Howdy, Stranger!

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

Pantheon and Saga of Lucimia

13468911

Comments

  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,795
    edited May 2020
    Tanist said:
    Am I upset? Do you really think I am?
    You do sound a teensie bit, yeah. Feel free to put the blame on Poe's Law  >:)
    Kyleranbcbullydcutbi001
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 14,041
    The proof is in the pudding.  SoL says they will release this year.  If/when they do, we will all get to see what they have produced.  Tim is an acquired taste and I actually have grown to like him but I have advised him on multiple occasions that the time will come when words have to become reality.

    We will see later this year what that reality looks like.

    I do not think their success will hinge on whether they have a map or not.  It will hinge on if their product is relatively bug-free and can handle a large number of players.



    Wellspring

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    tzervo said:
    achesoma said:

    Regarding Maps:

    It's kind of strange how people have fixated so much on SoL not having a map when Pantheon doesn't have one either.
    Thing is, I used the map as an example to make a point about SoL lead's mentality and conduct, not as a main point or as a comparison to Pantheon, because people were singing ballads here about SoL lead's professionalism (for which I admitted they get cookie points for transparency and holding to their initial vision), and that shot off as a tangent.

    But what I mostly wanted to point out was that from the SoL guy's responses:

    1) He seems to prioritize fluffing up his talk about not being ezmode over explaining their design rationale. He is more eager to show off how his game is the hardest and less handholdingy and to bang his chest about it. Fluff talk if you ask me :)

    2) He is acting as an arrogant condescending prick instead of a professional and a studio lead.

    Edit: removed some of my tangential bla bla

    I was talking about professionalism as it concerns the development of their game (ie structured development cycles, transparency, organization, structure). You turned this into a narcissistic argument over hurt feelings due to a dispute on development ideals. 

    His point is on target. He pointed out WHY they think maps are bad concerning their design and if you look throughout the thread you can see this is well supported by his comments.

    What I see from you is a "personal" objection by someone who got upset by not being worshiped for their viewpoint. You had a stupid point, a stupid objection to the basis of this games objective, you were shown to be of such and now you are "personally" upset about his comments.

    Boo hoo! Grow up!

    You don't like SoL. Good, bye? 
    KyleranYashaX
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    The proof is in the pudding.  SoL says they will release this year.  If/when they do, we will all get to see what they have produced.  Tim is an acquired taste and I actually have grown to like him but I have advised him on multiple occasions that the time will come when words have to become reality.

    We will see later this year what that reality looks like.

    I do not think their success will hinge on whether they have a map or not.  It will hinge on if their product is relatively bug-free and can handle a large number of players.



    Look closely at his comments. Nowhere did I see SoL proclaiming a definitive. They mention their goals, their objectives, their hopes, but they do not speak in absolutes and have been clear in such.


    What I see them being adamant about is their dedication to a design goal. Honestly, if they even began to attend to the main-streamers, I would drop them in a second. It is why I have no faith in Pantheon anymore. They sold out, they sucked up to mainstream and they deserve to die by it. Good luck to them.

    SoL has stated that they only need 5k subs to make their game work. I think that is an easily obtainable number, especially with their current game play videos. 

    In the end, time will tell... this is the truth of it... SoL could fold, Pantheon could fold, etc...

    This whole exercise was to theorize who was more likely to achieve their goal.

    At this point, I would say SoL. 

    I would love to say Pantheon I would like to see to fruition as well, but based on their design directions and my experience with their community liaison (Kilsin is far from what I would consider a professional and organized community manager),  I really don't have much faith. 
    delete5230
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    edited May 2020
    tzervo said:
    Tanist said:
    Am I upset? Do you really think I am?
    You do sound a teensie bit, yeah. Feel free to put the blame on Poe's Law  >:)
    I do? Could you elaborate, I mean... you were the one who got offended by Tim's tone, maybe you could walk us through the emotional logic you have of my speech.

    Please, I would appreciate a logical evaluation to the merit of your position. It would give us an insight on the manner in which you think. 


    Continue please. 
  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,795
    edited May 2020
    Tanist said:

    What I see from you is a "personal" objection by someone who got upset by not being worshiped for their viewpoint. You had a stupid point, a stupid objection to the basis of this games objective, you were shown to be of such and now you are "personally" upset about his comments.
    tzervo said:

    Just to clear up a couple misunderstandings @Tanist and @delete5230 ;

    1)
    I think you are dismissing the legitimate game play arguments against maps by claiming they are simple QoL aspects.

    I am not. Read my post again carefully:

    Although I see his point in trying to force/increase immersion:

    I explicitly said I can buy the argument that this enhances immersion for example and that was one of SoL lead's arguments about using landmarks etc. Not having maps is a non-issue for me personally if the game supports it well - it's all about the implementation.

