This reply applies to both @Dullahan and @baphamet. I can't get the multi-quote feature to work.
Many of the promises they have made are not visible, at least as far as the streams have shown so far. I do not recall seeing any evidence of the "Living Codex" (special drops of spells/abilities) nor the "Dynamic NPC Encounter Groups". We've not seen much of equipment from the videos, and there hasn't been much in the way of gear swapping, much less "Situational Gear". I haven't seen any evidence of any effect of the "Atmosphere/Climate System" on the characters.
What has been shown is an auto-attack system where the group dynamic revolves around restricting (via pulling or CC tactics) the active number of opponents to 1, with 1 character holding the opponents attention while a healer attempts to keep them alive, with all available hands beating on that one opponent until dead.
At this point, the list of promises is mostly that -- promises. This may be a design philosophy, but it does not show up in a tangible way in the videos. Many of the promises are concepts that may never have any observable effect. Without an observable effect, these become marketing / advertising mechanisms, and are very subject to subjective interpretation, many of which we have seen before (group/social orientation, varied NPC behavior, etc.)
I'm suggesting that confusing 'words on a website' with 'code in a game' is only going to cause disappointment. My opinion is based on my observation of available material.
They've mostly just shown proof of concept of these things. They've shown a mana climate. They showed an item that enabled colored mana, and gave resistance to that particular climate. I'm not certain whether that item had anything to do with the Living Codex or not, but it would qualify as situational gear.
Having only shown 3 gameplay streams of the first 14 levels, we haven't seen all of the potential of those systems. They've also shown NPC encounters that were quite different than anything in EQ back in the days, including a fully scripted battle. I'm not sure how dynamic those things were. The biggest challenge from a programming standpoint is NPC dispositions and AI. That seems to have the most potential of keeping combat interesting.
The question at this point is not whether or not they actually have those things or the capability to create them, it's whether or not they can finish the game.
Completion, in part, may come at the cost of these 'extra' features they have promised. As for the proof of concept, EQ1 (and other games) proved these concepts decades ago. They've not really shown anything new. Talked about it, sure, but it hasn't been seen in the video. So, with only 3 game play streams, we haven't seen in these systems act out as even partially functional systems. Your guess is as good as mine as to what features are likely to be cut to make the release date / come in under budget / etc. But I strongly suspect that features that haven't been seen are first on that list.
EQ1 had mobs that would try to run at a certain % of health, or linked pulls, or went into desperate attack mode (flurries, anyone?). How is that not a 'Disposition'? I've seen that before, and am not mislead by throwing a thesaurus at it and trying to call it a new system. Yes, it does have the possibility of keeping combat interesting, but it isn't a new concept. If it turns out the the mob with the blue hat will run at 50%, you can bet the community will know that after about 3 fights.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
PRE-PRE-Alpha.......... I'll say it again. Pre-Pre-Alpha.
I'm one of those with cautionary flags out. Your message might be more apt to those blindly praising everything about this game.
And... pre-pre-alpha with /dance animations? What does that say about the priorities?
how ironic you are talking about blind praise yet you are basing an opinion on things that are pure speculation on your part lol
I am building expectations from things I have seen, not promises made by developers on a website or a video. Many of those who are offering an undivided loyalty to Pantheon are speculating that the developers are capable of delivering on their promises, and that they will. It's a matter of me believing what I have and haven't seen, and others believing what they have been told.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I am building expectations from things I have seen, not promises made by developers on a website or a video. Many of those who are offering an undivided loyalty to Pantheon are speculating that the developers are capable of delivering on their promises, and that they will. It's a matter of me believing what I have and haven't seen, and others believing what they have been told.
In that case, do us all a favor and stop following the game until it is in the final stages of beta or in full release. Your constant need to doubt everything posted by the dev team, especially in super early pre-alpha stages of the game, is beyond tired. There have been three steams, and not once did the VR team say they were all inclusive to their original tenants and features. The steams are a courtesy to the backers of the game to show progress, as well as a marketing tool for open-mined people to discover Pantheon and decide if they are interested in this style of game.
It feels like you hope to get what you want by using the "squeaky wheels gets the grease" mentality, and that approach is just not going to bear weight with the dev team. It's one thing to have some doubt, but it's totally another issue when you've built an entire hobby of forum posting around it.
Nothing I am about to say relates to Svann. I just thought of this reading his post, is all.
One of the less talked about problems with a strong death penalty is that when players die and are heavily penalized for it, they tend to blame other players. The priest sucks. The warrior sucks.
Rather than making the game more social in any positive way, a major penalty can make people hate each other.
I get that part of being a member of a player community is upping your game so that you are less likely to be the recipient of such blame.
And I get that your player reputation should matter.
Still, I am interested to see how more modern gamers, who kick people from their groups and raids upon the slightest provocation, will handle the penalties whose cause they attribute to others.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Nothing I am about to say relates to Svann. I just thought of this reading his post, is all.
One of the less talked about problems with a strong death penalty is that when players die and are heavily penalized for it, they tend to blame other players. The priest sucks. The warrior sucks.
Rather than making the game more social in any positive way, a major penalty can make people hate each other.
I get that part of being a member of a player community is upping your game so that you are less likely to be the recipient of such blame.
And I get that your player reputation should matter.
