Still on the fence with this one. Can an almost solely group orented game with a sub work?
I remain skeptical.
Honestly it remains to be seen. It's easy to look at this topic black and white, but there are many lurking variables to consider. All of the unique innovations Pantheon is implementing will make this game so much more enjoyable that it may not even matter. Apart from Everquest (group game) still being alive and people paying subs almost 15 years later, let's instead use WoW for argument's sake. If they patched WoW overnight, scaled mobs etc, requiring everyone to group to quest, it really wouldn't be an issue would it. So long as the game is "good" enough to have healthy server populations, there are enough people online with enough class diversity that you're going to find a group. At Everquest's worst (right when we all switched to WoW), it was hard to find a group but as long as you were guilded you were going to have a group to play with. The last thing I'd add is there is a ton of horizontal progression requiring solo work, so there will always be something to do if you can't find a group.
Still on the fence with this one. Can an almost solely group orented game with a sub work?
I remain skeptical.
Its not "almost solely" group oriented. Groups will be more efficient, but you can solo. So while it is group oriented, it is not "almost solely" group oriented.
I hope the last statement is true but still done right.It is really tough to pull off a solo able game while maintaining a group oriented game. Only ONE game has ever done it,the NON skilled or lazy devs usually just stick the group content in instances and designed to be different than the rest of the game. So will be interesting to see if this team can pull it off or end up like EQ2.
There is only one way to pull it off,you need 1-2 class types that can solo,most likely a pet type class,however using bonuses for timed and chain killing which is where a group would be more efficient because of the many buffs and debuffs.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The combat video didn't impress me at all, but it's alpha so we'll see. The enviroments still look great. They have an oldschool, but not crude, look to them.
It's not even pre-alpha but that is around the corner, so the Devs say. I'm looking forward to how much they improve the animations. I think that's where they need the most work. Being an indy game I'm not sure how much to expect?
When I say "I'm not sure how much to expect?" I'm not being a smart ass, I really don't know. I have grown used to playing games like WoW where animation department just had what they needed. Pantheon has a small budget and are making a smaller game. I can live with what they have shown us now. Why? Because of everything around it. The combat as a team looks spot on. I do wonder how much more they will push animation or will they save that till the end when they know how much is left to play with? Indy gaming really is a different beast.
IMO tab targeting is naturally behind action combat as a standard but there is plenty of ways of making tab engaging (as some have said here, immersive). The two most important to me would be how hard the content is. If I don't interrupt this mob's spellcast will I probably die? This can make it more engaging
The other is subsystems like reactive abilities, stance change abilities, chain abilities, etc. In games such as Aion these systems have worked really well at spicing up tab target combat. You still get into a "groove" so it's not the be all, end all however if each fight has the chance to be even a little different than the 30 before it, that's improvement.
You can list all the reasons why it's okay that it looks bad, but it still looks bad. Alpha (or whatever milestone designation you want to use) doesn't mean it's okay that your showcase looks like shit.
When we preview alpha components in house or with our customers we focus on making that one piece look good. If it's not fully functional we have a good looking mock or prototype that simulates the experience as envisioned. It's a step up from a walking skeleton. Maybe showcasing combat at this point is not the best idea. Show off the class another way.
I get that it's early dev. I know what that means in a practical sense. I'm not forming an opinion about how I think combat will turn out based on that. I'm simply stating that it did not impress me at all. It's not impressive.
The environments are impressive though. The team has a great artistic vision for environmental and thematic setting.
Looks like shit to you. Looks just fine to me. Graphically, it looks good and are only getting better. Mechanically, what I see looks like the foundation of the first MMO that's come along in a decade that I'd actually play for years.
You can lol all you want at my comment, but you know that pure p2p model over long period of time *without any cash shop* is unsustainable in todays market.
There isnt a single mmorpg that has been able to pull of a pure p2p model without cash shop in the last 7 years. None.
Even super popular games like WoW and FFXIV and ESO had to add a cash shop to supplement profits.
Can Pantheon launch and stay pure p2p for a while? Absolutely.
Can they sustain this for years - no, they will have to introduce a cash shop at some point to stay in business, unless they choose to shut the game down instead.
Maybe, but you are comparing what has been a crap storm of twitched based MMO, most with no depth. Most of them dont have enough content to last 2 months. Messy patches to add content and raise levels to give people things to do till the planed content hits the game.