    Confused Emoji Images Stock Photos  Vectors  Shutterstock
    Also I explicitly said I disagree on how the commenters in the MOP article approached the whole thing, but I consider this irrelevant  - you can look it up. Something does not add up here folks.

    Anyway that's it from me, I won't bother you any more :) No need to burden the rest with our quarrel. The floor is yours. Go nuts.

    Post edited by tzervo on
  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,440
    Tanist said:
    I've backed both SoL and Pantheon, years ago when they first opened their stores.

    But I'm looking forward to playing Pantheon much more. It's shaping up to be a much more polished game. It's as close to a AAA quality MMORPG as you can get w/ an independent studio. I love the art style and that it will have character levels and similar classes and combat styles as EQ1.

    SoL is a completely different game. It's inspiration is heavily DnD, where progression is skill based, not levels. It uses a class-less system. It is no where near the same graphics quality as Pantheon. The team has less dev experience and work other jobs to pay their bills. They use a lot of store bought assets and animations. They're not in a rush, often spending time on side projects (writing a book, streaming DnD sessions, playing other MMOs, etc.).

    Disclaimer: Of course, this is all just my opinion based on my observations (which I admit could very well be outdated, as I haven't kept up with SoL the past year or two). And I'm not bashing the hard work that SoL team is doing. I want both teams to succeed and play both games. But to me, SoL is not even in the same realm as Pantheon.
    This is a response to your previous comment to me as well..


    Pantheon from its initial release was first very clear in its tenants, a focus on a very specific style of game for a niche audience and not afraid to use EQ and some elements of VG as a basis for what they wanted to achieve. 

    The early forums, it was pretty much settled in discussions as to the basic direction to which the game was headed. It didn't care about pretty graphics, being AAA, competing for mainstream markets, etc... It only wanted to build a very specific "Vision" to what was missing in games today.


    Over the years, this changed slowly. FAQ changed over the years to be more... malleable to mainstream. the term "Community" became a buzz word (over the elements of game play to which drove the reason for communities in the first place). Terms like "Old School" became terms they wished to distance themselves from (or any relation to EQ/VG for that matter). Doubling down on being a new game, with new directions, new features, etc... became the mantra, while the old comments of traditional mechanics of long past faded away. The forums became inundated with mainstream calls for design changes and arguments that once constantly were shut down by Kilsin, became "questions of the day" even though past discussions had already been settled. 


    If you are looking for empirical means for me to quote tit for tat to support my points, well... it isn't really worth my efforts to be honest (no offense to you). I can merely point out my general experiences with the game and I find Pantheon to be... well... as you describe, becoming more of an AAA game, attending to a wider audience, focused on a player base that I honestly have nothing in common with. 

    Now, as for SoL in terms of development? 

    Read the links I provided recently on the creative director describing their stages, where they are at, where they were, where they are going, etc..

    The level of professionalism in their development structure is quite impressive and they have gone far beyond what one would expect with transparency. The more I read, the more impressed I became. 

    Pantheon never at any time was at this level of professionalism (their own kick starter  was nothing more than pictures, half baked ideas and directions, which is why it failed). Don't get me wrong, the chance at an EQ like MMO had me from the first line (which is what I think they were counting on). 

    I would highly suggest reading more into SoL. In terms of evidence of development skill (ie able to structure a development cycle, meet goals, and time tables), they have shown far more legitimacy. 

    Now keep in mind, I would play a game of EQs level of graphics and design today if it were released as I am more interested in game play, not graphics or other AAA features.

    I get what you're saying. I agree they have adjusted their marketing language over the years to try to appeal to a wider audience, since most gamers have never experienced the joy of EQ1. And often Kilsin's "questions of the day" topics would be concerning if they were actually considering it, as opposed to just trying to spark conversation.

    Also, Pantheon has many gameplay systems which have not been publicly finalized yet (death penalty, corpse runs, etc.). They're relying on further testing and feedback before making any final decisions.

    So all that being said, I can see why you might think it is a sign of them compromising their original vision. But I choose to take the wait and see approach and trust the team Brad assembled, before jumping to conclusions. It could very well go either direction.

    --------------------------------------------
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    bcbully said:
    Tanist said:
    delete5230 said:
    WoW @ChildoftheShadows Your all twisted up.


    <quote>
    "You know who also hasn't shown much? Saga of Lucemia!"

    Why should they show much ?.... You can play it !.... Actually play it !


    Now put that in your pipe and smoke it, and try and get yourself un-twisted :)

    They both seem to offer the same things, bud. Why should Pantheon show you much?

