With what we know now that the game is STILL in PRE-alpha does it seem a little
disingenuous to sell the higher pledge amounts(1,3,10k) with things like lifetime membership? Even the hundreds at this point should be temporarily removed until they get stuff sorted out.
Thats a little bit of a backward way to look at this. Pantheon has still progressed to the point the have a working part of the game with most systems in play. Where you will be able to play a number of classes from level 1 to 50. With that, Pre-Alpha 5 will be about polishing that so that when Alpha starts, VR will have something to show investors to get more funds. Supporting VR is as much of a gamble as it always has but... They are getting some good momentum. From here, they will just need to repeat the process in other areas of the game.
I honestly hope you are right, but I suspect that the situation is quite dire and if they do not get an investor to bite in the next few months they will fold. I have a suspicion, maybe just a hope, that they already have a deal in the works and that this "Come to Jesus" moment was just to prepare folks for the announcement that they were acquired by XYZ company.
I've been trying to wrap my head around what VR's motivation was for releasing that State of the Game letter. They're finally coming out of a long dark period of development with Project Faerthale. Pre-alpha testing and communication is ramping up, which should only help to increase community interest. It's the timing. Why, now, say what they did? It just served to pour cold water on any community enthusiasm.
Most Likely:
a) @Slapshot1188 you are right. They have a deal in the works and are laying the foundation for an unpopular announcement. After all, "selling out" will be easier for the community to stomach, after being scared by the alternative of shutting down or an even slower development schedule.
Other theories:
b) They decided to clear the air, after they were caught by a community member hard-coding quest dialog, 10 days prior.
c) I'll tell you what I don't buy, that the state of the game was intended simply to update the community about the state of development. What's the point in telling us their struggles and that they need an investor / publisher, just for sake of transparency?? They didn't even ask the community to help bridge the financial gap.
With what we know now that the game is STILL in PRE-alpha does it seem a little
disingenuous to sell the higher pledge amounts(1,3,10k) with things like lifetime membership? Even the hundreds at this point should be temporarily removed until they get stuff sorted out.
Thats a little bit of a backward way to look at this. Pantheon has still progressed to the point the have a working part of the game with most systems in play. Where you will be able to play a number of classes from level 1 to 50. With that, Pre-Alpha 5 will be about polishing that so that when Alpha starts, VR will have something to show investors to get more funds. Supporting VR is as much of a gamble as it always has but... They are getting some good momentum. From here, they will just need to repeat the process in other areas of the game.
I honestly hope you are right, but I suspect that the situation is quite dire and if they do not get an investor to bite in the next few months they will fold. I have a suspicion, maybe just a hope, that they already have a deal in the works and that this "Come to Jesus" moment was just to prepare folks for the announcement that they were acquired by XYZ company.
I've been trying to wrap my head around what VR's motivation was for releasing that State of the Game letter. They're finally coming out of a long dark period of development with Project Faerthale. Pre-alpha testing and communication is ramping up, which should only help to increase community interest. It's the timing. Why, now, say what they did? It just served to pour cold water on any community enthusiasm.
Most Likely:
a) @Slapshot1188 you are right. They have a deal in the works and are laying the foundation for an unpopular announcement. After all, "selling out" will be easier for the community to stomach, after being scared by the alternative of shutting down or an even slower development schedule.
Other theories:
b) They decided to clear the air, after they were caught by a community member hard-coding quest dialog, 10 days prior.
c) I'll tell you what I don't buy, that the state of the game was intended simply to update the community about the state of development. What's the point in telling us their struggles and that they need an investor / publisher, just for sake of transparency?? They didn't even ask the community to help bridge the financial gap.
d) ????
I think option A is most likely and what first came to mind when I was done reading. I thought, man I hope they find an investor. So that could be just what they want everyone to think. So if they announce they have one, like you said, over sell out. People will be cheering. As long as they are careful not to get tied down with a bad company. Im find with it.