Pantheon on the other hand is designed to start playing the game from about level 8-10. Teamed content with slower paced leveling. Means from the get go, 6-12 months of content from launch. Also the target market is fans of EQ1, DAoC and Vanguard who have not had a MMO home in a long time. Most of them like the B2P sub model. From what I read they only need about 25'000 active subs to make this work. This is not outside possibility.
You can lol all you want at my comment, but you know that pure p2p model over long period of time *without any cash shop* is unsustainable in todays market.
There isnt a single mmorpg that has been able to pull of a pure p2p model without cash shop in the last 7 years. None.
Even super popular games like WoW and FFXIV and ESO had to add a cash shop to supplement profits.
Can Pantheon launch and stay pure p2p for a while? Absolutely.
Can they sustain this for years - no, they will have to introduce a cash shop at some point to stay in business, unless they choose to shut the game down instead.
No, I don't at all know that and have thoroughly refuted that claim on a number of occasions.
P2P will work perfectly if the game is rewarding, can provide long term goals and a sense of community. None of those things currently exist in most games in the manner they did in Everquest, and it ran perfectly with p2p for over a decade.
Free to play has an adverse effect on games like Pantheon, because to really work, they must replace progression via time devotion and content with RL money. It does not mesh, would kill the sense of accomplishment and exclusivity that kept EQ popular for so long.
Can Pantheon survive with 25,000 subscribers? Maybe. A lot is going to depend on things which I don't know, and a lot of things that no one can know at this time.
How much is VR going to allocate to payroll and benefits? They already have a team of 30 people, and if they have an average salary of $60,000 per year (my number), that comes to $150,000 per month without factoring in taxes or benefit costs. (Benefit costs can run from 0% to 140% the salary cost, with most "nice to work for" companies in the 40% to 60% range). This will probably be VR's biggest cost item, as it is with most other businesses.
Bandwidth costs can vary greatly, and surprisingly, the current costs aren't readily available on the internet. (I spent entirely too long trying to find realistic numbers on Thursday, and most of the numbers appear to come from a single document in 2007. But everywhere you can find people saying "bandwidth is cheaper now". I'm not willing to be put on a sales list when I only want ballpark information). The amount of bandwidth is going to be dependent on how Pantheon is implemented, and what kind of features will be offered. It will all depend on how much data is sent to and from the servers to each user, and how frequently that will happen.
Additionally, VR may have conventional business expenses -- office space, utilities, business costs, etc -- of unknown quantities. I have no idea how, or even if, they have plans for a workplace / office.
With the traditional rate of $15 / month, it is easy to see that 25,000 people can generate $375,000 per month of income. But it is equally easy to see scenarios where the costs exceed the monthly income.
In the long run, VR will probably find it necessary to up one of the numbers -- 25,000 minimum subscribers or the $15 / month subscription fee. Beyond that, opening another revenue stream (cash shop) might simply be the only option to remain in business.
I'm not as certain as @DMKano about an inevitable cash shop. My guess is that VR will push the $15 sub to the $25 or $30 range first, and maybe even further, just to hold to their "No Cash Shop" policy.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Huge fan of guess math (^_-) why should I trust your math and guesses over the people at Pantheon who have been in the business at least a little longer then you?
25k is well below what Pantheon will attract. We're talking about a game that easily won the most anticipated game by a landslide, and one that is based on other games beloved by millions in a time when no similar game exists.
25k is well below what Pantheon will attract. We're talking about a game that easily won the most anticipated game by a landslide, and one that is based on other games beloved by millions in a time when no similar game exists.
mmorpg.com staff should really hand out an player choice award for this. Im a little upset they didnt. Its one of a few reasons I pledged. Can't wait to start raining down fire in this game. My Wizard will bring nations down on there knees.
25k is well below what Pantheon will attract. We're talking about a game that easily won the most anticipated game by a landslide, and one that is based on other games beloved by millions in a time when no similar game exists.
mmorpg.com staff should really hand out an player choice award for this. Im a little upset they didnt. Its one of a few reasons I pledged. Can't wait to start raining down fire in this game. My Wizard will bring nations down on there knees.
How many of those games will fully release in 2017? Yeah a players choice award for any of those makes about as much sense as the best in show EQN got. You people are comedic gold.
The people were asked and they spoke. This is not the same as EQN being picked by the staff as Best in Show. By the way. Does it make you feel important when you laugh at my expense?