    Except, SoL is further along in its testing, has assigned a date for beta and release. 

    Pantheon did this in the past, missed several dates and now refuses to comment at all on their timeline. 

    Lets keep in mind they are still in pre-alpha and the last info we saw in 2019 said they were only 20% done with the game.

    So unless you find a square and a circle to be similar, they are not the same. 
    SoL is nearly 3 years beyond its initial release date..:
    Could you elaborate? I mean, I am not objecting... but consider this...

    SoL has stated previously that it takes 8 years roughly to build an MMO. (this you can read in the links I provided).

    So, please, with all complete and absolute respect... explain to us your comment?

    Thank you. 
  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,440
    achesoma said:
    I've backed both SoL and Pantheon, years ago when they first opened their stores.

    But I'm looking forward to playing Pantheon much more. It's shaping up to be a much more polished game. It's as close to a AAA quality MMORPG as you can get w/ an independent studio. I love the art style and that it will have character levels and similar classes and combat styles as EQ1.

    SoL is a completely different game. It's inspiration is heavily DnD, where progression is skill based, not levels. It uses a class-less system. It is no where near the same graphics quality as Pantheon. The team has less dev experience and work other jobs to pay their bills. They use a lot of store bought assets and animations. They're not in a rush, often spending time on side projects (writing a book, streaming DnD sessions, playing other MMOs, etc.).

    Disclaimer: Of course, this is all just my opinion based on my observations (which I admit could very well be outdated, as I haven't kept up with SoL the past year or two). And I'm not bashing the hard work that SoL team is doing. I want both teams to succeed and play both games. But to me, SoL is not even in the same realm as Pantheon.

    Have you seen the last 3 SoL streams put out? Graphically, it's looking pretty good considering they still don't have an FX artist or graphics programmer yet.

    Pantheon does look really good and more polished but that didn't happen until last year. And that was after Asmongold trashed Pantheon for looking terrible then VR started focusing more on the looks of the game.


    Regarding Maps:

    It's kind of strange how people have fixated so much on SoL not having a map when Pantheon doesn't have one either.

    I admit, it has probably been over a year since I've looked at SoL. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll check out the recent progress.
    --------------------------------------------
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    Tanist said:
    I've backed both SoL and Pantheon, years ago when they first opened their stores.

    But I'm looking forward to playing Pantheon much more. It's shaping up to be a much more polished game. It's as close to a AAA quality MMORPG as you can get w/ an independent studio. I love the art style and that it will have character levels and similar classes and combat styles as EQ1.

    SoL is a completely different game. It's inspiration is heavily DnD, where progression is skill based, not levels. It uses a class-less system. It is no where near the same graphics quality as Pantheon. The team has less dev experience and work other jobs to pay their bills. They use a lot of store bought assets and animations. They're not in a rush, often spending time on side projects (writing a book, streaming DnD sessions, playing other MMOs, etc.).

    Disclaimer: Of course, this is all just my opinion based on my observations (which I admit could very well be outdated, as I haven't kept up with SoL the past year or two). And I'm not bashing the hard work that SoL team is doing. I want both teams to succeed and play both games. But to me, SoL is not even in the same realm as Pantheon.
    This is a response to your previous comment to me as well..


    Pantheon from its initial release was first very clear in its tenants, a focus on a very specific style of game for a niche audience and not afraid to use EQ and some elements of VG as a basis for what they wanted to achieve. 

    The early forums, it was pretty much settled in discussions as to the basic direction to which the game was headed. It didn't care about pretty graphics, being AAA, competing for mainstream markets, etc... It only wanted to build a very specific "Vision" to what was missing in games today.


    Over the years, this changed slowly. FAQ changed over the years to be more... malleable to mainstream. the term "Community" became a buzz word (over the elements of game play to which drove the reason for communities in the first place). Terms like "Old School" became terms they wished to distance themselves from (or any relation to EQ/VG for that matter). Doubling down on being a new game, with new directions, new features, etc... became the mantra, while the old comments of traditional mechanics of long past faded away. The forums became inundated with mainstream calls for design changes and arguments that once constantly were shut down by Kilsin, became "questions of the day" even though past discussions had already been settled. 


    If you are looking for empirical means for me to quote tit for tat to support my points, well... it isn't really worth my efforts to be honest (no offense to you). I can merely point out my general experiences with the game and I find Pantheon to be... well... as you describe, becoming more of an AAA game, attending to a wider audience, focused on a player base that I honestly have nothing in common with. 

    Now, as for SoL in terms of development? 

    Read the links I provided recently on the creative director describing their stages, where they are at, where they were, where they are going, etc..

