Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Opinion: Three things Pantheon still needs to do

    • 1315 posts
    December 26, 2019 5:15 PM PST

    1: Groundhog day.

    At this point I am not sure there is any real way to save Pantheon from the Groundhog day effect.  It really comes down to the man hour difference between hand crafted content and procedurally generated content.  Procedurally generated content can easily be made dynamic but hand Crafted Zones must have duplicate zones created.  There may be ways to apply a small amount spawn cycle to a zone but that takes a lot of unique scripting rather then global logic. 

    There is still room for some scripted dynamic content but it will highlight the zones without it.  Named focused itemization also is a contributing factor to the groundhog day effect. If you want one of three unique items and there are 3000 characters on your server that want those items to " finish" their character then that content needs to be fairly consistently repeatable and in a non instanced game then that becomes a specific hole in a digital whack- mole game.

    Without breaking all art and geography into templates that can be tied to procedurally generated content and itemization Pantheon is going to suffer from the groundhog day effect like all other theme-park games.

     

    2. Non-combat is what turns a hack and slash game into an actual RPG.  Most community interactions happen outside of actual combat. Crafting, diplomacy, player run events, and commerce are RPG staples that yield good playtime Vs developer man hours due to the replay of non-combat content.  Both aspects make non-combat content a no brainer for Pantheon once a minimum of PVE content is created as it builds on community and gives a small team a big boost in replay time. Crafting is part of itemization and needs to be a part of initial development so it needs to at least be designed hand in hand with the initial pve implementation.

     

    3. A feeling of personal ownership and agency is a big tool to develop people's feelings of attachment to their in game personas. The more ways a person can make a character uniquely your own, without violating the game world setting, the better.  This is especially true if it increases the utilization of already created assets.  The rest ties back into my #2 opinion.

     

    The notion that having non-combat content rich and rewarding will ruin Pantheon for the EQ purists is bloody absurd.  That any form of character customization is giving into the masses and will see pizza box swimsuit warriors is Trump level moronic logic of the most obtuse degree.  A profitable growing company with a team of 20 developers and 20 developer manpower cost of support staff in Southern California will take around 120k subscribers at 15$ a month.  That means a game that caters only to EQ purists will be bankrupt in the first year or will need to resort to a skeletal CS team and no continuous development, if it can even service its debt.

    Pantheon is a modern game being designed with an old school group centric, slow paced strategic combat focus.  It is not a 20 year old game being ported into a modern engine. Pantheon will need to have a broad appeal to those interested in group centric, slow paced strategic combat as that will already be a small niche in the mmo game space. There is the option of having servers with some features disabled for a more hardcore sub group of Pantheon EQ Classic purists but the functions will need to be developed first then shut off.

    I would honestly feel better with a population target of 300 to 500k subscribers in the first year so 100k are maintained leading up to an expansion. This is by no means a wow killer or even 10% of the mmo player market but it is enough to be financially stable and able to continuously develop new great content.

    • 1860 posts
    December 27, 2019 6:08 AM PST

    Just for clarity, earlier in this thread I mentioned that VR has stated they are designing the game to be sustainable with LESS THAN 100k subs.

    The actual quote....by Ben Dean was: "We’ll be sustainable with subs in the 10s of thousands."

    Some how people started using 100k as a base number when that is not accurate.

    This is info that has been discussed multiple times. I guess that is what we do on these forums. Go around in circles repeatedly discussing the same things for the people who are unaware. Maybe that isnt a bad thing when what we are presented changes so frequently I guess?


    This post was edited by philo at December 27, 2019 6:10 AM PST
    • 557 posts
    December 27, 2019 7:04 AM PST

    What we are talking about here is adherence to both the spirit and implementation details behind #WorldsNotGames and #CommunityMatters.

     

    My thoughts.