Huge fan of guess math (^_-) why should I trust your math and guesses over the people at Pantheon who have been in the business at least a little longer then you?
You don't have to trust my math. The point is (and always has been) that there are several ways of interpreting the information that Pantheon is providing, not just the 'corporate' view. Do you really want to support a company that is stingy to it's employees, keeping salaries and benefits down, just to meet some marketing promise? I had pegged you as a bit more altruistic than that.
It's a legitimate question -- can Visionary Realms really survive with only 25,000 subscribers?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Huge fan of guess math (^_-) why should I trust your math and guesses over the people at Pantheon who have been in the business at least a little longer then you?
You don't have to trust my math. The point is (and always has been) that there are several ways of interpreting the information that Pantheon is providing, not just the 'corporate' view. Do you really want to support a company that is stingy to it's employees, keeping salaries and benefits down, just to meet some marketing promise? I had pegged you as a bit more altruistic than that.
It's a legitimate question -- can Visionary Realms really survive with only 25,000 subscribers?
Wasn't going to but if you insist. In your math you miss the small point that you need way more staff to make an MMO then to keep it running. That's why most MMO launch and then lay off a large number of staff. My point is your guess work is given from little experience and I could pick it apart further. I'm sure VR CFO has a plan born from education and experience. If they say they can function with 25'000 subs who are you to question it? What is the point of questioning it?
Also as pointed out above there is a good chance they won't be running at the bare minimum. Fans of EQ1 and Vanguard have been begging SoE for a modern MMO just like Pantheon and has fallen on defeat ears for 10 years. EQ2 does not count as it's play style is no where near the same. Look at the following and hype EQN got on their announcement of the project. How the hype died when they saw it was not a successor of EQ1. Pantheon fills a long wanted hole. If they pull it off it could be a thing of beauty.
No games have been designed for longterm gameplay in recent time. So does p2p not work, or does p2p only not work when people run out of stuff meaningful to do? The question is why are people quitting mmos at a rate 20xs faster then in the past? Why are people moving from mmo to mmo so fast?
With Pantheon targeting the market that is almost untouched right now, what are people going to leave to? It is not like if a shiny new WoW style themepark AAA game gets launched it will be pulling alot all of Pantheon's subs away, probably will not even dent it. Now if Pantheon was using WoW for its model... then yes I would agree that p2p is probably a horrific idea.
As for saying p2p cannot work, I 100% disagree. The reasons why p2p keeps failing is the games have been either A) copied, B ) Released way too early, C) Been utter crap. The lessons learned should be if you copy wow... the game will probably fail. Mainly because the market for that style mmo is flooded and the fact WoW still exist.
IF FFXIV has say 350k active subs, going to use the low estimate most ppl use (after patches and expansions it is much higher). That is 62.5Million a year. Now the game fluctuates between that and 700k subs so lets use 500k for the people who purchase the expansion every other year basically. so ~20million. So the game makes 145million every 2yrs. How can that not sustain itself?
So ffxiv and wow atm easily can survive on p2p if they throw out the cash shop. They would just make alot less money. So yea it is not question of will it work, it is a question does the publishers and devs want to make less money. Cash shops are designed to make money fast with less effort from the devs. What is easier design a whole quest line with dungeons,bosses, and npcs and such for a mount. Or just design the mount and sell it $4.99... or in the case these days $24.99. One add content but is extremely costly and time consuming and probably will keep people happy for a few days to a week. One takes 1-2 people to make a mount and brings in $250k at probably 1/20th the cost. For the game option A is much better, for making money option B is better... and developers and publishers lately only care about the ever powerful dollar.
The reason cash shops caught on is because people are making throwaway games. Hell I jump from mmo to mmo as of late not because I want to play different games, or the market is booming. But because the ones being created are designed to be played for 10hrs a week max with a few month of content instead of the 40+ hr of weekly gamplay where you never run out of content before a new expansion like they use to. Hell I wouldn't pay for months with no new content to play either... and strongly support p2p.
In short if pantheon is a solid game with tons of content and does not release like vangaurd did. P2P probably will work. Will they make the money of a cashshop, not even close. But can it sustain the game, pay the salary, and make money... yes easily. Especially with the lower budget the game has.
As for people always leaving yes that is true, all games decline in population over time. But people only leave mmos for one of 3 reasons.