    The level of professionalism in their development structure is quite impressive and they have gone far beyond what one would expect with transparency. The more I read, the more impressed I became. 

    Pantheon never at any time was at this level of professionalism (their own kick starter  was nothing more than pictures, half baked ideas and directions, which is why it failed). Don't get me wrong, the chance at an EQ like MMO had me from the first line (which is what I think they were counting on). 

    I would highly suggest reading more into SoL. In terms of evidence of development skill (ie able to structure a development cycle, meet goals, and time tables), they have shown far more legitimacy. 

    Now keep in mind, I would play a game of EQs level of graphics and design today if it were released as I am more interested in game play, not graphics or other AAA features.

    I get what you're saying. I agree they have adjusted their marketing language over the years to try to appeal to a wider audience, since most gamers have never experienced the joy of EQ1. And often Kilsin's "questions of the day" topics would be concerning if they were actually considering it, as opposed to just trying to spark conversation.

    Also, Pantheon has many gameplay systems which have not been publicly finalized yet (death penalty, corpse runs, etc.). They're relying on further testing and feedback before making any final decisions.

    So all that being said, I can see why you might think it is a sign of them compromising their original vision. But I choose to take the wait and see approach and trust the team Brad assembled, before jumping to conclusions. It could very well go either direction.

    Fair enough, and I sincerely hope you get the game you desire. I however, have seen enough where I know I don't care for where they are heading. So for me, it is money lost, but hey... life is always a gamble. Hope you get what you want!
    Wellspring
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    tzervo said:
    Tanist said:

    What I see from you is a "personal" objection by someone who got upset by not being worshiped for their viewpoint. You had a stupid point, a stupid objection to the basis of this games objective, you were shown to be of such and now you are "personally" upset about his comments.
    tzervo said:
    Just to clear up a couple misunderstandings @Tanist and @delete5230 ;

    1)
    I think you are dismissing the legitimate game play arguments against maps by claiming they are simple QoL aspects.

    I am not. Read my post again carefully:

    Although I see his point in trying to force/increase immersion:

    I explicitly said I can buy the argument that this enhances immersion for example and that was one of SoL lead's arguments about using landmarks etc. Not having maps is a non-issue for me personally if the game supports it well - it's all about the implementation.

    Confused Emoji Images Stock Photos  Vectors  Shutterstock

    Also I explicitly said I disagree on how the commenters in the MOP article approached the whole thing, but I consider this irrelevant  - you can look it up. Something does not add up here folks.


    Anyway that's it from me, I won't bother you any more :) No need to burden the rest with our quarrel. The floor is yours. Go nuts.

    I attended to your arguments, repeating them won't change anything. I am content to let this rest as you seem to be.
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    Going to end this here. 

    Honestly, those who are pro Pantheon, are going to be pro Pantheon. Those Pro SoL the same. 

    If you like Pantheon, more power to you, send them money, support them, etc... that is your choice. 

    Same with SoL. I think I am done with Pantheon, moving on.. money lost. Take care and I hope those who seek are met with what they sought. 


    YashaX
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    Tanist said:
    Dullahan said:
    Tanist said:
    I thought I would add this... because it was a point some made about what a certain stage of development was for the game. Here is a basic run down from SoL. 

    This was their Stage 2 post

    https://sagaoflucimia.com/forums/index.php?threads/development-stage-two.974/#post-6019

    This is the Stage 3 post

    https://sagaoflucimia.com/forums/index.php?threads/closed-alpha-stage-three.1141/

    It pretty much answers pretty clearly their plans, timelines, expectations, current and future stages, what they are, etc...

    Pantheon is nowhere near this transparent or organized. 

    Read both, and you will see exactly where they are in development, the details, the systems they have in place, the business affiliates they are pulling in, etc... 

    Seriously, for a first time venture, these guys act like seasoned professionals.  Yeah, I am going to say... there is no contest here, Pantheon isn't even on the same level.

    I really like the way SoL is being managed, and agree Pantheon would do well to adopt some of that transparency.

    That said, you're right about them not being on the same level. Watch the most recent videos of Pantheon and that of Saga of Lucimia, the depth and quality of Pantheon far exceeds that of SOL.

    Yet if I were a betting man, I'd bet on SoL to be the more likely game to launch. Much lower bar, and closer to their goal.

    However, I'd also bet exponentially more that Pantheon would be the game I'd play after launch, should they both make it there.

    I'm looking forward to both for a different experience, and wish them both luck.

    Pantheon slowly changed from their original goals. They gave more and more to mainstream designs, losing what I think was important to what made games like EQ so enjoyable. 

