philo said:EppE said: There is a middle ground between mindless masses and tiny community. Stop arguing extremes and being so upset someone said the old school MMO comunity is small. It was. EQ peaked at 500k two years after it's golden age. It's disengenuious to characterize it as otherwise. This death penalty has more in common with EQ than WoW.Discussing size of ther playerbase is a large tangent that doesnt relate to the original question...but ill bite.
500k players simultaneously is quite large for most mmorpgs. Are you comparing it to only the most heavily played/popular mmos for some reason? If you really think the number of players who played EQ was small you have a very twisted perspective of the genre as a whole. VR has stated they can "be sustainable with numbers in the tens of thousands."..they would be very happy to come anywhere close to EQ numbers. It's hard for you to say that someone is "arguing extremes" when your perspective seems so off.
If PRotF ends up with a long term sustainable playerbase of 500k or more they will likely have caved on much of the original tenants and ideas in order to attract those kind of numbers. Some examples might be: if the game is not truly challenging, if soloability is increased, if speed of combat is increased, if downtime is decreased, if payment models are expanded etc. These things might attract more players in the short term. My opinion is that these type of features would lessen the quality of the game.
560k was the max subscription in 2003 in the LDoN era, long after the "golden age". By then we had grave yards, instances, the bazaar and cosmetics (at least dyes). As soon as WoW came out in 2004 EQ subscriptions dropped rapidly. So when given the choice a significant portion of the MMO community switched to a title with different features.
It should also be noted that there was a huge amount of overlap between UO, EQ, DAoC, SWG and FF11 players. I played 4 out of 5 of those and went to WoW in favor of EQ2, Vanguard never even hit my radar at the time due to the launch. There might have been as many as 1 million MMO players before the launch of WoW.
I am in general a believer in most things VR states but the idea that they can operate the company on even 50k subscriptions tells me they need a new accountant, or they will have virtually no support staff or patch/expansion development staff.
There is plenty of design space between "someone else must go get my corpse for me and I cannot play until I have it" and "opps I died, oh well". Show stopper features will drive away a fair number of people that would otherwise enjoy a difficult group centric game. The emphasis is on Stopping play. If there is a slow but difficult path then that is enough.
Due to EQ mob/vs player density and zone size getting to your corpse naked was doable. If on the other hand Pantheon has significantly larger zones, casters can only bind in the same locations as melee, high mob density even during peak play, all mobs require a geared group to defeat and certain zones require acclimation gear to even enter then naked corpse runs even for a full group is literally impossible.
Now I do think death effects should be permeant until you loot your corpse and only once looted will the timer for it to wear off start to tick down. Being able to just leave a corpse behind because you don’t value what’s on it just leaves open too much cheese. The only caveat to that would be to have some way to break your tie to your body after say 24 RL hours at which point your inventory on the corpse is lost. I suspect that bags alone will be valuable enough that most people will not willingly do so.
This thread alone is proof enough there is enough variance of opinion among us crotchety old schoolers that making sweeping generalizations about what people want is absurd. And no, it isn't just old schoolers that are interested in Pantheon. I'm currently playing Classic WoW with people, that have never played another MMO other than WoW, that are interested in Pantheon, or at least interested in trying it out. This thread has really devolved into something ridiculous.
EppE said: Compared to the current amount of gamers yes the original EQ community is small. We are a small fraction of current gamers. 20 years ago we were in the majority but not anymore.
LOL. Brad's Classic EQ Trilogy alone was hundreds of thousands of people (it was in this period that saw INCREASES in subs, and it was long after this golden era when subs continuously DECLINED). Plus all of the other oldschool gamers from DAOC, Ultima Online, FF, VG and more who want an mmorpg of these tenets again. There are even people from D&D. There is no shortage of people interested in the tenets of Pantheon, just like Brad said. And as VR has stated, they are not going for mindless masses on top of that.
Even WoW for what it is had to bring back Classic to regain subs because they had literally been losing tons of subs for quite some time.