     

    1.  Groundhog Day - "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Arthur C. Clarke"

    One way we break the Groundhog Day syndrome is having systems which appear to be less deterministic to the outside observer.  This would include:

    * more randomization in the spawn timers of mobs, including yard trash

    * more randomization in the spawn location of mobs, except as required by complex scripted encounters

    * more decision points where a mob could suddenly change tactics or be less predictable using special abilities

    * more randomization of how effective resists are for a particular AoE blast

    * more diversity in the drop table - not just one boss that drops a specific item

    * more class variance when a mobs spawn, so you can't tell everything about a mob just by its name

     

    The more opportunities or decision points that can occur in an encounter, the less effective it's going to be to watch someone else kill a mob on YouTube.  Your fight may not go down the same way at all. Prepare to be surprised.

     

    2. Life Out Of Combat

    The fundamental flaw in most games to date, including Pantheon, is that everything out of combat is a second class system. Often these are patched in at last minute apparently to fill a feature checkbox for marketing material.

     

    There seems to be some unwritten rule for MMORPGs that says the best loot in-game has to be directly dropped from boss mobs. In my opinion, the best loot should be crafted by the top tier player crafters on the servers using materials only obtainable from those same boss mobs. In this model, guilds would recruit and support crafters with the same enthusiasm as tanks and healers. I don't need gathering and crafting to be a mini-games. Whatever drudgery that may be involved along the road to mastery would be worth it if my skills were of value at end game. I kind of like the drudgery. It ensures that only the most dedicated players become true masters of their craft. If everyone on the server is a master smith, it defeats the purpose of introducing a tiered crafting system. Crafting mastery should be as (or even more) difficult than becoming a top tier warrior or summoner. This adjustment is more about philosophy than a massive resource sink for the developers.

     

    3. Socialization

    To some degree, socialization is based on emergent gameplay but there are certainly programmable elements which can encourage or discourage this. Sometimes less is more. Would you rather have community-based player auctions (circa Everquest EC tunnel) or the impersonal, but infinitely more efficient auction house? From a community perspective, it's much richer to seek groups in chat channels than having automated tools which simply drop you into a party with completely random strangers.  The same can be said for player-driven portal services versus standing structure click-portals.   People have the opportunity to make new friends every time they interact with each other.

     

    Systems such as "canned" player emotes and their associated animations are a pleasant addition for role play, but they certainly aren't necessary so long as a basic /emote command line option exists.

     

    LoTRO had a very clever custom music system which allowed players to perform songs solo or form a party to play with multi-part harmony and different instruments. This went a long way towards socialization and encouraging people to congregate in town with no purpose other than chatting and having fun. It was also good fun during downtime whilst crawling through dungeons.

     

    Pantheon needs to appeal to more than just the hard-core gamer who is min-maxing and only cares about kills/loot per minute online. Somehow we have come to equate "adventuring" with "slaying and looting". Let's not forget chatting, exploring, crafting, fishing, pipe smoking, gambling and dwarf tossing!

    • 521 posts
    December 27, 2019 7:06 AM PST

    philo said:

    Just for clarity, earlier in this thread I mentioned that VR has stated they are designing the game to be sustainable with LESS THAN 100k subs.

    The actual quote....by Ben Dean was: "We’ll be sustainable with subs in the 10s of thousands."

    Some how people started using 100k as a base number when that is not accurate.

    This is info that has been discussed multiple times. I guess that is what we do on these forums. Go around in circles repeatedly discussing the same things for the people who are unaware. Maybe that isnt a bad thing when what we are presented changes so frequently I guess?

     

    “10s of thousands” means multiplies of 10 thousand, meaning 20 thousand plus. This doesn't mean it has to be less than 100k. Stating more than 100k would be more accurate if the intent was explicitly over 100k, but this isn't just about numbers, wording matters, phrasing it as “10s of thousands” could simply be intentional to avoid the appearance of a failed goal.

    Under the expectation of “10s of thousands”, hitting 90k would be considered a Hugh success, stating 100k and hitting 90k it would appear to be a failure.

    • 1860 posts
    December 27, 2019 7:19 AM PST

    I presented the above quote for those who were using 100k as a base requisite number which was incorrect. 

    Let's not get silly about the semantics of how we define the ambiguous number that is 10s of thousands.

    The point is, that Pantheon doesnt need to cater to the masses to be sustainable like was being mentioned earlier.

    This should be common knowledge at this point.