    What SoL has done is create a solid vision and pushed on to it with clear force. They took the idea of what they think works, honed it and pushed to see it through. EQ was not an overly complex game at release, yet till this day it still carries some of that past charm. 

    If a game came out today that looked exactly like early EQ, played exactly like early EQ with all its similar features, I would play it in an instant and pay 40 bucks a month for it. While some things of Pantheon are interesting, I find many of its features are counter to what made EQ what it was, so I have lost interest. SoL, even with is simplicity excites me as EQ did. The more I read about it, the more I am impressed with its goals. 

    I agree, SoL is much more likely to reach a completion. That also means, that it has the potential to grow after release, something a complex game that never is released can not. 

    How did Pantheon change from their original goals? How is it counter to what made EQ what it was? Its a completely open world game that centers around cooperative play and hard-earned progression. There is no other upcoming game more like EQ than Pantheon, and its not even close.
    Amathedcutbi001


  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 38,408
    edited May 2020
    achesoma said:
    I've backed both SoL and Pantheon, years ago when they first opened their stores.

    But I'm looking forward to playing Pantheon much more. It's shaping up to be a much more polished game. It's as close to a AAA quality MMORPG as you can get w/ an independent studio. I love the art style and that it will have character levels and similar classes and combat styles as EQ1.

    SoL is a completely different game. It's inspiration is heavily DnD, where progression is skill based, not levels. It uses a class-less system. It is no where near the same graphics quality as Pantheon. The team has less dev experience and work other jobs to pay their bills. They use a lot of store bought assets and animations. They're not in a rush, often spending time on side projects (writing a book, streaming DnD sessions, playing other MMOs, etc.).

    Disclaimer: Of course, this is all just my opinion based on my observations (which I admit could very well be outdated, as I haven't kept up with SoL the past year or two). And I'm not bashing the hard work that SoL team is doing. I want both teams to succeed and play both games. But to me, SoL is not even in the same realm as Pantheon.

    Have you seen the last 3 SoL streams put out? Graphically, it's looking pretty good considering they still don't have an FX artist or graphics programmer yet.

    Pantheon does look really good and more polished but that didn't happen until last year. And that was after Asmongold trashed Pantheon for looking terrible then VR started focusing more on the looks of the game.


    Regarding Maps:

    It's kind of strange how people have fixated so much on SoL not having a map when Pantheon doesn't have one either.

    I admit, it has probably been over a year since I've looked at SoL. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll check out the recent progress.
    Funny story, SoL actually does have a high level world map which includes larger features, just no mini map or compass.

    You'd be surprised how many condescending, snarky replies over on the MOP thread I had to wade through to find it though.

    Even found a brief explanation on why no compass, trying to recreate the early EQ1 experienced where it was important for players to learn and rely on local landmarks to navigate.

    I was a later arrival to the genre, in early 2002 playing Lineage 1 and DAOC, both titles not adhereing to such a mechanic providing a compass, mini map and /loc coordinate system.

    I believe by this time even EQ1 offered similar as players apparently preferred their convenience basically validating not having such was a poor or undesireable design decision.

    But hey, history tends to repeat itself, so assuming SoL or Pantheon ever launch we'll see how long they can go without their customers clamoring for said convenience features.


    Post edited by Kyleran on
    tzervo

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing ESO - Blackwood at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,795
    edited May 2020
    Kyleran said:
    Funny story, SoL actually does have a high level world map which includes larger features, just no mini map or compass.
    Confused young men with map looking at camera and confident young women showing them directions in the forest
    Sorry couldn't resist xD
    Kyleran
  • delete5230delete5230 Member EpicPosts: 6,737
    edited May 2020
    tzervo said:
    Kyleran said:
    Funny story, SoL actually does have a high level world map which includes larger features, just no mini map or compass.
    Confused young men with map looking at camera and confident young women showing them directions in the forest
    Sorry couldn't resist xD
    Two are point in different directions, yet the one holding the map is afraid to say anything.

    Infact, this shows maps could get you in trouble. 



    nuff from me, it's all I'm saying
    Post edited by delete5230 on
    tzervo
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    tzervo said:
    Kyleran said:
    Funny story, SoL actually does have a high level world map which includes larger features, just no mini map or compass.
    Confused young men with map looking at camera and confident young women showing them directions in the forest
    Sorry couldn't resist xD
    Two are point in different directions, yet the one holding the map is afraid to say anything.

