EppE said:A couple things.
I can hop on Steam right now and pick up almost any game and in 20-45 minutes be ready to play. I don't need to take a trip to the store and hope it's in stock. I can also play literally thousands of games under $10. I may only get a few hours or maybe a weekend out of it, but the value is still pretty high. Bottom line the market is saturated.
This is exactly why an mmorpg like Pantheon (that's NOT like those thousands of games) is needed right now. Especially since a challenging mmo inspired by the tenets of oldschool does not currently exist.
EppE said:I don't mind monitazation of games
That would be terrible for Pantheon. Brad was correct; subscriptions work just fine. Pantheon is not going for the mindless masses. People from Brad's Classic Trilogy, VG, DAOC, Ultima Online, FF, Warhammer, D&D, Wheel of Time, and even people sick of WoW are following Pantheon. There is no shortage of People interested in the oldschool-inspired tenets of Pantheon.
disposalist said:VR do not have to cater to the lowest common denominator to grow their player base at all.
I'm taking about VR staying true to their vision but players outside the intended niche, who are used to more 'mainstream' games, finding that Pantheon does, actually, appeal to them.
PLayers who have gotten used to the the modern MMORPGs and forgotten how much better it was, or who have never really experienced a challenging, group-oriented, open-world MMORPG before.
That's still audience grabbing. VR sticking to their vision, and pulling in mainstream players, are two different things. The only way a mainstream person is going to look at Pantheon and possibly find it interesting, is if VR added mechanics or other such things from other mainstream games, things that the forums have clearly stated they don't want. So to have VR entice people from just the niche that this game is targeted for is still audience grabbing, no matter how you word it.
I also doubt that oldschool gamers have forgotten what games were like, they just choose not to play games like it anymore, again because of time. All of us here clearly haven't forgotten what games were like, so I'm curious as to why you think there are people out there that have forgotten. If they are playing other MMO's, what makes you think that they are going to leave it for Pantheon, unless pantheon has things in it from those games to get them to play, or what makes you feel that they are playing them because they have forgotten? what if they are happier with it despite them having played EQ for years?
I'll give you that there might be some that haven't experienced what EQ offered, but again, there is always EQ or P99 if they wanted to experience that. Not to mention they probably watch oldschool gamers play EQ or P99 and just don't like it. They might take a peek as Pantheon, but if it doesn't appeal they aren't going to play. Though, we also have to remember that the generation that are here now, are the kids of people that played games like EQ and Classic WoW, and it could very well be that some of these parents aren't wanting their kids to play games like that anymore, because they remember the negatives of the game and don't want the negative impacts on their kids.
In any event, the bottom line here is that if VR are targeting the niche, but are trying to get other players invovled outside of it, it's audience grabbing still. This is one of the downsides to targeting a niche is that, if you want or need to have more revenue, then you need to target outside of it in turn possibly upsetting the niche that you have targed; but if you don't then you end up either losing quality of the product to the niche, or just outright leaving the niche behind.
bryanleo9 said: I dont buy the arguement that people have less time to play than we use to. We all gave 24 hours on s day. We will make time for things we enjoy and spend our money on such things. I read that the average American sits on thier butt watching 4.5 hours of tv EACH day. A quality mmo like classic EQ was a source of entertainment and relaxation. Many of us made time for it while working and going to school. I look forward to pantheon being my next mmo outlet as I have found the newer ones not meeting what is important to me. A challenging mmo that requires teamwork will be successful regardless on the age of the gamer.
You're correct. just exactly WHO has less time to play?
When people use that bogus argument I wish they would clarify exactly who is this "WE" they speak of that "no longer has time like they used too"
Players are like a revolving door, as some head out the high end others are comming in the bottem end, they are avalable from ALL spectrums of the age range. Peopel didn't STOP getting borne.
bryanleo9 said: I dont buy the arguement that people have less time to play than we use to. We all gave 24 hours on s day. We will make time for things we enjoy and spend our money on such things. I read that the average American sits on thier butt watching 4.5 hours of tv EACH day. A quality mmo like classic EQ was a source of entertainment and relaxation. Many of us made time for it while working and going to school. I look forward to pantheon being my next mmo outlet as I have found the newer ones not meeting what is important to me. A challenging mmo that requires teamwork will be successful regardless on the age of the gamer.
Yep, this is very true. My RL friends whom I played with 20 years ago were engineers/parents, a professor, students, and we also played with someone who was permanently in a wheelchair. People who say we don't have time to play now are full of bogus. And retirees have already stated on forums that they have even more time to play now. The concept of time is not changed; there are still the same number of hours in a week now as there were 20 years ago. You make the time for what you enjoy; that's nothing new.