Still, I am interested to see how more modern gamers, who kick people from their groups and raids upon the slightest provocation, will handle the penalties whose cause they attribute to others.
Dont be silly, idiots have been causing deaths of gamers since the start of online play. This is one way but the list could fill many books on ways idiots have done so.
I am building expectations from things I have seen, not promises made by developers on a website or a video. Many of those who are offering an undivided loyalty to Pantheon are speculating that the developers are capable of delivering on their promises, and that they will. It's a matter of me believing what I have and haven't seen, and others believing what they have been told.
In that case, do us all a favor and stop following the game until it is in the final stages of beta or in full release. Your constant need to doubt everything posted by the dev team, especially in super early pre-alpha stages of the game, is beyond tired. There have been three steams, and not once did the VR team say they were all inclusive to their original tenants and features. The steams are a courtesy to the backers of the game to show progress, as well as a marketing tool for open-mined people to discover Pantheon and decide if they are interested in this style of game.
It feels like you hope to get what you want by using the "squeaky wheels gets the grease" mentality, and that approach is just not going to bear weight with the dev team. It's one thing to have some doubt, but it's totally another issue when you've built an entire hobby of forum posting around it.
Fine. You don't like my opinion. I never expect anyone to. Just don't expect that I'll withhold my opinion when I feel it necessary. A chorus of totally fanbois singing praises to features they haven't seen, but believe they have seen, needs a dissenting opinion. I try to provide that, if for nothing else than to try to keep the community's expectations reasonable. Too many people were grossly disappointed with the progression of EQ:Next, and people who are disappointed tend to be more prone to leaving the industry, and that, to me, is a bad thing.
If VR only wants to hear positive comments, then don't make their streams public. Showing an incomplete product is indeed building an impression, and I'm willing to point out that the product is incomplete, and contains no evidence of the rich feature set that the web site has promised.
Please note, that no one has offered evidence to counter my claims that there wasn't evidence of any of the new features, and that the videos demonstrated nothing beyond the basic game play of 1999 EQ1. Instead, people want to disagree with my opinion and shout me down. Why not provide some evidence (video and time reference) that you believe supports the idea that Pantheon is so radically different from what came before? It is entirely possible that I missed something.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
You're barking up the wrong tree it is not radically different in fact I do believe the premise is that it will be the true successor to Everquest with some changes but I think it will be very much like the original and I also think that that is its selling point.
PRE-PRE-Alpha.......... I'll say it again. Pre-Pre-Alpha.
I'm one of those with cautionary flags out. Your message might be more apt to those blindly praising everything about this game.
And... pre-pre-alpha with /dance animations? What does that say about the priorities?
how ironic you are talking about blind praise yet you are basing an opinion on things that are pure speculation on your part lol
I am building expectations from things I have seen, not promises made by developers on a website or a video. Many of those who are offering an undivided loyalty to Pantheon are speculating that the developers are capable of delivering on their promises, and that they will. It's a matter of me believing what I have and haven't seen, and others believing what they have been told.
have you seen the finished product though? the fact you think that what you have seen so far is what the finished product will be really says it all. i'm not sure you realize how far away from launch this game is, assuming it does launch of course!
you are basically telling me you don't believe what they say will be the finished product so all that you have seen in early pre-alpha is absolutely all there will be in at launch.
that is flawed logic to put it nicely and i don't care what game we are talking about. again, dark and light has only shown walking around in a city, does that mean the game will have no combat? since you don't believe what you are told and only what you have seen?
I am building expectations from things I have seen, not promises made by developers on a website or a video. Many of those who are offering an undivided loyalty to Pantheon are speculating that the developers are capable of delivering on their promises, and that they will. It's a matter of me believing what I have and haven't seen, and others believing what they have been told.
In that case, do us all a favor and stop following the game until it is in the final stages of beta or in full release. Your constant need to doubt everything posted by the dev team, especially in super early pre-alpha stages of the game, is beyond tired. There have been three steams, and not once did the VR team say they were all inclusive to their original tenants and features. The steams are a courtesy to the backers of the game to show progress, as well as a marketing tool for open-mined people to discover Pantheon and decide if they are interested in this style of game.
It feels like you hope to get what you want by using the "squeaky wheels gets the grease" mentality, and that approach is just not going to bear weight with the dev team. It's one thing to have some doubt, but it's totally another issue when you've built an entire hobby of forum posting around it.
Fine. You don't like my opinion. I never expect anyone to. Just don't expect that I'll withhold my opinion when I feel it necessary. A chorus of totally fanbois singing praises to features they haven't seen, but believe they have seen, needs a dissenting opinion. I try to provide that, if for nothing else than to try to keep the community's expectations reasonable. Too many people were grossly disappointed with the progression of EQ:Next, and people who are disappointed tend to be more prone to leaving the industry, and that, to me, is a bad thing.
If VR only wants to hear positive comments, then don't make their streams public. Showing an incomplete product is indeed building an impression, and I'm willing to point out that the product is incomplete, and contains no evidence of the rich feature set that the web site has promised.