    Infact, this shows maps could get you in trouble. 



    nuff from me, it's all I'm saying
    Life of a cuck! The real question is, which of the 4 are the women... are we sure? 
    Iselindelete5230Kyleran
  • Raidan_EQRaidan_EQ Member UncommonPosts: 247
    @Tanist

    First RIP Brad, but if anything, he was leaning on more mainstream ideals closer to Vanguard than I’d say 1b developer was/is (Joppa).  Remember Brad’s everyone has pets proposal that was shot down or Joppa countering Brad’s posts?  Joppa loves EQ, and if you listen to him talk, he talks in EQ-esque terms.  There’s been no indication that the development has changed at all during the process, However, there’s always been discussion on meaningful progression in 2 hour play sessions, potential caravans, potential mentoring, potential discussion on what the death penalty will ultimately be, etc since the Kickstarter.  None of that has changed as nothing has been firmly set in stone, and it won’t be till testing.  Should they make a firm line in the sand - possibly, but it’s not like there stance has changed from saying this concrete death penalty system is now more mainstream.

    My bigger issue is will it ever make it to testing as development can’t last forever (funding and/or developer interest).  If it does, like Dullahan said, it will be by far the closest thing to EQ.
    WellspringKyleran
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    edited May 2020
    Kyleran said:

    But hey, history tends to repeat itself, so assuming SoL or Pantheon ever launch we'll see how long they can go without their customers clamoring for said convenience features.
    All I can say is if they do, I will drop them quickly. Considering that SoL does not have EXP, and its only penalty is that of having to go back and find your corpse, allowing people to have maps would... detract from the penalty and take us down the road of mainstream dumbing down of gaming. 

    But hey, recently I learned that PTW is a fully accepted thing on EQ servers these days, so much that people don't even realize they are paying to win. So it is understandable that people think having a map is simply a QOL feature that has no bearing on game play and just gets in the way of people enjoying the game. 
  • TanistTanist Member UncommonPosts: 272
    Raidan_EQ said:
    @Tanist

    First RIP Brad, but if anything, he was leaning on more mainstream ideals closer to Vanguard than I’d say 1b developer was/is (Joppa).  Remember Brad’s everyone has pets proposal that was shot down or Joppa countering Brad’s posts?  Joppa loves EQ, and if you listen to him talk, he talks in EQ-esque terms.  There’s been no indication that the development has changed at all during the process, However, there’s always been discussion on meaningful progression in 2 hour play sessions, potential caravans, potential mentoring, potential discussion on what the death penalty will ultimately be, etc since the Kickstarter.  None of that has changed as nothing has been firmly set in stone, and it won’t be till testing.  Should they make a firm line in the sand - possibly, but it’s not like there stance has changed from saying this concrete death penalty system is now more mainstream.

    My bigger issue is will it ever make it to testing as development can’t last forever (funding and/or developer interest).  If it does, like Dullahan said, it will be by far the closest thing to EQ.
    I remember Brad being a lot more "mainstream" than I liked. As you mentioned previously, he was the one that came up with Caravans, and he also was the one who wanted city to city transports (ala Vanguard style of continent to continent) to which Joppa shot him down. I see a lot of heavy push for mainstream on the site, and the videos of content do not give me confidence.

    Combat is too fast, the "buffs" over head and on display defeat from the concept of self managing and getting to know skills individually. Caravans being a design allowance bothers me and shows to be an extreme exploit. Mounts are an obvious problem as it gives everyone a default run speed (I doubt they are going to make the mounts a rare drop quest as they did with J-boots).

    The talk of leashing mobs is disturbing and defeats the concept of responsible movement through the zone. Call of the Hero being a spell in play also shows ignorance on the abuses it had in EQ. The perception and quest system is just a click/pop up fest, with a skill requirement that serves no real point (as opposed to a text input system where players have to think and interact). 

    I can already see they are making the same mistakes as EQ by trying to "balance" class makeups rather than worrying about content usefulness (look at the classes, they are looking very cookie cutter/homogenized with numerous classes trying to cover multiple roles ala Vanguard) and there seems to be a lot of attention to that of PvP, even though it was claimed it was not focused on. 

    Then there is the issue with FTP which is a death rattle for the game. That is, if they allow it to all servers, it will have an adverse effect on the game regardless of what safeguards they put in which not to mention will cause a massive drain on resources as those FTP accounts will not have a positive income influx (ie with no store to balance out expense, it is a pure loss and hope for subs which will never outbalance the FTP users).

    Then there is the change to end game talk, which was never a discussion before (ie end game was always a side note, with some mention of possible raid content, but the idea that it was all "end game" was not spoke of in such a fashion, rather the "journey" was.).  

    Now though, devs openly talk about "end game" using that phrase and going on about how it is am important concept of play. Take that combined with the focus on raid zones this early in the game (why are they making raid content this early on and show casing it if the game is predominately about the journey that EQ release was?).