1) Something better launches or is already in the market that targets the same people <= why most WoW clones failed. Some were good game but WoW did WoW better.
2) You run out of content and people get bored <= the reason why most non WoW clones fail. Game is thriving then people hit endgame and realize hey I have 1 raid and dailies to run. Then they quit a few weeks/months later. (GoGo linear casual game design......)
3) Real Life Issues (Job/School/Marriage/Kids/Life Changes ect)
3 is unavoidable. 1-2 well that is the devs issues to figure out. If the game is really good and has enough content to keep everyone happy and only cost $0.15-$0.18 an hour to be on an even playing field, why would people leave it?
The reason people quit MMORPGs and jump from one game to another is because they can. Once upon a time the landscape was so barren you simply stayed in one game and never even thought to look at other games. These days developers don't have that luxury of loyalty because many people play more than one game and a subscription is a deterrent when they can stop subscribing and come back a few months later. So when they stop subscribing to check out another game there will be a loss that will not be made up by new players.
You can lol all you want at my comment, but you know that pure p2p model over long period of time *without any cash shop* is unsustainable in todays market.
There isnt a single mmorpg that has been able to pull of a pure p2p model without cash shop in the last 7 years. None.
Even super popular games like WoW and FFXIV and ESO had to add a cash shop to supplement profits.
Can Pantheon launch and stay pure p2p for a while? Absolutely.
Can they sustain this for years - no, they will have to introduce a cash shop at some point to stay in business, unless they choose to shut the game down instead.
No, I don't at all know that and have thoroughly refuted that claim on a number of occasions.
P2P will work perfectly if the game is rewarding, can provide long term goals and a sense of community. None of those things currently exist in most games in the manner they did in Everquest, and it ran perfectly with p2p for over a decade.
Free to play has an adverse effect on games like Pantheon, because to really work, they must replace progression via time devotion and content with RL money. It does not mesh, would kill the sense of accomplishment and exclusivity that kept EQ popular for so long.
It is litterally impossible to make pure P2P work longterm.
Over time players leave - due to a many reasons, from not having enough time, to boredom, a new game release, friends leaving etc...
Over time the numbers decline and the new players coming in are so few (especially after several years) - you end up with negative profits.
There is no recovery.
On top of all this look at the overwhelming plethora of new games coming out, the market is saturated.
Not EvE, not WoW, not ANY game today can survive long term on pure subscription.
Pantheon cant either, at some point - most likely 6months to year they will need to supplement p2p with something to keep it profitable.
so you are saying people don't take breaks and come back to mmo's? that's all i do and i have been doing that for a long time. i don't know how many times i have "quit" playing an MMO only to re-sub a few months or perhaps a year or two later.
not only that but i would argue that a group centric game that has more of a heavy emphasis on community can hold their player base much better than mmo's that are more single player focused.
for me, it's been the community and the friends i have made in mmo's that have kept me around. even though you are not wrong about the market being saturated, that doesn't stop me and others from subbing/ re-subbing to games when i/we decide to play.
25k is well below what Pantheon will attract. We're talking about a game that easily won the most anticipated game by a landslide, and one that is based on other games beloved by millions in a time when no similar game exists.
mmorpg.com staff should really hand out an player choice award for this. Im a little upset they didnt. Its one of a few reasons I pledged. Can't wait to start raining down fire in this game. My Wizard will bring nations down on there knees.
Pantheon isn't going to release in 2017. Come on. Get a clue.
How long do playable betas generally last? Around 6 months? It's almost May. They haven't even started alpha yet.
I'll put my money on 2018 and I might be willing to plop a few dollars on 2019 as well.
No, just amused that you people think you're above it all and deserve some special recognition. The people didn't speak shit. Don't think that poll or any of them here mean anything.
By the way, that was the player's choice awards. So it's already been stated. Did you need a second special award to go with that?
you seem to have an axe to grind with people that want to play this game. this is one of the more anticipated games due to the fact there is jack shit being developed right now in terms of MMO's.
No, just amused that you people think you're above it all and deserve some special recognition. The people didn't speak shit. Don't think that poll or any of them here mean anything.
By the way, that was the player's choice awards. So it's already been stated. Did you need a second special award to go with that?
you seem to have an axe to grind with people that want to play this game. this is one of the more anticipated games due to the fact there is jack shit being developed right now in terms of MMO's.