Please note, that no one has offered evidence to counter my claims that there wasn't evidence of any of the new features, and that the videos demonstrated nothing beyond the basic game play of 1999 EQ1. Instead, people want to disagree with my opinion and shout me down. Why not provide some evidence (video and time reference) that you believe supports the idea that Pantheon is so radically different from what came before? It is entirely possible that I missed something.
the thing is, i don't see any "fanboi's" in here pumping the game up. i'm seeing opinions being stated as fact based on pure speculation, speculation that will almost certainly be proven incorrect if/when the game launches.
i would love for you to explain to me with sound logic why you think this game will only have features from EQ1 and vanguard at launch. not just that you don't believe what the dev's say until you see it for yourself, sorry....that isn't going to cut it.
if there is an actual reason why you think there will be only EQ1 and vanguard features in the game i am all ears.
also, go ahead and criticize what you have seen, nothing wrong with that. making baseless assumptions and playing it off as fact is the only thing i take issue with
I am building expectations from things I have seen, not promises made by developers on a website or a video. Many of those who are offering an undivided loyalty to Pantheon are speculating that the developers are capable of delivering on their promises, and that they will. It's a matter of me believing what I have and haven't seen, and others believing what they have been told.
In that case, do us all a favor and stop following the game until it is in the final stages of beta or in full release. Your constant need to doubt everything posted by the dev team, especially in super early pre-alpha stages of the game, is beyond tired. There have been three steams, and not once did the VR team say they were all inclusive to their original tenants and features. The steams are a courtesy to the backers of the game to show progress, as well as a marketing tool for open-mined people to discover Pantheon and decide if they are interested in this style of game.
It feels like you hope to get what you want by using the "squeaky wheels gets the grease" mentality, and that approach is just not going to bear weight with the dev team. It's one thing to have some doubt, but it's totally another issue when you've built an entire hobby of forum posting around it.
Fine. You don't like my opinion. I never expect anyone to. Just don't expect that I'll withhold my opinion when I feel it necessary. A chorus of totally fanbois singing praises to features they haven't seen, but believe they have seen, needs a dissenting opinion. I try to provide that, if for nothing else than to try to keep the community's expectations reasonable. Too many people were grossly disappointed with the progression of EQ:Next, and people who are disappointed tend to be more prone to leaving the industry, and that, to me, is a bad thing.
If VR only wants to hear positive comments, then don't make their streams public. Showing an incomplete product is indeed building an impression, and I'm willing to point out that the product is incomplete, and contains no evidence of the rich feature set that the web site has promised.
Please note, that no one has offered evidence to counter my claims that there wasn't evidence of any of the new features, and that the videos demonstrated nothing beyond the basic game play of 1999 EQ1. Instead, people want to disagree with my opinion and shout me down. Why not provide some evidence (video and time reference) that you believe supports the idea that Pantheon is so radically different from what came before? It is entirely possible that I missed something.
Your unwillingness to even acknowledge the things that have been seen, makes it hard for anyone to take your opinion seriously.
baphamet said: the thing is, i don't see any "fanboi's" in here pumping the game up. i'm seeing opinions being stated as fact based on pure speculation, speculation that will almost certainly be proven incorrect if/when the game launches.
i would love for you to explain to me with sound logic why you think this game will only have features from EQ1 and vanguard at launch. not just that you don't believe what the dev's say until you see it for yourself, sorry....that isn't going to cut it.
if there is an actual reason why you think there will be only EQ1 and vanguard features in the game i am all ears.
also, go ahead and criticize what you have seen, nothing wrong with that. making baseless assumptions and playing it off as fact is the only thing i take issue with
I have been involved in too many IT projects where the delivered results in no way matched what was promised. Promises, especially from a small, independent development team with suspect funding and no proven track record of producing quality products, are worthless. Even promises from companies like IBM trigger a degree of skepticism. At best, these types of statements are no more than a goal, a project objective. Features can and do change, and that includes requirements.
Brad has been a major player in 2 MMORPGs, and is a primary factor in Pantheon's development. Both EQ and Vanguard were very, very close in concept and in execution. I strongly suspect that Pantheon will follow the previous two efforts, essentially building a base line of EQ / Vanguard. If fact, it might be highly illogical to expect the third try from the same source to be substantially different from previous efforts.
The goals and objectives expressed on the Pantheon web site are in addition to that base line. I actually like a couple of the ideas, while I think that others aren't worthy of being considered a 'point of product differentiation' that Pantheon itself is advertising. ("The Pantheon Difference").
@Dullahan stated in this thread (page 3) that they have shown "proof of concept" in the streams. I contend that none of these additional features linked from the Pantheon web site have been present in any of the streams, even in a rudimentary form. At this point, Pantheon appears to me to be to be nothing more than "EQ with modern graphics". While the developers may be planning in all good faith to adding these additional features, these features do not appear to be there yet.
Many people in this community will accept "EQ with modern graphics". That is not what Pantheon has promised. That's only the base line of what Pantheon has promised, and from my point of view, all they have achieved to date. That's an observation that contributes to my opinion that what Pantheon ends up being may not be what was promised. If you choose to interpret that as a fact, I would contend that is a fallacy on your end.