To further @Slapshot1188's idea (above), what if the unnamed buyout investor was a company like Tencent, which is pretty much raw evil (and probably a worst case scenario). Imagine the amount of groundwork that would be necessary for VR to make such a commitment palatable to their fans/followers. I'll get really scared if there is a mass wave of similar announcements.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
To further @Slapshot1188's idea (above), what if the unnamed buyout investor was a company like Tencent, which is pretty much raw evil (and probably a worst case scenario). Imagine the amount of groundwork that would be necessary for VR to make such a commitment palatable to their fans/followers. I'll get really scared if there is a mass wave of similar announcements.
Why would Tencent buy this? That's a question to explore because I think Tencent buys games and studios that have working software with financial value. Who would want to buy a game studio that has no revenue stream, no working software in production, and an MMO built on Unity? That is who would buy this company and I personally don't think Tencent or big players would be interested.
Tencent was an example only.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
To further @Slapshot1188's idea (above), what if the unnamed buyout investor was a company like Tencent, which is pretty much raw evil (and probably a worst case scenario). Imagine the amount of groundwork that would be necessary for VR to make such a commitment palatable to their fans/followers. I'll get really scared if there is a mass wave of similar announcements.
Why would Tencent buy this? That's a question to explore because I think Tencent buys games and studios that have working software with financial value. Who would want to buy a game studio that has no revenue stream, no working software in production, and an MMO built on Unity? That is who would buy this company and I personally don't think Tencent or big players would be interested.
Tencent was an example only.
I understand, but I think it brought up a great point. It made me ask: Who is the target audience for a publisher, investor, or buyer? What or who is the audience for investment into this game, outside of crowd-funders?
Same people who enjoy putting everything down on 35 when spinning the Roulette wheel.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
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
To further @Slapshot1188's idea (above), what if the unnamed buyout investor was a company like Tencent, which is pretty much raw evil (and probably a worst case scenario). Imagine the amount of groundwork that would be necessary for VR to make such a commitment palatable to their fans/followers. I'll get really scared if there is a mass wave of similar announcements.
Why would Tencent buy this? That's a question to explore because I think Tencent buys games and studios that have working software with financial value. Who would want to buy a game studio that has no revenue stream, no working software in production, and an MMO built on Unity? That is who would buy this company and I personally don't think Tencent or big players would be interested.
Tencent was an example only.
I understand, but I think it brought up a great point. It made me ask: Who is the target audience for a publisher, investor, or buyer? What or who is the audience for investment into this game, outside of crowd-funders?
There is no real proof a game like this has a market. Many are asking for it. They have 4000 odd backers that gave $1000+ to the game + all the small fries like myself who gave a little more then you would pay for a B2P game. But would any of them stick around, or do we all have things were better back in the good old days vision? Working studios dont seem to want to touch this kind of endeavor. Closest was Blizzard with WoW classic and that games numbers have fallen allot. Still a huge gamble. I hope someone is willing.
I understand, but I think it brought up a great point. It made me ask: Who is the target audience for a publisher, investor, or buyer? What or who is the audience for investment into this game, outside of crowd-funders?
Who's willing to hire devs that no other company will employ to work on a game that'll still be in alpha after 4-5 years? Simple answer >>> AGS
I understand, but I think it brought up a great point. It made me ask: Who is the target audience for a publisher, investor, or buyer? What or who is the audience for investment into this game, outside of crowd-funders?
Who's willing to hire devs that no other company will employ to work on a game that'll still be in alpha after 4-5 years? Simple answer >>> AGS
I dont think you have any proof of that statement. Frankly, the VR team has pulled a major feat, creating what they have with how little they have to work with. The parts of the game that are done look stunning and play how their backers have asked for and they have added some really awesome stuff like climbing almost everything, that you see in major titles like Assassins Creed.
People aren't buying a game. They're supporting a small studio to get the type of MMO they want.
I won't speak for anyone else, but for me, any donations would simply be to buy the game.
If the idea isn't good enough to gather donations, it should fail. It did, via Kickstarter. Not using Kickstarter simply delayed the same inevitable outcome by 7 years.