The Ruins of Kunark 2000 April 24 60 The Scars of Velious 2000 December 5 60 The Shadows of Luclin 2001 December 4 60 The Planes of Power 2002 October 29 65 The Legacy of Ykesha 2003 February 25 65 Lost Dungeons of Norrath 2003 September 9 65 Gates of Discord 2004 February 10 65 Omens of War 2004 September 14 70 Dragons of Norrath 2005 February 15 70 Depths of Darkhollow 2005 September 13 70 Prophecy of Ro 2006 February 21 70 The Serpent's Spine 2006 September 19 75 The Buried Sea 2007 February 13
75
Data shows that the rate of increasing subs continued into SoL with the true peak being between Gates and Omens. It was only after Depths of Darkhollow that EQ really began to lose subscriptions though their market share was way down by then as WoW had between 10-11 million subs. It is also impossible to say how many people subscribed to more than one game in that time period, I know I did.
And yet the fact remains that the expansions after Classic saw the declines. Brad's Classic Trilogy only saw increases, which is quite impressive for a time when computers were not a dime a dozen. Even WoW had to bring back their own 'Classic' since WoW's subs had been declining immensely.
I think it's considerable that Pantheon is not only getting interest from Brad's Classic Trilogy and Vanguard but also other former oldschool mmorpg's like DAOC, Ultima Online, FF, Warhammer, and even people sick of WoW. That to me demonstrates the attractive vision for Pantheon.
Add: Back ON TOPIC LOL: I think deleveling risk, especially at higher levels will help to keep players engaged at max/high levels. I think it is at least one way to keep higher levels in the loop rather than on a 'permanent cushion.'
Trasak said:It should also be noted that there was a huge amount of overlap between UO, EQ, DAoC, SWG and FF11 players. I played 4 out of 5 of those and went to WoW in favor of EQ2, Vanguard never even hit my radar at the time due to the launch. There might have been as many as 1 million MMO players before the launch of WoW.
It is a very common misconception from people who weren't heavily involved in EQ at the time that when wow came out everyone jumped ship from EQ to WoW.
EQ was already on the decline prior to wow for a number of reasons. It's subscriptions began dropping a year or more before wow released. It was very noticable in EQ at the time. From Planes of power (that released in 2002) and Gates of Discord (that released in early 2004) EQ saw a huge drop off of numbers and wow wasn't even out yet.
Wow ended up being a large benefactor of the way things were going with the EQ playerbase. EQ was in a bad place.
...and it's stating the obvious but yes, of course there are more players now than then...there are also more games. I believe VR will be ecstatic if they can sustain upper EQ type numbers for Pantheon. They have never mentioned wanting/expecting anywhere near those numbers when it has been addressed. They have talked about how they need much less to sustain the game for the long term.
@Philo ^ Yes, that is correct. You stated it much better than I. The decline started after Classic and before WoW's release, and it was very noticeable at that time. I finally saw for the first time what my RL friends had been complaining about prior to the changes being implemented. I played more casually than them, and they quit before I did of course. Looking back now I completely agree with everything they said though, and they were right.
EppE said: This death penalty has more in common with EQ than WoW.
This is where I disagree (to an extent). Durability and spawning with full gear have been announced here. Durability and spawning with gear are literally in WoW. How these mechanics are altered here remain to be seen, but durability and respawning with full gear are definitely death mechanics in WoW. That's just a fact.
Agreed Syrif,
The chart posted above is quite skewed (at least for the EQ timeline).
I'm guessing because most people purchased 3 months to a year at a time so even though they quit they had prepaid for those extra months. But there could be a number of other factors for why it is so off as well.
It seems to be about 6 months to a year later than what actually happened (which was very obvious if you were actively involved at the time...you dont need a chart to tell you hah).
philo said:Agreed Syrif,
The chart posted above is quite skewed (at least for the EQ timeline).
I'm guessing because most people purchased 3 months to a year at a time so even though they quit they had prepaid for those extra months. But there could be a number of other factors for why it is so off as well.
It seems to be about 6 months to a year later than what actually happened (which was very obvious if you were actively involved at the time...you dont need a chart to tell you hah).
There is something to be said for the difference between hours play and months purchased. Leading up to canceling my account of both EQ and WoW my play time dropped way lower than my peak for both games, absolutely unhealthy amounts down to just a few hours a week.