Since what I am seeing at the moment is "EQ with modern graphics", I do not question that Pantheon might release in it's current form. There are myriad reasons why the project may be scaled back -- finances, pressure to deliver a product, technical difficulties, or even changes to the initial concepts. I am questioning if this isn't another case where a developer promised more than they can deliver to a customer base who is over-eager to accept anything said at face value without questioning it. That is a long standing formula for upset customers -- delivering something the customer didn't expect. I'll continue waving a red flag if I think there's even the slightest chance that even one customer doesn't come away disappointed.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I wait and see what features make it into the game. I like what I seen in the live streams so far. I though this thread was about the death penalty? Anyway I did finally for the first time add someone to my ignore list here on this site.
baphamet said: the thing is, i don't see any "fanboi's" in here pumping the game up. i'm seeing opinions being stated as fact based on pure speculation, speculation that will almost certainly be proven incorrect if/when the game launches.
i would love for you to explain to me with sound logic why you think this game will only have features from EQ1 and vanguard at launch. not just that you don't believe what the dev's say until you see it for yourself, sorry....that isn't going to cut it.
if there is an actual reason why you think there will be only EQ1 and vanguard features in the game i am all ears.
also, go ahead and criticize what you have seen, nothing wrong with that. making baseless assumptions and playing it off as fact is the only thing i take issue with
Brad has been a major player in 2 MMORPGs, and is a primary factor in Pantheon's development. Both EQ and Vanguard were very, very close in concept and in execution. I strongly suspect that Pantheon will follow the previous two efforts, essentially building a base line of EQ / Vanguard. If fact, it might be highly illogical to expect the third try from the same source to be substantially different from previous efforts.
The goals and objectives expressed on the Pantheon web site are in addition to that base line. I actually like a couple of the ideas, while I think that others aren't worthy of being considered a 'point of product differentiation' that Pantheon itself is advertising. ("The Pantheon Difference").
vanguard had many features EQ did not have like one of it's main features which was the 3 spheres of progression.... adventure, crafting , and diplomacy. not to mention it was seamless, unlike EQ.
so why assume that BM and VR won't add anything new based on BM's track record?
speaking of track record, i will say this. the way both EQ and vanguard launched, it would be fair to say you have your doubts that this game's launch will go much better.
i have my doubts too, trust me. but maybe wait to see what they actually do plan to launch with rather than speculate because you haven't seen it yet and pretend that's what the finished product will be?
anyways i'm done here, maybe in a year or two we can see where this game is at and have a discussion based on more facts rather than speculation.
Death should remove base stats. Getting your stats back should cost you three levels if reincarnating to the same class. The same mechanism could also allow you to change race or to a similar class. IE if you were a level 50 shaman you could reincarnate to a level 47 shaman, 45 cleric, druid, or beastmaster with restored stats. A level 50 cleric could reincarnate to a level 47 cleric, 45 paladin, shaman, or druid with restored stats. The latter stuff could allow guilds to reclass some members if needed, or if someone wanted a change.
baphamet said: the thing is, i don't see any "fanboi's" in here pumping the game up. i'm seeing opinions being stated as fact based on pure speculation, speculation that will almost certainly be proven incorrect if/when the game launches.
i would love for you to explain to me with sound logic why you think this game will only have features from EQ1 and vanguard at launch. not just that you don't believe what the dev's say until you see it for yourself, sorry....that isn't going to cut it.
if there is an actual reason why you think there will be only EQ1 and vanguard features in the game i am all ears.
also, go ahead and criticize what you have seen, nothing wrong with that. making baseless assumptions and playing it off as fact is the only thing i take issue with
I have been involved in too many IT projects where the delivered results in no way matched what was promised. Promises, especially from a small, independent development team with suspect funding and no proven track record of producing quality products, are worthless. Even promises from companies like IBM trigger a degree of skepticism. At best, these types of statements are no more than a goal, a project objective. Features can and do change, and that includes requirements.
Brad has been a major player in 2 MMORPGs, and is a primary factor in Pantheon's development. Both EQ and Vanguard were very, very close in concept and in execution. I strongly suspect that Pantheon will follow the previous two efforts, essentially building a base line of EQ / Vanguard. If fact, it might be highly illogical to expect the third try from the same source to be substantially different from previous efforts.
The goals and objectives expressed on the Pantheon web site are in addition to that base line. I actually like a couple of the ideas, while I think that others aren't worthy of being considered a 'point of product differentiation' that Pantheon itself is advertising. ("The Pantheon Difference").
@Dullahan stated in this thread (page 3) that they have shown "proof of concept" in the streams. I contend that none of these additional features linked from the Pantheon web site have been present in any of the streams, even in a rudimentary form. At this point, Pantheon appears to me to be to be nothing more than "EQ with modern graphics". While the developers may be planning in all good faith to adding these additional features, these features do not appear to be there yet.
Many people in this community will accept "EQ with modern graphics". That is not what Pantheon has promised. That's only the base line of what Pantheon has promised, and from my point of view, all they have achieved to date. That's an observation that contributes to my opinion that what Pantheon ends up being may not be what was promised. If you choose to interpret that as a fact, I would contend that is a fallacy on your end.
Since what I am seeing at the moment is "EQ with modern graphics", I do not question that Pantheon might release in it's current form. There are myriad reasons why the project may be scaled back -- finances, pressure to deliver a product, technical difficulties, or even changes to the initial concepts. I am questioning if this isn't another case where a developer promised more than they can deliver to a customer base who is over-eager to accept anything said at face value without questioning it. That is a long standing formula for upset customers -- delivering something the customer didn't expect. I'll continue waving a red flag if I think there's even the slightest chance that even one customer doesn't come away disappointed.
