or Crusader King II or Path of Exile, if you like.  EQ1 players have scattered, fragmented and scattered again.  There isn't a block of players that are 'old school EQ1 players' in any one location.  Point is, what is VR planning to do to 'get the band back together'?

    I am quite happy they are going for an old school approach and they don't need being an indie MMO to attract the sort of numbers ESO did. But I do question their decision making if they are leaving corpse runs in. That is one of the gameplay elements which was a turn of for many players, there are many aspects of old school gameplay that you would find it hard for anyone to object to. Like meaningful classes, choices which effect players and raids (even raids have been denigrated in many modern MMOs).
    svannKyleran

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • asteldiancaliskanasteldiancaliskan Member UncommonPosts: 58
    Yet just as many will be angry if corpse runs are removed. It's no easy solution because someone is getting disappointed no matter what.
    Same goes for map or no map.

    Too many people are fixated on remaking eq1 for the old school experience, so focused on that obvious example that they are missing the point - most people wanting the old school experience want Challenge, Consequence, Social Interactio, and Freedom (not quest hubbing ). Exactly how a game gives this is up for endless debate, but ultimately people need to be less intent on the finer details and simply open to the fact that so long as these things are achieved it doesn't really matter if the specific feature you wanted is there or not because the reason you wanted that feature is because you thought it was required.

    For example I think not having corpse runs would be a disaster and would put me off the game (bit not stop me trying it) but it is simply because there has never been an mmo since EQ1 where l gave a shit about dying and that ruins the experience because there is no risk or thrill to any content, in addition i have fond memories of interacting with others to help get their bodies or have them help me, from this I had an ever increasing pool of friends that I otherwise may have never met or gamed with.
    If they manage a solution that no one else has and create a meaningful death system without a corpse run and there are other ways for random encounters with other players to foster the community, then I will be perfectly happy because they managed to achieve what I wanted despite not using the feature I thought was required 
    kjempffcraftseekerdcutbi001
  • kjempffkjempff Member RarePosts: 1,657
    Yet just as many will be angry if corpse runs are removed. It's no easy solution because someone is getting disappointed no matter what.
    Same goes for map or no map.

    Too many people are fixated on remaking eq1 for the old school experience, so focused on that obvious example that they are missing the point - most people wanting the old school experience want Challenge, Consequence, Social Interactio, and Freedom (not quest hubbing ). Exactly how a game gives this is up for endless debate, but ultimately people need to be less intent on the finer details and simply open to the fact that so long as these things are achieved it doesn't really matter if the specific feature you wanted is there or not because the reason you wanted that feature is because you thought it was required.

    For example I think not having corpse runs would be a disaster and would put me off the game (bit not stop me trying it) but it is simply because there has never been an mmo since EQ1 where l gave a shit about dying and that ruins the experience because there is no risk or thrill to any content, in addition i have fond memories of interacting with others to help get their bodies or have them help me, from this I had an ever increasing pool of friends that I otherwise may have never met or gamed with.
    If they manage a solution that no one else has and create a meaningful death system without a corpse run and there are other ways for random encounters with other players to foster the community, then I will be perfectly happy because they managed to achieve what I wanted despite not using the feature I thought was required 
    Amen.
    Some Pantheon backers/fans in particular are so narrowed down on specific features that they are blind to alternatives. In my opinion the specifics are just details, and what is really important is what those features achieved.
    I fall into that pit myself sometimes, labeling something as a gamebreaker.. for example I really hate all kinds of scaling in mmorpgs. But if you were to make a game asking just 100 people what their gamebreakers are and remote those from the game, then you would have no game.

    This is Pantheons big challenge, how to base a game on a player base with such narrow and strong opinions on unimportant details ? They need to make backers happy because they are the backbone that made your dream happen, but on the other hand the same players are also those who restrict your game, possibly very seriously (time will tell).
    craftseekerdcutbi001Kyleran
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 13,304
    Yet just as many will be angry if corpse runs are removed. It's no easy solution because someone is getting disappointed no matter what.
    Same goes for map or no map.

    Too many people are fixated on remaking eq1 for the old school experience, so focused on that obvious example that they are missing the point - most people wanting the old school experience want Challenge, Consequence, Social Interactio, and Freedom (not quest hubbing ). Exactly how a game gives this is up for endless debate, but ultimately people need to be less intent on the finer details and simply open to the fact that so long as these things are achieved it doesn't really matter if the specific feature you wanted is there or not because the reason you wanted that feature is because you thought it was required.