    This post was edited by philo at December 27, 2019 7:19 AM PST
    • 521 posts
    December 27, 2019 7:43 AM PST

    philo said:

    I presented the above quote for those who were using 100k as a base requisite number which was incorrect. 

    Let's not get silly about the semantics of how we define the ambiguous number that is 10s of thousands.

    The point is, that Pantheon doesnt need to cater to the masses to be sustainable like was being mentioned earlier.

    This should be common knowledge at this point.

     

    Your presenting the quote as proof that it doesn't mean 100k, which is incorrect. 100k as a baseline is an interpretation of the quote, and not an unrealistic one considering its approximately 1/5 of the peak subscriber's that Everquest obtained nearly 20 years ago in a much smaller MMO market.

    • 1428 posts
    December 27, 2019 8:51 AM PST

    philo said:

    I presented the above quote for those who were using 100k as a base requisite number which was incorrect. 

    Let's not get silly about the semantics of how we define the ambiguous number that is 10s of thousands.

    The point is, that Pantheon doesnt need to cater to the masses to be sustainable like was being mentioned earlier.

    This should be common knowledge at this point.

    i'm dumb.  common knowledge isn't my strong suit =(  it's new information to me.

     

    i never said pantheon should cater to the masses, however, they need to attract enough attention to be sustainable(whatever that number is).  i'd rather have a successful long term mmo this isn't slightly what i wanted(things i can game with), than one that is exactly what i want and burns out after a year.  for the most part i like what i see, minus the las12.  that's a contested point with mixed thoughts.

     

    there are alot of serious contenders(mmo developers) looking to get a piece of the pie.  2020 is a huge mark for many upcoming mmos.  with blizzard bleeding out, now is the time to capitalize.

    https://www.nerdmuch.com/games/5184/new-mmos/

    i'm not a statistician, but the success rate of mmos is probably 1 out of 10.  probably even less than that.

     

     

    last thing i want is pantheon to get shuffled into oblivion.

    you have to consider that vr gets one shot to do this independently.

    if they miss there mark, it'll be a huge blow and the chances to shoot again becomes extremely narrow in a very competitive market.

     

    • 1315 posts
    December 27, 2019 11:26 AM PST

    120k subscribers will get you 5 officers, 20 developers, and 30 to 40 customer support personal in Southern California.  If you don't like those numbers then too bad.  They are a little conservative to confirm that the company stays in the black but it's all based on glass door salaries for the area VR is located at, standard business manpower to minimum revenue models to be a healthy company and basic business taxes.

    Wishful thinking that there are enough eq classic purists to keep Pantheon afloat is exactly that, wishful thinking.  I would be surprised if there are even 10k people globally that will pay 15 a month for escentially EQ 1 unity edition.  Remember the initial Kickstart failed.  It wasn't until new ideas and modern quality of life mechanics were added onto the old model that Pantheon started taking off.  That first version. Is dead and gone and not coming back.  It has evolved into something better, and stronger with broader a peal and sustainability.

    Neph's post highlighted good advice for conceptsto keep in mind to really bring Pantheon home.  Not everything has equal priority or urgency but rather each are important cogs the support the whole.

     

    • 1428 posts
    December 27, 2019 1:02 PM PST

    Trasak said:

    120k subscribers will get you 5 officers, 20 developers, and 30 to 40 customer support personal in Southern California.  If you don't like those numbers then too bad.  They are a little conservative to confirm that the company stays in the black but it's all based on glass door salaries for the area VR is located at, standard business manpower to minimum revenue models to be a healthy company and basic business taxes.

    Wishful thinking that there are enough eq classic purists to keep Pantheon afloat is exactly that, wishful thinking.  I would be surprised if there are even 10k people globally that will pay 15 a month for escentially EQ 1 unity edition.  Remember the initial Kickstart failed.  It wasn't until new ideas and modern quality of life mechanics were added onto the old model that Pantheon started taking off.  That first version. Is dead and gone and not coming back.  It has evolved into something better, and stronger with broader a peal and sustainability.

    Neph's post highlighted good advice for conceptsto keep in mind to really bring Pantheon home.  Not everything has equal priority or urgency but rather each are important cogs the support the whole.