It's not exactly the game I want. My needs are modest. No cash shop, subscription only. They won't be able to fulfill either or both of those, by their own admission. This team said they were fully funded to launch (without a date), then they weren't fully funded (without a date), and now they won't be able to launch in a reasonable time, based on crowdfunding alone.
It might be reasonable to extend faith and trust, except for one teeny tiny problem. They've done all this before. Many times. Some of the current and past developers of this project have been through the creation (from scratch) of an MMO client, server, and database. They have been through the acquisition of a small/indie project by a large company, publisher, or similar.
As has been said before (on this site), they should have proven the game mechanics, MMO-networking and gameplay loops BEFORE they went looking for money to make it look shiny. They did the opposite, and now it's biting them in the ass. Reap? Meet sow. I'm sure you'll be very happy together. No-one is there to shield me from my mistakes that I make as an adult. The Pantheon developers deserve the same consequences.
The really funny part is that at any time since 2014, when this whole disaster started rolling, they could have pumped the brakes and said "woah, woah, hardcoding everything into the client? That's wonko! Let's go back to basics and take a few minutes to create a few greybox testing zones, and prove all these mechanics actually work with primitives instead of models". And while we're at it, we'll take all the hardcoding out of the client, and put all of it (read: as much of it as possible xoxo Nanfoodle) into a database so we can do live updates the way an actual modern MMO does.
In fact, they had three different opportunities to do that. They've publicly said they started again in 2014 (after the failed kickstarter), 2016 when they acquired new staff, and 2018 with project farthall. Now we're in 2020, and they're re-starting again, but still only going halfway, and their hand is still out for more money. Yay? They have now consumed twice as much time as it took to create EQ1 from scratch (with zero tools!) and have no public product to sell.
Here's a pro tip: To demonstrate if your MMO gameplay loops work, you don't need any art. You don't need any sound, music, particle effects, lighting, shaders, models, animations, or even textures. Exactly zero art or content is required. That would be a pre-alpha build that anyone (claiming to be a Unity developer)could create in Unity as a proof of concept, at any time.
But they didn't. At every step, despite their community telling them it was a mistake, they've been reading chapter and verse out of the Book of Fail, and swimming in their own kool-aid. Again. Just like Vanguard.
Here's a pro tip: To demonstrate if your MMO gameplay loops work, you don't need any art. You don't need any sound, music, particle effects, lighting, shaders, models, animations, or even textures. Exactly zero art or content is required.
People aren't buying a game. They're supporting a small studio to get the type of MMO they want.
Was that a quote from Ryan Dancey and Pathfinder Online? Sounds very familiar...
I think his statement was people say they don’t like to spend a lot of money, but their wallets say otherwise. That was in response to him charging $250 for a cabin in the game. People were making the ethical argument and he saw it in dollars and cents. That mindset continued from the very beginning until he eventually bailed and left Lisa Stevens holding the bag. Game has been on life support ever since.
People aren't buying a game. They're supporting a small studio to get the type of MMO they want.
Was that a quote from Ryan Dancey and Pathfinder Online? Sounds very familiar...
I think his statement was people say they don’t like to spend a lot of money, but their wallets say otherwise. That was in response to him charging $250 for a cabin in the game. People were making the ethical argument and he saw it in dollars and cents. That mindset continued from the very beginning until he eventually bailed and left Lisa Stevens holding the bag. Game has been on life support ever since.
I think the reality is people who don't have a lot of money (or are unwilling to spend it) get really whiff when other people choose to do so.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
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
I expected this. A lot of the early stuff felt like it was lifted from EQ. I think what they are doing is smart.
Please elaborate because I really don't get a clear picture of what they are actually doing. IDk if they have 5 zones or 10 zones,i don't even know the full design of anything from combat to xp the only thing I keep getting hints about is they still stick to some of the BAD EQ ideas.
People are different though some are very complacent, they would be happy with same old,me I want improvement and I have always been that way likely because of sports.I feel most people should want to improve on anything they can be it better at your job,more efficient,better with your money,better health,better with your kids,the list never ends.