I can see your scepticism but at this point in the development it seems premature to debate this topic and really of no real use. Further even if you are right that this game is merely Everquest reboot there is no need to argue and belabour this on a forum where the fans seem to prefer that idea. What are you trying to achieve aside from pissing them off ? Why not just wait until there are further reveals and bear in mind Brad also made Vanguard as @Bahaphat pointed out so this game might be a Vanguard/Everquest reboot. I think since there is not enough information or you have been unable to find any and the ones who do know different are not inclined to enlighten you why don't you give this a rest instead of this useless back and forth.
baphamet said: the thing is, i don't see any "fanboi's" in here pumping the game up. i'm seeing opinions being stated as fact based on pure speculation, speculation that will almost certainly be proven incorrect if/when the game launches.
i would love for you to explain to me with sound logic why you think this game will only have features from EQ1 and vanguard at launch. not just that you don't believe what the dev's say until you see it for yourself, sorry....that isn't going to cut it.
if there is an actual reason why you think there will be only EQ1 and vanguard features in the game i am all ears.
also, go ahead and criticize what you have seen, nothing wrong with that. making baseless assumptions and playing it off as fact is the only thing i take issue with
I have been involved in too many IT projects where the delivered results in no way matched what was promised. Promises, especially from a small, independent development team with suspect funding and no proven track record of producing quality products, are worthless. Even promises from companies like IBM trigger a degree of skepticism. At best, these types of statements are no more than a goal, a project objective. Features can and do change, and that includes requirements.
Brad has been a major player in 2 MMORPGs, and is a primary factor in Pantheon's development. Both EQ and Vanguard were very, very close in concept and in execution. I strongly suspect that Pantheon will follow the previous two efforts, essentially building a base line of EQ / Vanguard. If fact, it might be highly illogical to expect the third try from the same source to be substantially different from previous efforts.
The goals and objectives expressed on the Pantheon web site are in addition to that base line. I actually like a couple of the ideas, while I think that others aren't worthy of being considered a 'point of product differentiation' that Pantheon itself is advertising. ("The Pantheon Difference").
@Dullahan stated in this thread (page 3) that they have shown "proof of concept" in the streams. I contend that none of these additional features linked from the Pantheon web site have been present in any of the streams, even in a rudimentary form. At this point, Pantheon appears to me to be to be nothing more than "EQ with modern graphics". While the developers may be planning in all good faith to adding these additional features, these features do not appear to be there yet.
Many people in this community will accept "EQ with modern graphics". That is not what Pantheon has promised. That's only the base line of what Pantheon has promised, and from my point of view, all they have achieved to date. That's an observation that contributes to my opinion that what Pantheon ends up being may not be what was promised. If you choose to interpret that as a fact, I would contend that is a fallacy on your end.
Since what I am seeing at the moment is "EQ with modern graphics", I do not question that Pantheon might release in it's current form. There are myriad reasons why the project may be scaled back -- finances, pressure to deliver a product, technical difficulties, or even changes to the initial concepts. I am questioning if this isn't another case where a developer promised more than they can deliver to a customer base who is over-eager to accept anything said at face value without questioning it. That is a long standing formula for upset customers -- delivering something the customer didn't expect. I'll continue waving a red flag if I think there's even the slightest chance that even one customer doesn't come away disappointed.
I can see your scepticism but at this point in the development it seems premature to debate this topic and really of no real use. Further even if you are right that this game is merely Everquest reboot there is no need to argue and belabour this on a forum where the fans seem to prefer that idea. What are you trying to achieve aside from pissing them off ? Why not just wait until there are further reveals and bear in mind Brad also made Vanguard as @Bahaphat pointed out so this game might be a Vanguard/Everquest reboot. I think since there is not enough information or you have been unable to find any and the ones who do know different are not inclined to enlighten you why don't you give this a rest instead of this useless back and forth.
The reason I will continue posting is the posts that say things like "OMG! Pantheon looks fantastic. It's going to be the best game ever!". That is a bit premature, also. Worse, it may be building false expectations in a significant portion of the fan base. A fan base with failed expectations is rarely good for a company's and game's health.
Since VR isn't bothering to attempt to manage customer's expectations (at least on this forum), dissenting opinions will have to do. Attempting to shout down any voice that isn't in 100% agreement isn't advancing the discussion. If there is any purpose in debating a topic, all opinions need to be accommodated.
I will be happy to try Pantheon. I would be even happier to see evidence of the 'points of difference' that Pantheon has promised.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
1) When the person that died makes it to the gravestone they then pay with experience or gold to come back alive, which also leaves the group to take a break in RL for bio or get a drink or something.
2) BUT with that being said, if the group does not want to wait they could Pay the Ferryman (each member has to pay something, again gold or exp) to carry ghost of the dead person back his grave to get the dungeon crawl back on track quickly.
Why can't people say Pantheon is the best or that they like what they see so far, what's so terrible about that, that you have to respond are you seriously upset that people are jubilant and saying over the top things. That's human nature and trying to point things out when you yourself have so little information is not helpful either it is as bad as the superlatives being thrown about. Anyway I guess it will be fodder for either side to fight over and tangle with without end.