    There are so many inconsistencies, so many loose ends, so many questions that I don't trust them anymore. They are not upfront and honest on their intent, they have been wishy washy on things and the continued pandering to forum topic questions by Kilsin to ask about mainstream concepts is flipping insulting and telling at the same time. 

    They are selling out, keeping thier options open. I don't doubt Joppa loves old EQ and would love to have such, but I know this... they aren't selling that, they haven't for a long time. 
  • Raidan_EQRaidan_EQ Member UncommonPosts: 247
    We’ll obviously disagree on it - but I don’t think they’ve went “more” mainstream than the original vision - it was always going to be somewhere between EQ -> VG - even during the Kickstarter, which I did want it to be “more” like EQ as well.  

    Some of the marketing language changed - like the removal of calling it niche, but that did a long time ago when they first brought on the CFO, so we’ll see - but again, until testing - its all just opinion.  
    Wellspringtzervodcutbi001
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited May 2020
    Tanist said:
    Raidan_EQ said:
    @Tanist

    First RIP Brad, but if anything, he was leaning on more mainstream ideals closer to Vanguard than I’d say 1b developer was/is (Joppa).  Remember Brad’s everyone has pets proposal that was shot down or Joppa countering Brad’s posts?  Joppa loves EQ, and if you listen to him talk, he talks in EQ-esque terms.  There’s been no indication that the development has changed at all during the process, However, there’s always been discussion on meaningful progression in 2 hour play sessions, potential caravans, potential mentoring, potential discussion on what the death penalty will ultimately be, etc since the Kickstarter.  None of that has changed as nothing has been firmly set in stone, and it won’t be till testing.  Should they make a firm line in the sand - possibly, but it’s not like there stance has changed from saying this concrete death penalty system is now more mainstream.

    My bigger issue is will it ever make it to testing as development can’t last forever (funding and/or developer interest).  If it does, like Dullahan said, it will be by far the closest thing to EQ.
    I remember Brad being a lot more "mainstream" than I liked. As you mentioned previously, he was the one that came up with Caravans, and he also was the one who wanted city to city transports (ala Vanguard style of continent to continent) to which Joppa shot him down. I see a lot of heavy push for mainstream on the site, and the videos of content do not give me confidence.

    Combat is too fast, the "buffs" over head and on display defeat from the concept of self managing and getting to know skills individually. Caravans being a design allowance bothers me and shows to be an extreme exploit. Mounts are an obvious problem as it gives everyone a default run speed (I doubt they are going to make the mounts a rare drop quest as they did with J-boots).

    The talk of leashing mobs is disturbing and defeats the concept of responsible movement through the zone. Call of the Hero being a spell in play also shows ignorance on the abuses it had in EQ. The perception and quest system is just a click/pop up fest, with a skill requirement that serves no real point (as opposed to a text input system where players have to think and interact). 

    I can already see they are making the same mistakes as EQ by trying to "balance" class makeups rather than worrying about content usefulness (look at the classes, they are looking very cookie cutter/homogenized with numerous classes trying to cover multiple roles ala Vanguard) and there seems to be a lot of attention to that of PvP, even though it was claimed it was not focused on. 

    Then there is the issue with FTP which is a death rattle for the game. That is, if they allow it to all servers, it will have an adverse effect on the game regardless of what safeguards they put in which not to mention will cause a massive drain on resources as those FTP accounts will not have a positive income influx (ie with no store to balance out expense, it is a pure loss and hope for subs which will never outbalance the FTP users).

    Then there is the change to end game talk, which was never a discussion before (ie end game was always a side note, with some mention of possible raid content, but the idea that it was all "end game" was not spoke of in such a fashion, rather the "journey" was.).  

    Now though, devs openly talk about "end game" using that phrase and going on about how it is am important concept of play. Take that combined with the focus on raid zones this early in the game (why are they making raid content this early on and show casing it if the game is predominately about the journey that EQ release was?).

    There are so many inconsistencies, so many loose ends, so many questions that I don't trust them anymore. They are not upfront and honest on their intent, they have been wishy washy on things and the continued pandering to forum topic questions by Kilsin to ask about mainstream concepts is flipping insulting and telling at the same time. 

    They are selling out, keeping thier options open. I don't doubt Joppa loves old EQ and would love to have such, but I know this... they aren't selling that, they haven't for a long time. 
    There are quite a few assumptions here, some misinformation and then undue importance placed on fringe features.

    First, I agree with you that Brad did have tendencies to move towards the mainstream and convenience features that did not suit the rest of his design. It was something I worried about in Vanguard, and that I believe really hurt the game. With Pantheon, however, he had other people in positions of respect and authority that kept him in check and leaned back on the design philosophy that made EQ so successful.