Then there is of course the mindset that some ideas i consider to be bad they actually think are GREAT !!.There is one difference,I don't think that they think about it at all and just stick to what made them happy back in the day.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I expected this. A lot of the early stuff felt like it was lifted from EQ. I think what they are doing is smart.
Please elaborate because I really don't get a clear picture of what they are actually doing.
I'm thinking there's prob not a lot done, since they have to redo everything. The best course of action is develop a proof of concept and hope to convince someone to get on board. There's no other option at this point that I see viable. Trying to do too much now would blow whatever little funds they have left and have nothing to show for it.
Essentially, it's Ashes of Creation 1.0, or in the words of Ryan Dancey, ' EVE with swords '. It is another failed attempt to attract sheep (paying PvE customers) to wolves (paying PvP customers) and artificially encourage 1v1 direct player conflict. While of course, at the same time, punishing the victims (sheep) for participation.
They, too, were warned that they couldn't attract sufficient demographic numbers to sustain their game, and when that reality came to pass, Ryan simply left the company. They couldn't keep 1000 customers subscribed. Their public target was 4000.
Oh, and it also has the same tired old failed concept of "the first are the most powerful" with temporal skill gains. That means that the players on day 1 were always and forever more powerful than players paying from day 2, or onward, because the XP cap was granted over time, not due to actions. Similarly, item crafting (yes, a single item) took days or weeks, not seconds or minutes. This was intended to foster item value, in whatever bizarro universe Ryan Dancey lives.
But wait, there's more! You could $$BUY$$ ... XP. Yep, you could open your wallet and buy your way right up to the day-1-purchaser XP cap. That was their whole financial viability premise. I followed it and played it a fair bit at 'launch' but there was never more than a few dozen players online that I ever saw, even though they claimed an all time peak of 400, iirc.
AoC is going down the same path by punishing non-combatant victims with MORE penalties than combatants, which, objectively, is the most illogical thing you could ever attempt, yet again. But apparently the AoC devs are not students of history. I mean, what paying PvE customer doesn't enjoy having their play time experience completely controlled by non-consensual PvP combat? That's the dream, right? Riiiiight.
Both games are based on the premise that anyone can be attacked anywhere, at any time, by another player. Full stop, always true, git gud or git gone.
Thankfully, at least the Pantheon devs are smart enough to try to leave PvP alone. And yes, the world map, continents, zone count, zone names, zone locations, all of that? Completely unknown for Pantheon, as of October 2020. Even the tenets, differences, and features of Pantheon are now gone from the web site, and replaced with climbing, perception, and acclimation.
Yet, the fanboi white knights of this community still claim: They are still updating thesite (from August), you have to give them more time. Sure, that's what they need after 7 years, more time. Because updating a web site is new, like it's 1995 again.
Find myself being completely apathetic to these announcements these days. Even on titles I've followed for half a decade or more. Really just can't be bothered to care anymore. Good riddance if it doesn't cut it in the end.
Comments
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Most Likely:
Other theories:
https://seforums.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/12433/a-thing-i-didn-t-expect
d) ????
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
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
Who's willing to hire devs that no other company will employ to work on a game that'll still be in alpha after 4-5 years? Simple answer >>> AGS
I can't believe it still needs repeating.
If the idea isn't good enough to gather donations, it should fail. It did, via Kickstarter.
Not using Kickstarter simply delayed the same inevitable outcome by 7 years.
It's not exactly the game I want. My needs are modest. No cash shop, subscription only.
They won't be able to fulfill either or both of those, by their own admission.
This team said they were fully funded to launch (without a date), then they weren't fully funded (without a date), and now they won't be able to launch in a reasonable time, based on crowdfunding alone.
It might be reasonable to extend faith and trust, except for one teeny tiny problem. They've done all this before. Many times. Some of the current and past developers of this project have been through the creation (from scratch) of an MMO client, server, and database. They have been through the acquisition of a small/indie project by a large company, publisher, or similar.
As has been said before (on this site), they should have proven the game mechanics, MMO-networking and gameplay loops BEFORE they went looking for money to make it look shiny. They did the opposite, and now it's biting them in the ass.