     

    man that's gonna be tough in 2020.  out of my group of gamers, about 20, only 2 of us are committing to pantheon.  others are leaning towards ash of creation, crowfall and camelot unchained or just dancing with wow until the end of time.

    assume that on the youtube there are 17k subs and they are jump on board.

    6k(rounding up) on twitch 23k

    adding your 10k globally that would carry over 33k subs

    let's assume half those 33k can convince 1 friend to come along that puts us at 50k

    i would say there's a 2 year operational pillow.

    they still need to come up with 70k subs >.>

    • 2419 posts
    December 27, 2019 1:09 PM PST

    Actually there is really just 1 thing Pantheon needs to do:  Get into Alpha.  :) 

    That way those who did front the money to get this company off the ground and get the development started can begin their work as Alpha/Beta testers on thorough testing and on providing constructive feedback so this notion of 'getting by with 10s of thousands' of subscribers can be looked back upon as a serious underestimate of just how good this game can be and the number of players it will attract.


    This post was edited by Vandraad at December 30, 2019 7:51 AM PST
    • 1428 posts
    December 27, 2019 1:36 PM PST

    Vandraad said:

    Actually there is really just 1 thing Pantheon needs to do:  Get into Alpha.  :) 

    That way those who did front the money to get this company off the ground and get the development started and begin their work as Alpha/Beta testers on thorough testing and on providing constructive feedback so this notion of 'getting by with 10s of thousands' of subscribers can be looked back upon as a serious underestimate of just how good this game can be and the number of players it will attract.

    good point.  so i can advertise SOMETHING to draw more people.

    • 2756 posts
    December 27, 2019 2:51 PM PST

    One of the things that most attracted me and got me to VIP pledge is that VR has always made it known they are intentionally aiming for (and are happy with) a niche audience.

    One of the biggest downfalls of most MMORPGs in recent years (well, in nearly all cases since EQ, really) has been the greedy grasp for mass appeal and the dilution, homogenisation, dumbing-down and glamming-up that has been necessary to do that.

    When I say "downfall" obviously I mean that selfishly, because a lot of them have been great commercial successes. They simply haven't been something old-school gamers like me enjoy for long. I could try and argue that to make something that is massively multi-player soloable and something that is a role-playing game feel like an arcade game is objectively 'bad', since it defies the genres definition, but it's tricky.

    Too much of the gameplay and values that kept geeky old school gamers like myself playing EQ for many years even when it started being 'dated' has been lost in order to gain mass audiences.

    This does not mean that Pantheon cannot become much more popular than it's target niche.  I firmly believe there is an untapped audience out there that are playing the mass-market poop, but once exposed to something more challenging, immersive and community-based, will be hooked.  BUT VR should not water down their vision in order to *seek out* mass appeal.  They should be very careful to resist the temptation to do so as they will lose the core of their audience in the process and risk becoming just another popular but short-lived experience we've all seen a dozen times.

    Avoiding Groundhog Day

    Whilst I agree in principal that elements of dynamism will add replayability and longevity VR need to be very careful. Old-school gamers like to become experts. They like to feel they have 'mastered' content. They like it to be a great challenge, yes, but they like to feel they can become knowledgable and skilled enough to overcome that challenge and that it is them beating it, not that they got lucky. There is a difference between dynamic challenge and random danger and VR need to be very careful not to make it so players feel, no matter how skilled, powerful and experienced they are, they can still get killed by dumb bad luck or something being utterly changed/different that couldn't be prepared for.

    Deep and meaningful non-combat activities

    Yes, crafting and other activities can be integral to adventuring and are better if they have depth, but I'm not upset with them feeling like a 'secondary' or 'alternate' thing to do. It's kind of the nature of the beast. You either make crafting (or music or fishing or whatever) the sole way of doing some things (which I don't think I'd want and would probably feel contrived) or you make it an alternative that a lot of people won't take.