I don't have an issue with people who want to play the game, just a few people who think they own the game or any conversation or opinion about it and pretend like this game and those people deserve some special reach around.
No, you been getting more and more negative with your posts in just about every corner of the forums. You attack mostly in the Pantheon forums. I don't know what's gotten you over the past few months but your not the same guy who garnered great respect here. I used to enjoy reading your feedback and miss the guy you used to be. I hope to see him again.
Huge fan of guess math (^_-) why should I trust your math and guesses over the people at Pantheon who have been in the business at least a little longer then you?
You don't have to trust my math. The point is (and always has been) that there are several ways of interpreting the information that Pantheon is providing, not just the 'corporate' view. Do you really want to support a company that is stingy to it's employees, keeping salaries and benefits down, just to meet some marketing promise? I had pegged you as a bit more altruistic than that.
It's a legitimate question -- can Visionary Realms really survive with only 25,000 subscribers?
Wasn't going to but if you insist. In your math you miss the small point that you need way more staff to make an MMO then to keep it running. That's why most MMO launch and then lay off a large number of staff. My point is your guess work is given from little experience and I could pick it apart further. I'm sure VR CFO has a plan born from education and experience. If they say they can function with 25'000 subs who are you to question it? What is the point of questioning it?
Also as pointed out above there is a good chance they won't be running at the bare minimum. Fans of EQ1 and Vanguard have been begging SoE for a modern MMO just like Pantheon and has fallen on defeat ears for 10 years. EQ2 does not count as it's play style is no where near the same. Look at the following and hype EQN got on their announcement of the project. How the hype died when they saw it was not a successor of EQ1. Pantheon fills a long wanted hole. If they pull it off it could be a thing of beauty.
First point. Yes, MMORPGs can operate with smaller staffs. Where are the 30 currently on the team going to go when the project is launched? I can tell you. They will begin working to develop an expansion pack. Why? Subscriptions rely on new content. Since those 30 people are going to be occupied with new development duties, VR is likely to need to hire additional staff for operational support. You think that VR's staff size is going to shrink because they go live? I don't.
Second point. Your projection is based purely on anecdotal evidence. I've asked many times where these hoards of people are that are going to step forward and give VR money. I can't identify them, and no one has bothered to attempt an answer. Yet, you continue to believe and use this unidentified group of people as 'proof' that Pantheon will be a great success. Field of Dreams might be a great, entertaining movie, but it's not a model for a sound business plan.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Man that game looks like garbage lol, they actually showed that, I would be ashamed to show that to people. It makes everquest 1 animations look good. If your goal was to get people not to want to play it, well you got me not to want to play it.
Comments
Honestly it remains to be seen. It's easy to look at this topic black and white, but there are many lurking variables to consider. All of the unique innovations Pantheon is implementing will make this game so much more enjoyable that it may not even matter. Apart from Everquest (group game) still being alive and people paying subs almost 15 years later, let's instead use WoW for argument's sake. If they patched WoW overnight, scaled mobs etc, requiring everyone to group to quest, it really wouldn't be an issue would it. So long as the game is "good" enough to have healthy server populations, there are enough people online with enough class diversity that you're going to find a group. At Everquest's worst (right when we all switched to WoW), it was hard to find a group but as long as you were guilded you were going to have a group to play with. The last thing I'd add is there is a ton of horizontal progression requiring solo work, so there will always be something to do if you can't find a group.
Its not "almost solely" group oriented. Groups will be more efficient, but you can solo. So while it is group oriented, it is not "almost solely" group oriented.
Only ONE game has ever done it,the NON skilled or lazy devs usually just stick the group content in instances and designed to be different than the rest of the game.
So will be interesting to see if this team can pull it off or end up like EQ2.
There is only one way to pull it off,you need 1-2 class types that can solo,most likely a pet type class,however using bonuses for timed and chain killing which is where a group would be more efficient because of the many buffs and debuffs.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It's not even pre-alpha but that is around the corner, so the Devs say. I'm looking forward to how much they improve the animations. I think that's where they need the most work. Being an indy game I'm not sure how much to expect?
The other is subsystems like reactive abilities, stance change abilities, chain abilities, etc. In games such as Aion these systems have worked really well at spicing up tab target combat. You still get into a "groove" so it's not the be all, end all however if each fight has the chance to be even a little different than the 30 before it, that's improvement.