I'll just wait for more information to come out or more of the game to be revealed before I praise or scoff for the time being.
1) When the person that died makes it to the gravestone they then pay with experience or gold to come back alive, which also leaves the group to take a break in RL for bio or get a drink or something.
2) BUT with that being said, if the group does not want to wait they could Pay the Ferryman (each member has to pay something, again gold or exp) to carry ghost of the dead person back his grave to get the dungeon crawl back on track quickly.
Thats one of my problems with the old death system. Sometimes a wipe (especially unbalanced team) would take 1-2hrs to get back into the swing of things. You dont always have the perfect team with a cleric and CCer. The odd time the cleric died and no one was there to summon them. Again you would have a huge loss of time. Can risk be added that removes the run back time. Or do we need exp loss + run back time to add the fear of death? Can there be a new system added that speeds up the process of run back time and still keeps the core of fear of death?
I think adding a system just because thats how EQ1 did it, without looking at ways it can be modernized is a foolish move. Can it be done better should always be asked.
1) When the person that died makes it to the gravestone they then pay with experience or gold to come back alive, which also leaves the group to take a break in RL for bio or get a drink or something.
2) BUT with that being said, if the group does not want to wait they could Pay the Ferryman (each member has to pay something, again gold or exp) to carry ghost of the dead person back his grave to get the dungeon crawl back on track quickly.
Thats one of my problems with the old death system. Sometimes a wipe (especially unbalanced team) would take 1-2hrs to get back into the swing of things. You dont always have the perfect team with a cleric and CCer. The odd time the cleric died and no one was there to summon them. Again you would have a huge loss of time. Can risk be added that removes the run back time. Or do we need exp loss + run back time to add the fear of death? Can there be a new system added that speeds up the process of run back time and still keeps the core of fear of death?
I think adding a system just because thats how EQ1 did it, without looking at ways it can be modernized is a foolish move. Can it be done better should always be asked.
It has to hurt. Obviously if you remove what hurts, you remove the reason for fear. Since mmos are all about investing/wasting time, what hurts will be something that takes time away from you one way or another.
In a game based on risk versus reward, the risk factor is primarily time. The higher level you get and the more rewarding the content, the higher the risk must be. That means dying at level 5 and having to run back from the nearest city or outpost may only take a few minutes, but at level 50 in raid content, it has to take longer if the content is to be rewarding.
Pantheon will be a group focused game and they intend for you to be able to accomplish something significant in a 2 hour window. But that doesn't mean everything in the game will follow that rule. If there is to be progressively greater rewards, there has to be progressively greater risk.
In a game based on risk versus reward, the risk factor is primarily time. The higher level you get and the more rewarding the content, the higher the risk must be. That means dying at level 5 and having to run back from the nearest city or outpost may only take a few minutes, but at level 50 in raid content, it has to take longer if the content is to be rewarding.
Pantheon will be a group focused game and they intend for you to be able to accomplish something significant in a 2 hour window. But that doesn't mean everything in the game will follow that rule. If there is to be progressively greater rewards, there has to be progressively greater risk.
I found that was not the case with EQ1. Most of the risk was low level. Sometimes chaining a few bad groups in a row would end up losing a whole level. Higher levels the risk just dropped. Exp reses, corpse summons and summon player. By the time you get these tools most people knew how to play their role in a team. So chaining bad teams just didnt happen. My fear is like EQ1, the risk will all be at lower levels and it will drive off new blood.
IMO, I think tools like exp res, corpse summons and summon player should be at lower levels. Maybe by level 10. This gives players more reasons to not only seek out classes that have these tools but also gets people playing them from the start because it will get them teams. This would add to higher levels having a better balance of classes from the get go.
In a game based on risk versus reward, the risk factor is primarily time. The higher level you get and the more rewarding the content, the higher the risk must be. That means dying at level 5 and having to run back from the nearest city or outpost may only take a few minutes, but at level 50 in raid content, it has to take longer if the content is to be rewarding.
Pantheon will be a group focused game and they intend for you to be able to accomplish something significant in a 2 hour window. But that doesn't mean everything in the game will follow that rule. If there is to be progressively greater rewards, there has to be progressively greater risk.
I found that was not the case with EQ1. Most of the risk was low level. Sometimes chaining a few bad groups in a row would end up losing a whole level. Higher levels the risk just dropped. Exp reses, corpse summons and summon player. By the time you get these tools most people knew how to play their role in a team. So chaining bad teams just didnt happen. My fear is like EQ1, the risk will all be at lower levels and it will drive off new blood.
IMO, I think tools like exp res, corpse summons and summon player should be at lower levels. Maybe by level 10. This gives players more reasons to not only seek out classes that have these tools but also gets people playing them from the start because it will get them teams. This would add to higher levels having a better balance of classes from the get go.
I agree. Except in some extreme scenarios, things did tend to get too easy at the higher levels. Especially once you knew how to plan ahead, bind nearby, or have an additional cleric account camped in case of emergency. The exceptions were mostly in extremely dangerous raid areas.
Even with some of the excessive conveniences I think EQ introduced, there were still some innate issues that were introduced at higher levels. The content was usually in more dangerous areas, and were further off the beaten path. That alone meant it was harder, because melee could not bind nearby and in the even of a full wipe, you all had to run back a greater distance. In some cases you even had to use corpse summoning (plat sink) or have someone feign pull or sneak pull your corpses.
