antonius said:Mathir said:We want the original freaking wheel (Everquest) with updated graphics and a new world to explore. That was the orginal point of Pantheon, now we have feature creep and delays. Unless you get 100 million in funding and hire another hundred employees, you can't compete with modern AAA MMOs due to fiscal and time limitations.
Agreed.
I am not sure I can disagree strongly enough with this sentiment. While there are plenty of enthusiasts who liked EQ I doubt there are even 5000 who will subscribe to basically an EQ clone with updated graphics and lore.
EQ was a great product 20 years ago. Now phone games have more sophistication. If you want an EQ clone there are plenty of emulation servers. No real developer wants to just copy and reface someone else work, even if it was a team you were part of.
Pantheon absolutely needs to stand on its own in a modern landscape. It needs to have a minimum level of quality of life interface functionality and a minimum level of game sophistication or it will just be laughed out of the market place by most gamers, even the 5k diehards will tire quickly.
Honestly if Pantheon was just going to be an EQ clone I would not have pledged, I've already given 4-6 years of free time to Everquest and that's enough. What got me to pledge was a combination of the tenants (not the specific game mechanics) that made Everquest both hard and group centric and the new features and Ideas that have developed from the best minds in MMOs over the last two decades.
Games can and will be made on a lean scale and a true gem will attract enthusiastic investors that an EQ clone would not interested in the slightest. If you really think an EQ clone can stand on its own there is nothing stopping you from launching a kickstarter.
Mathir said:Well, I'm on Team Joppa. The idea of seeing mobs in a dungeon that I can't attack because they are locked to another group is beyond ridiculous to me. Regardless though, VR, you guys need to quit trying to reinvent the wheel here. We want the original freaking wheel (Everquest) with updated graphics and a new world to explore. That was the orginal point of Pantheon, now we have feature creep and delays. Unless you get 100 million in funding and hire another hundred employees, you can't compete with modern AAA MMOs due to fiscal and time limitations. I get you want to show the world this ground breaking and cutting edge MMO, but you don't have the resources, you're just going to alienate your loyal fanbase as the delays and radio silence pile up. Maybe if an EQ style clone can be successful, you'll have the finances to do what you want with the second MMO. As for the naming policy, I couldn't disagree more on having multiple people with the same first name. Awful and confusing. Names definitely should only be locked to one server though.
Anyway, I'm clinging to the raft until Project Faerthale is revealed. You guys asked for my trust this last year plus as you showed us nothing but claimed to be doing great things. I continue to give that trust, I just hope it's rewarded. You've truly made the health and future of this game's development reliant on a postive impression of Project Faerthale.
I am just going to say: THIS ^^ all of it .
Drop this climate gate system. Leave out End Game raids, add them later. I would rather have people wait for end game stuff vs having EVERYONE waiting for EVERYTHING. Add dispositions Later, in an expansion. Drop Bard, Necro and Summoner for now and add them in an expansion 6 months after release. Having a game is better than a game with half baked features. as mentioned. you guys don't have Blizzards budget. stop acting like you do. finish something. add other crapola Later.
Trasak said:While there are plenty of enthusiasts who liked EQ I doubt there are even 5000 who will subscribe to basically an EQ clone with updated graphics and lore.
You comment about how you are a math guy but you repeatedly pull numbers out of the air that aren't based on anything.
philo said:Trasak said:While there are plenty of enthusiasts who liked EQ I doubt there are even 5000 who will subscribe to basically an EQ clone with updated graphics and lore.
You comment about how you are a math guy but you repeatedly pull numbers out of the air that aren't based on anything.
Referencing P99 user numbers is how I came up with 5000. Anyone who can still play on that server qualifies as an EQ enthusiast to me. Granted they haven't been at 5000 users in a long time but I am assuming there are a lot of casual users that are rarely on at the same time. Perhaps the Green launch will show us higher numbers but more than 10,000? Very unlikely.