Maybe, but you are comparing what has been a crap storm of twitched based MMO, most with no depth. Most of them dont have enough content to last 2 months. Messy patches to add content and raise levels to give people things to do till the planed content hits the game.
Pantheon on the other hand is designed to start playing the game from about level 8-10. Teamed content with slower paced leveling. Means from the get go, 6-12 months of content from launch. Also the target market is fans of EQ1, DAoC and Vanguard who have not had a MMO home in a long time. Most of them like the B2P sub model. From what I read they only need about 25'000 active subs to make this work. This is not outside possibility.
No, I don't at all know that and have thoroughly refuted that claim on a number of occasions.
P2P will work perfectly if the game is rewarding, can provide long term goals and a sense of community. None of those things currently exist in most games in the manner they did in Everquest, and it ran perfectly with p2p for over a decade.
Free to play has an adverse effect on games like Pantheon, because to really work, they must replace progression via time devotion and content with RL money. It does not mesh, would kill the sense of accomplishment and exclusivity that kept EQ popular for so long.
How much is VR going to allocate to payroll and benefits? They already have a team of 30 people, and if they have an average salary of $60,000 per year (my number), that comes to $150,000 per month without factoring in taxes or benefit costs. (Benefit costs can run from 0% to 140% the salary cost, with most "nice to work for" companies in the 40% to 60% range). This will probably be VR's biggest cost item, as it is with most other businesses.
Bandwidth costs can vary greatly, and surprisingly, the current costs aren't readily available on the internet. (I spent entirely too long trying to find realistic numbers on Thursday, and most of the numbers appear to come from a single document in 2007. But everywhere you can find people saying "bandwidth is cheaper now". I'm not willing to be put on a sales list when I only want ballpark information). The amount of bandwidth is going to be dependent on how Pantheon is implemented, and what kind of features will be offered. It will all depend on how much data is sent to and from the servers to each user, and how frequently that will happen.
Additionally, VR may have conventional business expenses -- office space, utilities, business costs, etc -- of unknown quantities. I have no idea how, or even if, they have plans for a workplace / office.
With the traditional rate of $15 / month, it is easy to see that 25,000 people can generate $375,000 per month of income. But it is equally easy to see scenarios where the costs exceed the monthly income.
In the long run, VR will probably find it necessary to up one of the numbers -- 25,000 minimum subscribers or the $15 / month subscription fee. Beyond that, opening another revenue stream (cash shop) might simply be the only option to remain in business.
I'm not as certain as @DMKano about an inevitable cash shop. My guess is that VR will push the $15 sub to the $25 or $30 range first, and maybe even further, just to hold to their "No Cash Shop" policy.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The people were asked and they spoke. This is not the same as EQN being picked by the staff as Best in Show. By the way. Does it make you feel important when you laugh at my expense?
You don't have to trust my math. The point is (and always has been) that there are several ways of interpreting the information that Pantheon is providing, not just the 'corporate' view. Do you really want to support a company that is stingy to it's employees, keeping salaries and benefits down, just to meet some marketing promise? I had pegged you as a bit more altruistic than that.
It's a legitimate question -- can Visionary Realms really survive with only 25,000 subscribers?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Wasn't going to but if you insist. In your math you miss the small point that you need way more staff to make an MMO then to keep it running. That's why most MMO launch and then lay off a large number of staff. My point is your guess work is given from little experience and I could pick it apart further. I'm sure VR CFO has a plan born from education and experience. If they say they can function with 25'000 subs who are you to question it? What is the point of questioning it?
Also as pointed out above there is a good chance they won't be running at the bare minimum. Fans of EQ1 and Vanguard have been begging SoE for a modern MMO just like Pantheon and has fallen on defeat ears for 10 years. EQ2 does not count as it's play style is no where near the same. Look at the following and hype EQN got on their announcement of the project. How the hype died when they saw it was not a successor of EQ1. Pantheon fills a long wanted hole. If they pull it off it could be a thing of beauty.
With Pantheon targeting the market that is almost untouched right now, what are people going to leave to? It is not like if a shiny new WoW style themepark AAA game gets launched it will be pulling alot all of Pantheon's subs away, probably will not even dent it. Now if Pantheon was using WoW for its model... then yes I would agree that p2p is probably a horrific idea.
As for saying p2p cannot work, I 100% disagree. The reasons why p2p keeps failing is the games have been either A) copied, B ) Released way too early, C) Been utter crap. The lessons learned should be if you copy wow... the game will probably fail. Mainly because the market for that style mmo is flooded and the fact WoW still exist.