    For example I think not having corpse runs would be a disaster and would put me off the game (bit not stop me trying it) but it is simply because there has never been an mmo since EQ1 where l gave a shit about dying and that ruins the experience because there is no risk or thrill to any content, in addition i have fond memories of interacting with others to help get their bodies or have them help me, from this I had an ever increasing pool of friends that I otherwise may have never met or gamed with.
    If they manage a solution that no one else has and create a meaningful death system without a corpse run and there are other ways for random encounters with other players to foster the community, then I will be perfectly happy because they managed to achieve what I wanted despite not using the feature I thought was required 
    I don't think having no map is up there with corpse runs, in fact I am finding it hard to think of anything that needs dropping from old school MMOs more than that. This is part of the wider question of death penalty which we need more of but how best to do it, returning to corpse runs is not the way. Far better to come up with something that takes up time and involves needing other players to rest "fatigue" or the like. Hang on other MMOs did come up with that idea and it created a socialising down time which was even better.
    Lokero

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • AzarealAzareal Member UncommonPosts: 163
    Sorry if I'm rehashing some points already brought up but I just saw Pantheon (like 15 minutes ago) when I clicked on a Pantheon youtube video while looking at old EQ1 vids; so I came here to see what was going on :D.

    Read some of the posts here and noticed some of the concerns.

    1.   Corpse Runs - It was always an annoyance especially when you log in and a friend or guildie asks for your help because their corpse was stuck deep in some dungeon. You would end up burning something like an hour just to help out. Didn't think CRs were needed back then since there was already an death xp penalty. When they put the guild hall in, just about everyone was a happy camper since CR's could be done there (at least I recall they could but it's been a seriously long time since I played EQ1). So, no CRs but maybe up the death xp penalty ? Make it so that players will learn to be more careful and/or learn to play their class better.

    2.   Timesink - Static spawns was always an issue back then. Remember Stormfeather ? 3 days or so of camping one mob. And if anyone thinks this wasn't an issue, think again because at one point I locked all the solo'able dragons and basically cornered the market on their drops (e.g. CoF) until one of my guildies told me that other guilds had started to complain with suspicions that I was doing it. 

           - Resource / tradeskills was also a major time sink. Not saying that it should be made trivial in Pantheon but perhaps just a little easier would be sufficient so that players won't have to spend months working on leveling just one skill.

           - XP was also an issue at the start. It took me 3 months just to get to level 10 (this was back when the spellbook covered the whole damn screen when you were medding and banded armor was like more precious than gold in real life :D). Maybe scale it back a little but not to the point where you can hit max cap from character creation in one weekend. Honestly, not many people have that sort of time these days and if people are forced to kill the same mobs over and over again for months to level up then Pantheon's likely not going to winning any fans.

    3.   Graphics - The original EQ1 graphics was definitely dated by the time we got into the 2000s. Back then (if I recall correctly) the devs said that it couldn't be improved any further because of the original core design for the character base. The graphics in Pantheon looks to be good enough but I just hope they have thought about cosmetics enough to make it a core item since players these days seem to care a lot about their looks enough to be spending a lot of money on it. I know a few friends who won't even play certain games simply because they saw videos on the cosmetics and they considered it unappealing.

    4.   Spells / Skills - EQ1 always did have a focus on tactics utilising a conglomeration of various class skills / spells and I loved that. It certainly made things more interesting than just cycling through your rotations in every fight. this was what made EQ1 stand out from all the rest that's come along. But because of this, it's also likely that they will lose a lot of customers. Not everyone likes not having their simple rotations.

    5.   Quests - lots of side quests please. This made EQ1 more immersive even though I swear Halas has enough lion meat to feed Norrath for the next few centuries by the end of EQ1's first year. Some games out there do not seem to realise how immersive this can be. Try out Tera (has lots of issues but is good fun for a very short period of time). I literally maxxed all the classes within 3 months just by doing the main story arc. Then realised that there were whole zones with zero people in them simply because there was nothing to do in those zones. It's like West Karana. It's there, it's huge, there are mobs but other than one or two side quests that take you there, there was otherwise no reason to go there.