    Joppa has been creative director for quite a while now, and I only grow more confident he understands those important principles and will stay true to them. Just watch the interview with him on PantheonPlus two weeks ago if you are worried.

    Combat speeds will likely see adjustment throughout development and test phases. I personally think its a little fast as well, but then I watch a full group of people in Saga of Lucimia battle a boar for a minute straight (slower than any early EQ group battle), and I think maybe Pantheon's combat speed is spot on.

    Maybe Ive missed it, but i havent heard talk of caravans in a long time. I dont think they have any place in Pantheon either, but I'm not getting hung up on a once-suggested feature that hasnt appeared in game demos or been discussed in years (afaik).

    End game has always been a part of this type of game and has always been a part of the Pantheon conversation. Raid content has to be developed just like group content, even if it only accounts for a small portion of the overall content. I agree that it should take a back seat to the journey and group content, but they are developing templates and tools and must make sure the game scales properly.


    Mob leashing is currently not in Pantheon. Really though, that too falls under the fringe issue category. If we're talking realistic danger, nothing chases you forever. I can tell you from first hand experience, neither the police, nor angry bull dogs, nor alligators will pursue you indefinitely. There are ways to do it without making content trivial. That kind of doubt in developer competence is unwarranted.

    It sounds to me like you should check out some of Joppa's videos, his most recent interview in particular. Again, you're getting discouraged by fringe issues that in some cases aren't even being discussed.
    Raidan_EQdcutbi001


  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 10,501
    Tanist said:
    bcbully said:
    Tanist said:
    delete5230 said:
    WoW @ChildoftheShadows Your all twisted up.


    <quote>
    "You know who also hasn't shown much? Saga of Lucemia!"

    Why should they show much ?.... You can play it !.... Actually play it !


    Now put that in your pipe and smoke it, and try and get yourself un-twisted :)

    They both seem to offer the same things, bud. Why should Pantheon show you much?

    Except, SoL is further along in its testing, has assigned a date for beta and release. 

    Pantheon did this in the past, missed several dates and now refuses to comment at all on their timeline. 

    Lets keep in mind they are still in pre-alpha and the last info we saw in 2019 said they were only 20% done with the game.

    So unless you find a square and a circle to be similar, they are not the same. 
    SoL is nearly 3 years beyond its initial release date..:
    Could you elaborate? I mean, I am not objecting... but consider this...

    SoL has stated previously that it takes 8 years roughly to build an MMO. (this you can read in the links I provided).

    So, please, with all complete and absolute respect... explain to us your comment?

    Thank you. 
    In 2015 on these forums Renfail said SoL would release in 2017. 

    Please do the research yourself. Me and my girl have 3 bad bitches over. I don’t have the time to link you.
    tzervo
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 38,408
    edited May 2020
    bcbully said:
    Tanist said:
    bcbully said:
    Tanist said:
    delete5230 said:
    WoW @ChildoftheShadows Your all twisted up.


    <quote>
    "You know who also hasn't shown much? Saga of Lucemia!"

    Why should they show much ?.... You can play it !.... Actually play it !


    Now put that in your pipe and smoke it, and try and get yourself un-twisted :)

    They both seem to offer the same things, bud. Why should Pantheon show you much?

    Except, SoL is further along in its testing, has assigned a date for beta and release. 

    Pantheon did this in the past, missed several dates and now refuses to comment at all on their timeline. 

    Lets keep in mind they are still in pre-alpha and the last info we saw in 2019 said they were only 20% done with the game.

    So unless you find a square and a circle to be similar, they are not the same. 
    SoL is nearly 3 years beyond its initial release date..:
    Could you elaborate? I mean, I am not objecting... but consider this...

    SoL has stated previously that it takes 8 years roughly to build an MMO. (this you can read in the links I provided).

    So, please, with all complete and absolute respect... explain to us your comment?

    Thank you. 
    In 2015 on these forums Renfail said SoL would release in 2017. 

    Please do the research yourself. Me and my girl have 3 bad bitches over. I don’t have the time to link you.
    Correct, and when asked about the missed dates Renfail will totally evade, call you a hater, or mock your weakness.

    What I've never seen him do is own up to it.
    YashaXtzervobcbullydcutbi001

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing ESO - Blackwood at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 14,041
    bcbully said:


    Please do the research yourself. Me and my girl have 3 bad bitches over. I don’t have the time to link you.
    Sorry but this just needed an in-person W T F...

    But did make me laugh.
    Wellspringbcbully

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

Sign In or Register to comment.