IF FFXIV has say 350k active subs, going to use the low estimate most ppl use (after patches and expansions it is much higher). That is 62.5Million a year. Now the game fluctuates between that and 700k subs so lets use 500k for the people who purchase the expansion every other year basically. so ~20million. So the game makes 145million every 2yrs. How can that not sustain itself?
So ffxiv and wow atm easily can survive on p2p if they throw out the cash shop. They would just make alot less money. So yea it is not question of will it work, it is a question does the publishers and devs want to make less money. Cash shops are designed to make money fast with less effort from the devs. What is easier design a whole quest line with dungeons,bosses, and npcs and such for a mount. Or just design the mount and sell it $4.99... or in the case these days $24.99. One add content but is extremely costly and time consuming and probably will keep people happy for a few days to a week. One takes 1-2 people to make a mount and brings in $250k at probably 1/20th the cost. For the game option A is much better, for making money option B is better... and developers and publishers lately only care about the ever powerful dollar.
The reason cash shops caught on is because people are making throwaway games. Hell I jump from mmo to mmo as of late not because I want to play different games, or the market is booming. But because the ones being created are designed to be played for 10hrs a week max with a few month of content instead of the 40+ hr of weekly gamplay where you never run out of content before a new expansion like they use to. Hell I wouldn't pay for months with no new content to play either... and strongly support p2p.
In short if pantheon is a solid game with tons of content and does not release like vangaurd did. P2P probably will work. Will they make the money of a cashshop, not even close. But can it sustain the game, pay the salary, and make money... yes easily. Especially with the lower budget the game has.
As for people always leaving yes that is true, all games decline in population over time. But people only leave mmos for one of 3 reasons.
1) Something better launches or is already in the market that targets the same people <= why most WoW clones failed. Some were good game but WoW did WoW better.
2) You run out of content and people get bored <= the reason why most non WoW clones fail. Game is thriving then people hit endgame and realize hey I have 1 raid and dailies to run. Then they quit a few weeks/months later. (GoGo linear casual game design......)
3) Real Life Issues (Job/School/Marriage/Kids/Life Changes ect)
3 is unavoidable. 1-2 well that is the devs issues to figure out. If the game is really good and has enough content to keep everyone happy and only cost $0.15-$0.18 an hour to be on an even playing field, why would people leave it?
so you are saying people don't take breaks and come back to mmo's? that's all i do and i have been doing that for a long time. i don't know how many times i have "quit" playing an MMO only to re-sub a few months or perhaps a year or two later.
not only that but i would argue that a group centric game that has more of a heavy emphasis on community can hold their player base much better than mmo's that are more single player focused.
for me, it's been the community and the friends i have made in mmo's that have kept me around. even though you are not wrong about the market being saturated, that doesn't stop me and others from subbing/ re-subbing to games when i/we decide to play.
Pantheon isn't going to release in 2017. Come on. Get a clue.
How long do playable betas generally last? Around 6 months? It's almost May. They haven't even started alpha yet.
I'll put my money on 2018 and I might be willing to plop a few dollars on 2019 as well.
~~ postlarval ~~
you seem to have an axe to grind with people that want to play this game. this is one of the more anticipated games due to the fact there is jack shit being developed right now in terms of MMO's.
No, you been getting more and more negative with your posts in just about every corner of the forums. You attack mostly in the Pantheon forums. I don't know what's gotten you over the past few months but your not the same guy who garnered great respect here. I used to enjoy reading your feedback and miss the guy you used to be. I hope to see him again.
First point. Yes, MMORPGs can operate with smaller staffs. Where are the 30 currently on the team going to go when the project is launched? I can tell you. They will begin working to develop an expansion pack. Why? Subscriptions rely on new content. Since those 30 people are going to be occupied with new development duties, VR is likely to need to hire additional staff for operational support. You think that VR's staff size is going to shrink because they go live? I don't.
Second point. Your projection is based purely on anecdotal evidence. I've asked many times where these hoards of people are that are going to step forward and give VR money. I can't identify them, and no one has bothered to attempt an answer. Yet, you continue to believe and use this unidentified group of people as 'proof' that Pantheon will be a great success. Field of Dreams might be a great, entertaining movie, but it's not a model for a sound business plan.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.