    Supporting Socialisation

    I believe this will simply happen if the game is challenging and firmly designed to be group-based. The reason people got to know each other in EQ was because they *had* to do so to play the interesting content. Want to get deep into a dungeon? You've got to join a group. Want to kill a dragon? You'll need a raid force. Want to get your Epic Weapon? You're probably going to need a guild.

    Yes, there are 'things' VR can do to encourage and support and make it easy to be social, but I firmly believe the core of this is making the game *require* you to be social.

    This comes back to the 'mass market' appeal issue, of course. Make a game 'force' social interaction and you lose a large potential audience. Boo hoo. There are a tons of games for loners out there. Please, let's have Pantheon dare to be niche.

    P.S. I'm not saying Neph is asking for a mass market game at all! A good post as always, Neph, and very thought provoking.


    This post was edited by disposalist at December 27, 2019 2:53 PM PST
    • 257 posts
    December 28, 2019 12:23 AM PST

    EQ1 didn't feel like groundhog to me, even while grinding countless AA's. Grouping up for some xp grinding is just something I did because I enjoyed it. When WoW added dailies to their game is when groundhog day hit me. I *HATE* those daily quests.

    • 379 posts
    December 28, 2019 4:03 AM PST

    Vandraad said:

    Actually there is really just 1 thing Pantheon needs to do:  Get into Alpha.  :) 

    That way those who did front the money to get this company off the ground and get the development started and begin their work as Alpha/Beta testers on thorough testing and on providing constructive feedback so this notion of 'getting by with 10s of thousands' of subscribers can be looked back upon as a serious underestimate of just how good this game can be and the number of players it will attract.

    The river of gold and sky of green shall come forth once the gate opens! Come now, quickly!

    • 1247 posts
    December 28, 2019 4:46 AM PST

    Trasak said:

    120k subscribers will get you 5 officers, 20 developers, and 30 to 40 customer support personal in Southern California.  If you don't like those numbers then too bad.  They are a little conservative to confirm that the company stays in the black but it's all based on glass door salaries for the area VR is located at, standard business manpower to minimum revenue models to be a healthy company and basic business taxes.

    Wishful thinking that there are enough eq classic purists to keep Pantheon afloat is exactly that, wishful thinking.  I would be surprised if there are even 10k people globally that will pay 15 a month for escentially EQ 1 unity edition.  Remember the initial Kickstart failed.  It wasn't until new ideas and modern quality of life mechanics were added onto the old model that Pantheon started taking off.  That first version. Is dead and gone and not coming back.  It has evolved into something better, and stronger with broader a peal and sustainability.

    Neph's post highlighted good advice for conceptsto keep in mind to really bring Pantheon home.  Not everything has equal priority or urgency but rather each are important cogs the support the whole.

    Wow, I disagree with pretty much most of what you post. Not worth my time to go through it all, but I will say it is beyond stupid to still try and call people “EQ purists” & to the contrary, “mainstreamers.” Brad was right: interest in Pantheon has only just begun. And, the abundance of crappy mmorpg’s will only strengthen this new game’s position. Not many people knew about Pantheon & the vision during the Kickstarter (duh).

    I’ll take Visionary Realms anyday over the others. LMAO - look at what the mega Activision Blizzard is capable of doing: ‘Battle for Azeroth.’ Lol really? And you are saying that it’s all about mega revenue and large overhead? Lol. 


    This post was edited by Syrif at December 28, 2019 5:36 AM PST
    • 1247 posts
    December 28, 2019 7:02 AM PST

    Nephele said:

    Pantheon simply being a nostalgia play for a niche audience

    Yikes! This is wrong on so, so many levels. You must really be confused. Nostalgia to a niche crowd? Literally Classic World of Warcraft servers released by Blizzard - now that's an example of nostalgia. For you to imply that about Pantheon is absurd! Nephele, the reality is we will finally see an mmorpg actually feel like an mmorpg again & Pantheon is going to be taking good gaming so much further than what others have recently tried and failed to do..


    This post was edited by Syrif at December 28, 2019 7:05 AM PST
    • 1428 posts
    December 28, 2019 10:33 AM PST

    Syrif said:

    Wow, I disagree with pretty much most of what you post. Not worth my time to go through it all, but I will say it is beyond stupid to still try and call people “EQ purists” & to the contrary, “mainstreamers.” Brad was right: interest in Pantheon has only just begun. And, the abundance of crappy mmorpg’s will only strengthen this new game’s position. Not many people knew about Pantheon & the vision during the Kickstarter (duh).