Ill throw math at you then to show that at least the entire population of P99 at 10k users could not support a company even VRs size. At $15 a month each account would generate $180 a year. 10k users would then generate 1.8 million in revenue a year. While that may sound like a lot its not, its revenue. Typical industry personel costs are roughly double take home pay. A midlevel programmer in California makes roughly 85k. So in personnel cost 1.8 million revenue only supports 10.6 midlevel programmers. That doesn't cover network costs, building costs, advertising, support roles or C level positions. We wont even begin to talk about servicing the interest and investments to develop the game. Typically personnel costs are only 25% of a businesses revenue. The rest is split between reinvestment, debt servicing(all reoccurring operating costs) and yes profit because you know, its a business.
If we classify all VRs current 20 team members as midlevel programmers the will need a base revenue of 13.6 million annually. Now add in C level and CSRs and we can double the base payroll and the total target revenue.
To be a profitable company of roughly 40 people that pays off its debts in 5 years VR will need to attract 151k subscribers. That's nothing compared to WoW numbers or even peak EQ numbers but it is never going to be achieved by an EQ clone. Its going to require new blood that has modern expectations in what a game is.
Feel free to disagree with any of my numbers but I do have a basis for most of my statements, I just don't always include citations list with all my posts. Maybe I should.
P99 is a horrible point of reference as far as comparing subscription numbers to what an actual game would be. The only relation is that it is a shell of the original title in an obscure format.
As much as I enjoy P99 personally (though it is far from the original eq experience), surely you must be able to see why the numbers you are using are a mathematical fallacy?
Without getting into silly arguments about people's perceptions, I can say truthfully that I would be rather disappointed if Pantheon amounted to nothing more than a cloned or upgraded version of EverQuest. I respect that a portion of the community think that's what they want (and it may even be true for some of them!) but that's not me - and I don't think I"m alone in that sentiment, or even in a significant minority.
Fortunately, I don't believe that's what the team is really aiming for. I think they want to build a new and unique MMORPG that takes the best ideas and concepts from all of its predecessors. I think they want to build something that stands on its own, and helps set an example to the rest of the industry. Something that tells people you can still build a deep, social, group-centric, open-world game and be successful.
Perhaps I'll be disappointed, and perhaps I won't.
Either way - I suggest everyone go read Brad's rewrite of one of his blog posts, which just went up today. It may not answer all your questions, but it can't hurt. https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/188/much-to-do-about-pantheon-cco-update
philo said:P99 is a horrible point of reference as far as comparing subscription numbers to what an actual game would be. The only relation is that it is a shell of the original title in an obscure format.
As much as I enjoy P99 personally (though it is far from the original eq experience), surely you must be able to see why the numbers you are using are a mathematical fallacy?
I liked EQ P99 as well, but I'm fairly sure that people playing modern EQ in all its incarnations and EQ2 even will be interested in Pantheon. Not to mention all the people playing no MMORPG currently because there is nothing like Pantheon will be. Not to mention the people playing each modern MMORPG one after the other for a while desperately hoping for something that will satisfy their need for something like Pantheon.
So, yeah, using P99 figures as a gauge of potential for Pantheon is... not good.
philo said:P99 is a horrible point of reference as far as comparing subscription numbers to what an actual game would be. The only relation is that it is a shell of the original title in an obscure format.
As much as I enjoy P99 personally (though it is far from the original eq experience), surely you must be able to see why the numbers you are using are a mathematical fallacy?
If you think my numbers are a mathematical fallacy I'll turn this back to you then. How many users do you think would come out and subscribe at $15 a month for 5 years for a refaced Everquest MMO? Numbers and sources please. If my P99 population isn't acceptable (noticed I doubled the quadruple current users to add a slush factor) please show me some form of industry research that better represents the EQ enthusiast focus group. I guess -1 person as I normally would flag as an Everquest enthusiast but would not pay to play an EQ clone. Before you suggest it current EQ live numbers are not valid as EQ live is barely recognizable balance and play style wise to Everquest even 10 years ago. I could see an argument for the highest population progression server divided in half due to all the full group multi boxers that wont function in Pantheon, but I honestly don't have those numbers.
My 151k subscribers number is if anything is a conservative estimate of the required number of subscriptions to keep a 40 man MMO company profitable. It is based on actual business estimate guides and MBA course work. The Salaries are from glassdoor and localized and again on the lower side staying away from the Bay Area cause that **** is stupid. One could argue you might be able to get cheaper manpower buy letting developers telecommute in from much lower cost of living area's but I imagine that the eventual plan is to centralize everyone once the game launches.