In the end though, the ability to completely mitigate the experience loss did tend to make death more punishing at low levels, even if it was usually easier to retrieve your corpse.
In a game based on risk versus reward, the risk factor is primarily time. The higher level you get and the more rewarding the content, the higher the risk must be. That means dying at level 5 and having to run back from the nearest city or outpost may only take a few minutes, but at level 50 in raid content, it has to take longer if the content is to be rewarding.
Pantheon will be a group focused game and they intend for you to be able to accomplish something significant in a 2 hour window. But that doesn't mean everything in the game will follow that rule. If there is to be progressively greater rewards, there has to be progressively greater risk.
I found that was not the case with EQ1. Most of the risk was low level. Sometimes chaining a few bad groups in a row would end up losing a whole level. Higher levels the risk just dropped. Exp reses, corpse summons and summon player. By the time you get these tools most people knew how to play their role in a team. So chaining bad teams just didnt happen. My fear is like EQ1, the risk will all be at lower levels and it will drive off new blood.
IMO, I think tools like exp res, corpse summons and summon player should be at lower levels. Maybe by level 10. This gives players more reasons to not only seek out classes that have these tools but also gets people playing them from the start because it will get them teams. This would add to higher levels having a better balance of classes from the get go.
I agree. Except in some extreme scenarios, things did tend to get too easy at the higher levels. Especially once you knew how to plan ahead, bind nearby, or have an additional cleric account camped in case of emergency. The exceptions were mostly in extremely dangerous raid areas.
Even with some of the excessive conveniences I think EQ introduced, there were still some innate issues that were introduced at higher levels. The content was usually in more dangerous areas, and were further off the beaten path. That alone meant it was harder, because melee could not bind nearby and in the even of a full wipe, you all had to run back a greater distance. In some cases you even had to use corpse summoning (plat sink) or have someone feign pull or sneak pull your corpses.
In the end though, the ability to completely mitigate the experience loss did tend to make death more punishing at low levels, even if it was usually easier to retrieve your corpse.
Its called Progression you guys! This is how MMO's are meant to be. As you progress forward you gain more knowledge and experience. This knowledge and experience makes life in-game much easier. That's why at higher levels you don't feel the sting as much as someone might at a lower level. But even the most prepared high level group will feel the hard sting at times. Which servers as a reminder of where we came from and how far we have come.
Its not just about making life easier. Back in the day with MMOs like EQ1, you started with 1 or 2 DPS skills and sometimes a buff or minor heal. Nothing that made teaming with someone worth doing so. By level 10 people would start grouping to kill static spawns and camps. The balance needed for teaming was not very strict. Skill level for level 1 was kill 10 rats. We as gamers have evolved beyond that. So have our games.
Watching the content for level 8-10 for Pantheon is way more in depth then anything EQ1 had at that level. They are risking much more. So the skills should be there to deal with the complex grouping needed. Also, we started out with a few skills to teach people how to play at a slow rate. Most MMOs start people with 5+ skills. Even EQ1 now, currently, has you starting with many skills. Skills you didnt used to get till higher levels. I want a "MODERN" remake of EQ1, not going back to kill 10 rats with a rusty knife.
Comments
EQ1 had mobs that would try to run at a certain % of health, or linked pulls, or went into desperate attack mode (flurries, anyone?). How is that not a 'Disposition'? I've seen that before, and am not mislead by throwing a thesaurus at it and trying to call it a new system. Yes, it does have the possibility of keeping combat interesting, but it isn't a new concept. If it turns out the the mob with the blue hat will run at 50%, you can bet the community will know that after about 3 fights.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
It feels like you hope to get what you want by using the "squeaky wheels gets the grease" mentality, and that approach is just not going to bear weight with the dev team. It's one thing to have some doubt, but it's totally another issue when you've built an entire hobby of forum posting around it.
One of the less talked about problems with a strong death penalty is that when players die and are heavily penalized for it, they tend to blame other players. The priest sucks. The warrior sucks.
Rather than making the game more social in any positive way, a major penalty can make people hate each other.
I get that part of being a member of a player community is upping your game so that you are less likely to be the recipient of such blame.
And I get that your player reputation should matter.
Still, I am interested to see how more modern gamers, who kick people from their groups and raids upon the slightest provocation, will handle the penalties whose cause they attribute to others.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
If VR only wants to hear positive comments, then don't make their streams public. Showing an incomplete product is indeed building an impression, and I'm willing to point out that the product is incomplete, and contains no evidence of the rich feature set that the web site has promised.
Please note, that no one has offered evidence to counter my claims that there wasn't evidence of any of the new features, and that the videos demonstrated nothing beyond the basic game play of 1999 EQ1. Instead, people want to disagree with my opinion and shout me down. Why not provide some evidence (video and time reference) that you believe supports the idea that Pantheon is so radically different from what came before? It is entirely possible that I missed something.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
you are basically telling me you don't believe what they say will be the finished product so all that you have seen in early pre-alpha is absolutely all there will be in at launch.
that is flawed logic to put it nicely and i don't care what game we are talking about. again, dark and light has only shown walking around in a city, does that mean the game will have no combat? since you don't believe what you are told and only what you have seen?