    I’ll take Visionary Realms anyday over the others. LMAO - look at what the mega Activision Blizzard is capable of doing: ‘Battle for Azeroth.’ Lol really? And you are saying that it’s all about mega revenue and large overhead? Lol. 

     

    he probably means eq purist as players who want things exactly as they were in eq with updated graphics.

    besides the people that made blizzard aren't really there anymore.  it's just activision milking blizzard's name.

     

    individuals that want certain things have to realize that mmos have other players too.  the developers need to be able to gather enough interests to ensure they can sustain and grow the game.  sometimes even devs have to make compromises as it brings more players to the table or else they'll end up like a starving artist.

     

    i can point out 2 things that will turn people away from pantheon right now:

    1.  player expression-  i'm not talking about appeareance slots.  it's playstyle expression that distinguishes one player from another player of the same class.  no specialization or individual quarks, building player and character attachment is null.  this is my biggest qualm with las12 and no gcd.

    2.  slow combat-  i personally am okay with slower combat as long as the consequence of action enough.  most of the people i talk to are pvpers so this is biased.  it'll filter out alot of us.  rejoice pvers.

     

    i really can't come up with a 3rd point.  the game i know is going to be super immersive(which is what attracts me).

    guess i'm not really concerned with groundhogging.  pvp really smashes that out the window.  sometimes i think the challenge pvers want comes from pvp >.>  maybe they just want the reward of a challenge without the many losses to another player.  eh whatever.

    • 1785 posts
    December 28, 2019 10:41 AM PST

    I wanted to take a moment to thank everyone who posted intelligent and thoughtful responses, and who took the time to clearly think through the different points I raised instead of simply reacting to parts of what I wrote.  The intent of my post was to start a discussion on the eve of the new year, and I'm really happy to see that several of you are participating in that - especially the people that are newer to the community.

    I don't think everyone has this problem, but I think that some members of our community labor under a few misconceptions.  The first is that there's such a thing as a "mainstream" gamer.  "Mainstream" is an over-generalization and a logical fallacy.  That's like saying that everyone who drives an SUV in the real world drives them for the same reasons.  The truth is that gamers have many different motivations and things they enjoy, and also that those things change over time.  What works for someone at the beginning of a new game may not work so well a few months or years later.  As an example of this, there are many, many people currently playing those "mainstream" games who would certainly be interested in Pantheon.  Just because they haven't sworn off other games in the meantime doesn't mean they're not the right kind of player, or ready for this one.  Even among this community, where many of us agree on broad things like challenge, group focus, and an open-world design, we still disagree, often violently, on smaller details.  Those disagreements aren't because we're fundamentally different types of players or because some of us are trying to "sabotage" Pantheon, but because we've all been influenced in different ways and our preferences have evolved over time.  We need to recognize that none of us has the complete picture or represents the ideal audience for Pantheon.  All of us taken together do, however.

     

    The second misconception is that adding something else to Pantheon will somehow take away from what it already has.  I certainly understand the fear that the experiences we want to see in the game won't be complete, but the truth is that you can build systems side by side in an MMORPG.  Having a rich crafting system doesn't take away from having compelling adventuring content.  Having detailed class abilities doesn't take away from having rich lore.  We should not be thinking of Pantheon, or any other game, as a zero-sum equation.  That's not how they work.  Sure, we could be cynical and point to other games that did a very bad job of integrating systems together, but let's have a little faith in the team at VR, shall we?  This isn't their first rodeo, and they have plenty of examples of both success and failure to learn from as they build Pantheon.

    I think it's very important that all of us keep the bigger picture in mind.  Retention is important.  Appealing to and supporting a diverse player base is important.  Truly evolving the designs and formulas of the past is important.  If Pantheon fails to do these things, then it simply won't last, nor will it make a big enough impact to encourage any other studios to try a similar approach.  We can disagree on how Pantheon should do these things but we should all be smart enough recognize that Pantheon still needs to do them if it is to succeed.