PS mathematical fallacy is exceedingly insulting and condescending. You can disagree with me and my choice of data points but calling it a fallacy is a personal attack and I will take it as such if you continue. If you want to disagree with data points then provide your own, if you can't then what you have is an opinion and not a projection, estimate or fact.
disposalist said:So, yeah, using P99 figures as a gauge of potential for Pantheon is... not good.
That was in reference to the EQ clone version of Pantheon. The current direction of Pantheon is going to attract a huge cross section of players. The new systems and functionality added onto the best of the Everquest platform (which is really just group content requiring a tank/healer/CC/dps, slower leveling, and D&D archetype classes) are what is attracting interest. You take out the Disposition System, the Perception System, the Progeny System, the Climate System and any form of temporary content division and you are left with basically an EQ clone. If you shred the game down that far a large portion of the non P99/Progression Server player base fades away within a year of launch.
Trasak said:disposalist said:So, yeah, using P99 figures as a gauge of potential for Pantheon is... not good.
That was in reference to the EQ clone version of Pantheon. The current direction of Pantheon is going to attract a huge cross section of players. The new systems and functionality added onto the best of the Everquest platform (which is really just group content requiring a tank/healer/CC/dps, slower leveling, and D&D archetype classes) are what is attracting interest. You take out the Disposition System, the Perception System, the Progeny System, the Climate System and any form of temporary content division and you are left with basically an EQ clone. If you shred the game down that far a large portion of the non P99/Progression Server player base fades away within a year of launch.
There's an EQ clone version of Pantheon? My apologies if I've misunderstaood the context.
@disposalist
Philo, flapp antonius and Mathir are advocating “We want the original freaking wheel (Everquest) with updated graphics and a new world to explore. “
To me that is an EQ clone with a different face. It could be done pretty cheaply and quickly especially if you make the 4 roles a base class with only some specialization paths within the base class. Its not what Pantheon is though. Also its important to remember that the original PROTF kickstarter that was mostly an EQ clone failed. Its the advanced features that have attracted a lot of interest.
@Trasak
Ah, I see. I agree if Pantheon were to release something as stripped back as Classic Everquest but with new graphics, it would have a limited niche appeal. I still think, though, it would be much wider than those who play P99. A lot of people would would love a Classic Everquest reboot, if that's all they could get (I know I would) and they perhaps simply aren't playing MMORPGs anymore or are unhappily flitting from one to another.
It's a good thing for everyone, though, that Pantheon is already looking better than EQ classic. The class design is much more interesting, for one basic but fundamental thing. My god, warriors were boring in EQ (sorry warriors, but compared to casters, it was dreary). Not so in Pantheon. Also the interface and the mechanics are much less clunky already. The default EQ UI was painful and the custom UIs very tricky to configure and maintain. Ongoing, because they are based on Unity, things like UI should be a doddle to make good and to make flexible.
@disposalist
Its fair to say that P99 doesn't encompass the entire population that will at least be curious about an EQ clone. I am just unconvinced that there are more than an order of magnitude more people that will be willing to sub for 3-5 years. That I suppose is where I'm leaning on my personal opinion and not any true data. Just the way the gaming population moves from one game to another like locusts and how quickly emulation servers that are not constantly cranking out content become very stale very fast.
A team of maybe 10 people could get a limited content clone out in 2 years using a lot of stock Unity plugins and art assets. That few could in theory be supported by a 30k subscription pool if they keep the content rolling in to keep up with the consumption. Its actually not a bad idea for a group of College students with just enough expertise and who have the time to risk on a possibly fruitless endeavor.
Trasak said:@disposalist
Its fair to say that P99 doesn't encompass the entire population that will at least be curious about an EQ clone. I am just unconvinced that there are more than an order of magnitude more people that will be willing to sub for 3-5 years. That I suppose is where I'm leaning on my personal opinion and not any true data. Just the way the gaming population moves from one game to another like locusts and how quickly emulation servers that are not constantly cranking out content become very stale very fast.
A team of maybe 10 people could get a limited content clone out in 2 years using a lot of stock Unity plugins and art assets. That few could in theory be supported by a 30k subscription pool if they keep the content rolling in to keep up with the consumption. Its actually not a bad idea for a group of College students with just enough expertise and who have the time to risk on a possibly fruitless endeavor.