Reap? Meet sow. I'm sure you'll be very happy together. No-one is there to shield me from my mistakes that I make as an adult. The Pantheon developers deserve the same consequences.
The really funny part is that at any time since 2014, when this whole disaster started rolling, they could have pumped the brakes and said "woah, woah, hardcoding everything into the client? That's wonko! Let's go back to basics and take a few minutes to create a few greybox testing zones, and prove all these mechanics actually work with primitives instead of models". And while we're at it, we'll take all the hardcoding out of the client, and put all of it (read: as much of it as possible xoxo Nanfoodle) into a database so we can do live updates the way an actual modern MMO does.
In fact, they had three different opportunities to do that. They've publicly said they started again in 2014 (after the failed kickstarter), 2016 when they acquired new staff, and 2018 with project farthall. Now we're in 2020, and they're re-starting again, but still only going halfway, and their hand is still out for more money. Yay?
They have now consumed twice as much time as it took to create EQ1 from scratch (with zero tools!) and have no public product to sell.
Here's a pro tip: To demonstrate if your MMO gameplay loops work, you don't need any art. You don't need any sound, music, particle effects, lighting, shaders, models, animations, or even textures. Exactly zero art or content is required. That would be a pre-alpha build that anyone (claiming to be a Unity developer)could create in Unity as a proof of concept, at any time.
But they didn't. At every step, despite their community telling them it was a mistake, they've been reading chapter and verse out of the Book of Fail, and swimming in their own kool-aid. Again. Just like Vanguard.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
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
IDk if they have 5 zones or 10 zones,i don't even know the full design of anything from combat to xp the only thing I keep getting hints about is they still stick to some of the BAD EQ ideas.
People are different though some are very complacent, they would be happy with same old,me I want improvement and I have always been that way likely because of sports.I feel most people should want to improve on anything they can be it better at your job,more efficient,better with your money,better health,better with your kids,the list never ends.
Then there is of course the mindset that some ideas i consider to be bad they actually think are GREAT !!.There is one difference,I don't think that they think about it at all and just stick to what made them happy back in the day.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
No idea. Never followed Pathfinder Online.
They, too, were warned that they couldn't attract sufficient demographic numbers to sustain their game, and when that reality came to pass, Ryan simply left the company. They couldn't keep 1000 customers subscribed. Their public target was 4000.
Oh, and it also has the same tired old failed concept of "the first are the most powerful" with temporal skill gains. That means that the players on day 1 were always and forever more powerful than players paying from day 2, or onward, because the XP cap was granted over time, not due to actions. Similarly, item crafting (yes, a single item) took days or weeks, not seconds or minutes. This was intended to foster item value, in whatever bizarro universe Ryan Dancey lives.
But wait, there's more! You could $$BUY$$ ... XP. Yep, you could open your wallet and buy your way right up to the day-1-purchaser XP cap. That was their whole financial viability premise. I followed it and played it a fair bit at 'launch' but there was never more than a few dozen players online that I ever saw, even though they claimed an all time peak of 400, iirc.
AoC is going down the same path by punishing non-combatant victims with MORE penalties than combatants, which, objectively, is the most illogical thing you could ever attempt, yet again. But apparently the AoC devs are not students of history. I mean, what paying PvE customer doesn't enjoy having their play time experience completely controlled by non-consensual PvP combat? That's the dream, right? Riiiiight.
Both games are based on the premise that anyone can be attacked anywhere, at any time, by another player. Full stop, always true, git gud or git gone.
Thankfully, at least the Pantheon devs are smart enough to try to leave PvP alone.
And yes, the world map, continents, zone count, zone names, zone locations, all of that? Completely unknown for Pantheon, as of October 2020. Even the tenets, differences, and features of Pantheon are now gone from the web site, and replaced with climbing, perception, and acclimation.
Yet, the fanboi white knights of this community still claim: They are still updating the site (from August), you have to give them more time. Sure, that's what they need after 7 years, more time. Because updating a web site is new, like it's 1995 again.