    This post was edited by Nephele at December 28, 2019 11:13 AM PST
    • 1247 posts
    December 28, 2019 10:59 AM PST

    Nephele said:

    I wanted to take a moment to thank everyone who posted intelligent and thoughtful responses, and who took the time to clearly think through the different points I raised instead of simply reacting to parts of what I wrote.  The intent of my post was to start a discussion on the eve of the new year, and I'm really happy to see that several of you are participating in that - especially the people that are newer to the community.

    I don't think everyone has this problem, but I think that some members of our community labor under a few misconceptions.  The first is that there's such a thing as a "mainstream" gamer.  "Mainstream" is an over-generalization and a logical fallacy.  That's like saying that everyone who drives an SUV in the real world drives them for the same reasons.  The truth is that gamers have many different motivations and things they enjoy, and also that those things change over time.  What works for someone at the beginning of a new game may not work so well a few months or years later.  As an example of this, there are many, many people currently playing those "mainstream" games who would certainly be interested in Pantheon.  Just because they haven't sworn off other games in the meantime doesn't mean they're not the right kind of player, or ready for this one.  Even among this community, where many of us agree on broad things like challenge, group focus, and an open-world design, we still disagree, often violently, on smaller details.  Those disagreements aren't because we're fundamentally different types of players or because some of us are trying to "sabotage" Pantheon, but because we've all been influenced in different ways and our preferences have evolved over time.  We need to recognize that none of us has the complete picture or represents the ideal audience for Pantheon.  All of us taken together do, however.

     

    The second misconception is that adding something else to Pantheon will somehow take away from what it already has.  I certainly understand the fear that the experiences we want to see in the game won't be complete, but the truth is that you can build systems side by side in an MMORPG.  Having a rich crafting system doesn't take away from having compelling adventuring content.  Having detailed class abilities doesn't take away from having rich lore.  We should not be thinking of Pantheon, or any other game, as a zero-sum equation.  That's not how they work.  Sure, we could be cynical and point to other games that did a very bad job of integrating systems together, but let's have a little faith in the team at VR, shall we?  This isn't their first rodeo, and they have plenty of examples of both success and failure to learn from as they build Pantheon.

    I think it's very important that all of us keep the bigger picture in mind.  Retention is important.  Appealing to and supporting a diverse player base is important.  Truly evolving the designs and formulas of the past is important.  If Pantheon fails to do these things, then it simply won't last, nor will it make a big enough impact to encourage any other studios to try a similar approach.  We can disagree on how Pantheon should do these things but we should all be smart enough recognize that Pantheon still needs to do them if it is to succeed.

    Neph - if you are going to make absurd claims alongside thoughtful ideas, then those are going to get responses as well. 

    Furthermore, you can insert “EQ Puritan” into what you say about “Mainstreamer” and the result is still true. See? Both are stupid terms.


    This post was edited by Syrif at December 28, 2019 11:21 AM PST
    • 1247 posts
    December 28, 2019 11:10 AM PST

    stellarmind said:

    Syrif said:

    Wow, I disagree with pretty much most of what you post. Not worth my time to go through it all, but I will say it is beyond stupid to still try and call people “EQ purists” & to the contrary, “mainstreamers.” Brad was right: interest in Pantheon has only just begun. And, the abundance of crappy mmorpg’s will only strengthen this new game’s position. Not many people knew about Pantheon & the vision during the Kickstarter (duh).

    I’ll take Visionary Realms anyday over the others. LMAO - look at what the mega Activision Blizzard is capable of doing: ‘Battle for Azeroth.’ Lol really? And you are saying that it’s all about mega revenue and large overhead? Lol. 

     

    he probably means eq purist as players who want things exactly as they were in eq with updated graphics.

    besides the people that made blizzard aren't really there anymore.  it's just activision milking blizzard's name.

     

    individuals that want certain things have to realize that mmos have other players too.  the developers need to be able to gather enough interests to ensure they can sustain and grow the game.  sometimes even devs have to make compromises as it brings more players to the table or else they'll end up like a starving artist.