I'd love to see the P99 team do somthing like that. They must have a *lot* of relevant detailed knowledge. I played P99 for many months until coming up against the same problems I did in the EQ high level game, only quicker and more compressed.
If someone re-wrote EQ and made some of the more obvious improvements (yes, I know that's not as clear-cut as it sounds, but there will be some clear candidates for additions and changes) I would sub the crap out of that hehe.
At the risk of saying what is entirely too obvious. The closer to P99 we are the more P99 is simply competition and many of the core EQ fans who are already there or on other official or unofficial EQ servers will say "I have loads of time invested where I am. Why the heck even try Pantheon if it is simply starting over with more of the same and a few bells and whistles".
We need to be both much better (we will be - the state of the art has advanced a LOT over 20 years) and significantly different. Albeit with significant similarities to appeal to the heart of our target market.
Trasak said:PS mathematical fallacy is exceedingly insulting and condescending. You can disagree with me and my choice of data points but calling it a fallacy is a personal attack and I will take it as such if you continue. If you want to disagree with data points then provide your own, if you can't then what you have is an opinion and not a projection, estimate or fact.
I 100% have an opinion. Just like you but at least I'm not trying to hide behind some sort of false math that has no backing. Making up numbers as if they are backed by actual relevant statistics is way worse than just stating an opinion and is the definition of a mathematical fallacy.
It's like you dont get that your numbers are completely self serving and biased and not based on anything relevant. They dont help you make a valid point. On the contrary. They make people like myself call out the invalidity of your flawed numbers.
When I say an EQ clone, I don't mean that literally. I want 2020 graphics, the actual classes to be more engaging and interesting, newer systems like collections and Vanguard style crafting, etc.... Basically an updated EQ with 2020 technology and lessons learned. But the core game is what i want theoretically copied. LONG leveling, grindish, group focused, excellent lore, massive challenge, huge death penalties and corpse recoveries to make the reward of trying hard content all the more fulfilling and rare, specific class roles and individuality, completely unbalanced gameplay where some classes are just better in certain circumstances, lots of abilities but limited in how many you can use at once, a game with lots of strategy on how to tackle things, the ability to solo and camp and farm items starting early on that will last and make a differnece the duration of your character, and the list goes on.
What I don't want is instancing, frequent loot drops (I want everything worthwhile to be ungodly rare, so if you want to camp something, set aside a lot of time), no quest hubs, no maps, no teleports outside very limited druid and wizard ports, no summons at all, no bonus or rest xp, no caravan system, no mob locking, no quest journals, no shared first names, small raids (all raids 50+ people), no loot pinatas (limited drops on raid mobs so it takes a long time to gear up a guild), and the list goes on.
Essentially I want a game like EQ, so I say EQ clone. I don't mean that literally. But nobody has made a game like EQ since EQ, even though I loved WoW, it was far too easy. WoW Classic right now is ridiculously easy and too dumbed down, but still better than anything else out there. What I am worried about is VR talking about a 2 hour focus. GTFO with that. I want a game just like EQ1 that throws you into the world with unlimited things to do that take forever to do them. I want that overwhelming, no hand held feeling. By definition, I don't think you can have an open, sand box world and somehow say you're breaking it down into two hour play sessions. Makes zero sense and would be a massive mistake. If people want to play just two hours, they'll log off after two hours. Make a game for the people that will never log off, that covers everyone else in the process. EQ1 is the blueprint for this. Yes, we need graphics upgrades, and yes, some classes could use more oomph and strategy, and yes, there are some new features over the years not the least of which is indepth Vanguard crafting that should be included as well. But the core design, the core feel, the core concepts....EQ1 clone please. Noone else has ever done it and that's what everyone is waiting for. Newer players will fall in love with the challenge and scope as well. And the old EQ1 players all want something new to discover and explore, P99 and those types of Classic servers can never give that, which is why I never played on them. New, modernized version of EQ1 please.
@Trasak
I always enjoy your posts!