LOL this is actually amusing to me, carry on!
i would love for you to explain to me with sound logic why you think this game will only have features from EQ1 and vanguard at launch. not just that you don't believe what the dev's say until you see it for yourself, sorry....that isn't going to cut it.
if there is an actual reason why you think there will be only EQ1 and vanguard features in the game i am all ears.
also, go ahead and criticize what you have seen, nothing wrong with that. making baseless assumptions and playing it off as fact is the only thing i take issue with
Brad has been a major player in 2 MMORPGs, and is a primary factor in Pantheon's development. Both EQ and Vanguard were very, very close in concept and in execution. I strongly suspect that Pantheon will follow the previous two efforts, essentially building a base line of EQ / Vanguard. If fact, it might be highly illogical to expect the third try from the same source to be substantially different from previous efforts.
The goals and objectives expressed on the Pantheon web site are in addition to that base line. I actually like a couple of the ideas, while I think that others aren't worthy of being considered a 'point of product differentiation' that Pantheon itself is advertising. ("The Pantheon Difference").
@Dullahan stated in this thread (page 3) that they have shown "proof of concept" in the streams. I contend that none of these additional features linked from the Pantheon web site have been present in any of the streams, even in a rudimentary form. At this point, Pantheon appears to me to be to be nothing more than "EQ with modern graphics". While the developers may be planning in all good faith to adding these additional features, these features do not appear to be there yet.
Many people in this community will accept "EQ with modern graphics". That is not what Pantheon has promised. That's only the base line of what Pantheon has promised, and from my point of view, all they have achieved to date. That's an observation that contributes to my opinion that what Pantheon ends up being may not be what was promised. If you choose to interpret that as a fact, I would contend that is a fallacy on your end.
Since what I am seeing at the moment is "EQ with modern graphics", I do not question that Pantheon might release in it's current form. There are myriad reasons why the project may be scaled back -- finances, pressure to deliver a product, technical difficulties, or even changes to the initial concepts. I am questioning if this isn't another case where a developer promised more than they can deliver to a customer base who is over-eager to accept anything said at face value without questioning it. That is a long standing formula for upset customers -- delivering something the customer didn't expect. I'll continue waving a red flag if I think there's even the slightest chance that even one customer doesn't come away disappointed.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
so why assume that BM and VR won't add anything new based on BM's track record?
speaking of track record, i will say this. the way both EQ and vanguard launched, it would be fair to say you have your doubts that this game's launch will go much better.
i have my doubts too, trust me. but maybe wait to see what they actually do plan to launch with rather than speculate because you haven't seen it yet and pretend that's what the finished product will be?
anyways i'm done here, maybe in a year or two we can see where this game is at and have a discussion based on more facts rather than speculation.
take care!
Since VR isn't bothering to attempt to manage customer's expectations (at least on this forum), dissenting opinions will have to do. Attempting to shout down any voice that isn't in 100% agreement isn't advancing the discussion. If there is any purpose in debating a topic, all opinions need to be accommodated.
I will be happy to try Pantheon. I would be even happier to see evidence of the 'points of difference' that Pantheon has promised.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
1) When the person that died makes it to the gravestone they then pay with experience or gold to come back alive, which also leaves the group to take a break in RL for bio or get a drink or something.
2) BUT with that being said, if the group does not want to wait they could Pay the Ferryman (each member has to pay something, again gold or exp) to carry ghost of the dead person back his grave to get the dungeon crawl back on track quickly.
I'll just wait for more information to come out or more of the game to be revealed before I praise or scoff for the time being.
I think adding a system just because thats how EQ1 did it, without looking at ways it can be modernized is a foolish move. Can it be done better should always be asked.
It has to hurt. Obviously if you remove what hurts, you remove the reason for fear. Since mmos are all about investing/wasting time, what hurts will be something that takes time away from you one way or another.
Pantheon will be a group focused game and they intend for you to be able to accomplish something significant in a 2 hour window. But that doesn't mean everything in the game will follow that rule. If there is to be progressively greater rewards, there has to be progressively greater risk.
IMO, I think tools like exp res, corpse summons and summon player should be at lower levels. Maybe by level 10. This gives players more reasons to not only seek out classes that have these tools but also gets people playing them from the start because it will get them teams. This would add to higher levels having a better balance of classes from the get go.
Even with some of the excessive conveniences I think EQ introduced, there were still some innate issues that were introduced at higher levels. The content was usually in more dangerous areas, and were further off the beaten path. That alone meant it was harder, because melee could not bind nearby and in the even of a full wipe, you all had to run back a greater distance. In some cases you even had to use corpse summoning (plat sink) or have someone feign pull or sneak pull your corpses.
In the end though, the ability to completely mitigate the experience loss did tend to make death more punishing at low levels, even if it was usually easier to retrieve your corpse.
Watching the content for level 8-10 for Pantheon is way more in depth then anything EQ1 had at that level. They are risking much more. So the skills should be there to deal with the complex grouping needed. Also, we started out with a few skills to teach people how to play at a slow rate. Most MMOs start people with 5+ skills. Even EQ1 now, currently, has you starting with many skills. Skills you didnt used to get till higher levels. I want a "MODERN" remake of EQ1, not going back to kill 10 rats with a rusty knife.