     

    i can point out 2 things that will turn people away from pantheon right now:

    1.  player expression-  i'm not talking about appeareance slots.  it's playstyle expression that distinguishes one player from another player of the same class.  no specialization or individual quarks, building player and character attachment is null.  this is my biggest qualm with las12 and no gcd.

    2.  slow combat-  i personally am okay with slower combat as long as the consequence of action enough.  most of the people i talk to are pvpers so this is biased.  it'll filter out alot of us.  rejoice pvers.

     

    i really can't come up with a 3rd point.  the game i know is going to be super immersive(which is what attracts me).

    guess i'm not really concerned with groundhogging.  pvp really smashes that out the window.  sometimes i think the challenge pvers want comes from pvp >.>  maybe they just want the reward of a challenge without the many losses to another player.  eh whatever.

     

    The problem with that claim is I have yet to see a SINGLE PERSON here who has asked for things to be “exactly” the same from EQ with “just updated graphics” - as you mention. And I have been here since the KS. If by “EQ puritism” you mean P1999, then that‘s available. Myself and others don’t play over there because replaying Classic Everquest servers does not interest us. To say that looking to Brad’s former games for some inspiration makes someone a “puritan” is beyond totally stupid. 

    • 3237 posts
    December 28, 2019 11:25 AM PST

    One of Brad's blogs comes to mind:  https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/178/how-to-get-through-to-people-who-just-don-t-get-it?

    There are plenty of great posts on this thread from people who seem to get it.  You know who you are, and thank you for treating others with respect.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at December 28, 2019 11:26 AM PST
    • 1247 posts
    December 28, 2019 11:41 AM PST

    Yep - exactly! :) thanks for the link ad7. ^^ I’d refer people to that. 

    • 1428 posts
    December 28, 2019 11:45 AM PST

    Syrif said:

    The problem with that claim is I have yet to see a SINGLE PERSON here who has asked for things to be “exactly” the same from EQ with “just updated graphics” - as you mention. And I have been here since the KS. If by “EQ puritism” you mean P1999, then that‘s available. Myself and others don’t play over there because replaying Classic Everquest servers does not interest us. To say that looking to Brad’s former games for some inspiration makes someone a “puritan” is beyond totally stupid. 

    eh i dunno about eq puritists.  couldn't care less.  one could probably refer it to players that are adamant against change and there's plenty of people on the forums here resistant to even minor changes.

    i should probably clarify that this isn't a bad thing.  there are tried and true methods that worked.  if i dont' add that some 'purist' my purge me rofl.

    i'm already an odd man out here on the forums.


    This post was edited by NoJuiceViscosity at December 28, 2019 11:51 AM PST
    • 1428 posts
    December 28, 2019 12:20 PM PST

    oneADseven said:

    One of Brad's blogs comes to mind:  https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/178/how-to-get-through-to-people-who-just-don-t-get-it?

    There are plenty of great posts on this thread from people who seem to get it.  You know who you are, and thank you for treating others with respect.

     

    eyes of a hawk, apm of octopus, memory of an elephant.

    • 1247 posts
    December 28, 2019 1:05 PM PST

    stellarmind said:

    Syrif said:

    The problem with that claim is I have yet to see a SINGLE PERSON here who has asked for things to be “exactly” the same from EQ with “just updated graphics” - as you mention. And I have been here since the KS. If by “EQ puritism” you mean P1999, then that‘s available. Myself and others don’t play over there because replaying Classic Everquest servers does not interest us. To say that looking to Brad’s former games for some inspiration makes someone a “puritan” is beyond totally stupid. 

    eh i dunno about eq puritists.  couldn't care less.  one could probably refer it to players that are adamant against change and there's plenty of people on the forums here resistant to even minor changes.

    i should probably clarify that this isn't a bad thing.  there are tried and true methods that worked.  if i dont' add that some 'purist' my purge me rofl.

    i'm already an odd man out here on the forums.

    Just want to add that actually, I think the trend you are describing is people are not wanting things reminiscent of the current/dominant mmorpg market. People want something different. Just my 2 coppers :)