Mathir said:What I am worried about is VR talking about a 2 hour focus. GTFO with that. I want a game just like EQ1 that throws you into the world with unlimited things to do that take forever to do them
To be fair, VR have said they want to *enable* people to play in 2 hour blocks. Make it so you can make meaningful achievements in that block. Not necessarily make it so 2 hour blocks are the aim and ideal.
You *could* do this in EQ if you planned your travel and coordinated with your group. The only things you couldn't do would be holding down some of those epic quest camps, but even those you *could* just check in on and, if busy during your two hours, do something else, if not busy, hold them for two hours and cross you fingers. Epic questing was a marathon anyway, right?
I suppose it would restrict some of those huge raids. Often it would take 2 hours to get 80 people together, though even that would be much quicker and easier these days with modern comms and forums.
I get what you're saying but I don't think letting more casual players have a chance at 'the good stuff' *has* to mean a less challenging or rewarding game.
philo said:Trasak said:PS mathematical fallacy is exceedingly insulting and condescending. You can disagree with me and my choice of data points but calling it a fallacy is a personal attack and I will take it as such if you continue. If you want to disagree with data points then provide your own, if you can't then what you have is an opinion and not a projection, estimate or fact.
I 100% have an opinion. Just like you but at least I'm not trying to hide behind some sort of false math that has no backing. Making up numbers as if they are backed by actual relevant statistics is way worse than just stating an opinion and is the definition of a mathematical fallacy.
It's like you dont get that your numbers are completely self serving and biased and not based on anything relevant. They dont help you make a valid point. On the contrary. They make people like myself call out the invalidity of your flawed numbers.
He provided an estimate/projection and used sound logic to explain his numbers. You don't get to call his projection invalid or flawed based on an "opinion" -- or maybe you can, but you must accept that opinions are worthless in the context of claiming mathematical fallacy. If you're going to call his projection invalid and false then you need to point out the invalid step or argument. You cited relevance multiple times, as if your opinion is somehow more relevant to the equation than whatever research he did. That's called an anecdotal logical fallacy. He asked you to provide your own data points, which is fair, seeing that you claim to have such a strong grasp on relevance and validity. Instead of doing that you doubled down and continued to criticize him. That's called a tu quoque logical fallacy. Calling his numbers biased and self-serving prior to undermining their relevance and validity is ad hominem, which is also a logical fallacy. In other words, Trasak's math appears to be far more credible than your logic.
disposalist said:Mathir said:What I am worried about is VR talking about a 2 hour focus. GTFO with that. I want a game just like EQ1 that throws you into the world with unlimited things to do that take forever to do themTo be fair, VR have said they want to *enable* people to play in 2 hour blocks. Make it so you can make meaningful achievements in that block. Not necessarily make it so 2 hour blocks are the aim and ideal.
You *could* do this in EQ if you planned your travel and coordinated with your group. The only things you couldn't do would be holding down some of those epic quest camps, but even those you *could* just check in on and, if busy during your two hours, do something else, if not busy, hold them for two hours and cross you fingers. Epic questing was a marathon anyway, right?
I suppose it would restrict some of those huge raids. Often it would take 2 hours to get 80 people together, though even that would be much quicker and easier these days with modern comms and forums.
I get what you're saying but I don't think letting more casual players have a chance at 'the good stuff' *has* to mean a less challenging or rewarding game.
I hope that is what they mean. For whatever reason, I'm under the impression they literally are designing the game for casuals in two hour blocks and that was more of a recent direction they decided to take the development of the game. Hopefully, I just read some things wrong and have the wrong impression. I'm sure they'll clarify at some point. And to be clear, I'm fine with there being nice stopping points in dungeons and along epic quest lines where it's convenient for casuals to take breaks, but I'm hoping the game is still being designed overall for those that play for huge blocks at a time. Again, I thought EQ1 did this best. World of Warcraft is what I think of when they say two hour content blocks, and a casual friendly game like that is not what I am hoping for or expect, but fear that might be the new focus. The super small raid sizes already have me on edge.
Of course 187 would respond. The person who is most known for twisting given information to validate his own points. Just like trask is doing above..
Its not that big of a deal. its simply a common sense thing. If it isnt obvious why the numbers given arent relevant to what actual subscription numbers would be we can move on. I'm not going to go into any of the possible variables that would invalidate those numbers. Why the given data wouldn't equate to being close to accurate should be common sense to most people.