    In the end, I'm hoping that Pantheon will be successful and will likely throw some cash at Brad to help out; gotta read up more about it first though. If nothing else I'm hoping it'll launch just so he can give Smedley the finger. Anyway, apologies for the long post but the above were some items that had been percolating in my head for a long time ever since I stopped playing EQ1 ages ago.
    ScotMrMelGibsonKyleran
  • Mylan12Mylan12 Member UncommonPosts: 281
    Azareal said:
           - XP was also an issue at the start. It took me 3 months just to get to level 10 (this was back when the spellbook covered the whole damn screen when you were medding and banded armor was like more precious than gold in real life :D). Maybe scale it back a little but not to the point where you can hit max cap from character creation in one weekend. Honestly, not many people have that sort of time these days and if people are forced to kill the same mobs over and over again for months to level up then Pantheon's likely not going to winning any fans.


      You must have only played once a week or something. I admit that I played a fair amount back then but just messing around with my static group and helping random people with CR, I got to level 50 in 3 and a half months or so from release. A lot of people got to 50 before me. 
     If they have lots of lower level content, then the leveling may need to be even slower than EQ1 or maybe have a switch to turn off experience when you want to. Some current MMORPG's are such that you out level areas before you even have done all the content.
    Its not like its a race to get to max level? Right?

  • LonzoLonzo Member UncommonPosts: 294
    I am an EQ1 Vet from 1999... I am now 40years old, have a 9month old beautiful daughter and I am leading a small filmmaking company. My life is very demanding and the time I play games is like 1/20 of what I have been leveling, raiding, looting back in the days. STILL, I wish pantheon will be a very well made EQ clone. With corpse runs, teleportation just for a few classes, multiboxing, serverguilds that have a meaning, Ykeshas, Nagafens, meanigful buffs (Clarity) and things that I will remember when I am 60years old. I remember my time on Solusek Ro Server, the inofficial „german“ Server. (I am from germany) It was such a great community where american, british, spanish, french and german players lived together in respectful rivalry. Loved it.
    WellspringMrMelGibsonKyleransakin13

    image
  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 7,220
    edited January 2019
    I think corpse runs are very important to building both fear and respect and it also allows you to interact with others more frequently. 

    There is however one exception I feel it will warrant just may be a summoning method by a necromancer for those circumstances where you will not be able to get your body without a full raid. I recall several particularly bad Plane of Fear runs where I even lost my level and could not get back into Fear to get my corpse. All the time the clock was ticking I was sweating and really worried I was going to lose everything on the corpses I left trying to recover the first. It was a horrible experience the sheer terror of losing the months and months worth of work I had put in to get those items including 3 solid months of one room in a dungeon which I was so sick of that I never wanted to see it again.

    I feel that the fear of dying has to be real for players to respect the world and the game.

    No maps although I am one of the most scatterbrained people where directions were concerned that I would constantly get lost and take hours to get to a place simply because I ran the wrong way for half an hour. Maps are cheesy they just completely trivialize the space, area and exploration aspect of the game. You need to learn the terrain and pick out landmarks so that your familiarity of the landscape gives you the pleasure of actually travelling through it. If you are spending your time engrossed in an overhead map or compass, you're not looking at the world. You are just moving through it without experiencing the world and that is a crime. If the world is beautiful and diverse it should take up your interest and create in you the desire to move through it while appreciating its beauty. People often complain games are too small... blame maps.

    I remember drawing crude maps of places and counting rocks and trying to remember the shape of the particular rock before the zone line so that I can run through it when pursued by some unrelenting mobs. I had folders of maps that  I printed or drawn myself to guide me through this massive world.

    The number of times I got lost in Guk were so bad my guild would make fun of me all the time and some even insisted I should never go there alone in spite of having invisibility. I recall so many times watching my invisibility blinking and dreading the moment a mob I cannot handle on my own sees me. Then it would turn away and I would quickly cast it again, my heart thumping in my chest. I cannot think of a single game that ever made me that afraid again.

    Right now I am playing Fallen Earth. The map is large but because I have maps I am not afraid of getting lost. I get lost anyway :p but I am not afraid. I realised I was not noticing things like power lines or huge constructions that I should be using to find my way about. Instead I check the overall map to make sure I am moving in the right direction. Maps diminish a world.
    Post edited by cheyane on
    AmathekitaradWellspringMrMelGibsonLackingMMOmikeb0817sakin13mcd6993
    Martens: "With all due respect, madam, where are you going with this?"
    Avasarala: "Wherever I goddamn like."
Sign In or Register to comment.