@Zorkon Ah! Looks like we were sharing similar response at same time lol. :) What you state is true.
Nephele said:I get where you're coming from but I also think you may have a misconception as to what a group focused game really means. It is a misconception that a lot of people seem to have because everyone's perception is colored by their past experiences. Just because Pantheon is being built with an open world and a group focus does not mean that everything is going to be camp checks and long grinds as people were used to in EQ. What it does means is that when the game presents a challenge, you will want to bring friends for that challenge. That's all.
As far as time requirements or how we approach the game's content, that's an entirely different subject and it really depends on how the content is built. We will all have a better idea of what that will be like in Alpha, but I think the goal the team is working towards is to have a world that you can actively explore (with friends), and not simply a series of camps that you choose between for grinding experience or getting loot drops. The team has a stated goal that on average, players should be able to make progress and accomplish something meaningful within the bounds of 2- to 3-hour play sessions. That alone should tell you that they're sensitive to the time constraints that many adults have to deal with.
I've played EQ and P99...unfortunately it just doesn't hold up to what I use to think of it. EQ, looking back on it now after having spent this much time away from it, was just that, camp checks and grinding for hours on end for nothing more than pixilated items that now mean nothing. I agree that Pantheon being an open world game means it's going to be exactly like that, but given how some of the forum-goers demand it be that way, and we all know that these same people have access to pre alpha testing, it does lead me, and I can only speculate that there are others, that do feel it's going to be just that all over again. I don't mind a challenge, but I don't want what EQ was nor do I want what P99 is now.
For the thing with time constraints, you can't have 2 hour to 3 hour play sessions and have a lot of the hardcore things form EQ being asked for on the forums in place as well. I will give them that they are doing what most companies don't do properly, in that they are looking at the average person that doesn't have the time to play for hours on end without sacrificing something, whether that sacrifice is noticeable or not. They are trying to have things done with the 2 to 3 hour time constraint and have it be fun and engaging while being meaningful, and I give them full credit for that. With some of the things being asked for if not demanded by the forums, like an extreme death penalty, sure you can do 2 to 3 hours of game play, but be set back by the same amount, if not more by an extreme death penalty. On top of that everyone has a different opinion on what is meaningful and what isn't so no one is ever going to agree on that either. The devs could consider getting from one camp to another in two hours meaningful, while others could consider completing 3 or 4 quests in two hours as meaningful. I do agree, and as much as I hate the argument, but we do have to just wait and see as we don't know a lot about what's going on with the game behind the curtains.
@syrif i want a cash shop for aesthetics so that i can have my enchanter looking like a sweet 5 dollar treat rockin' dat old skool firiona vie outfit ya ya!
it is also acceptable to have it where cash shop cosmetics can't be toggle on and off. i'd pay 20 usd to have an updated version of dat sultry female high elf attire ;D
it's a magical world right?! RIGHT?! i can walk in the bone chilling tundra of frosthammer summit dressed in sheen satin fabrics of MMMMAAGGGGICCCC!
srs folks, theres a legit reason why casters have to wear revealing outfits.
1. all spell casters need as much open skin contact to release mana at a more cost effecient rate.
2. spells are exactly 1 percent more potent per 1 square inch of skin in open contact with the environment.
3. certain classes will even wear less clothing to absorb ambient mana, such as druids, shamans, necromancers, enchanters, wizards and some monks.
with these 3 very important points, it is therefore immersive for spell casters to be barely dressed. this is also not including special bonuses, such as reduce threat, bonuses to charisma, agility, charm, mobility and style points.
i very much like the late 80s and 90s style of female wardrobe. sure one can argue that is is immersion breaking, but dare i say this is a world with mermaids, aliens made of light, and humanoids that made from magical stones. these 3 races should exclusively have less clothing due to the nature of their existence.
this isn't factoring in the tribal aspects of spiky people and big wide almost hairless mongrels.
humans are really the only races, minus spell casters and the exception of monk, should be normally clothed
and if ya think it's not practical to wear barely anything for combat, pfft, MAGICAL FORCE FIELD PROJECTS FROM THE SKIN! LESS SKIN, MORE OMPH for the natural mana barrier!
that's right! for casters, less is more!
OCastitatisLilium said:I've played EQ and P99...unfortunately it just doesn't hold up to what I use to think of it. EQ, looking back on it now after having spent this much time away from it, was just that, camp checks and grinding for hours on end for nothing more than pixilated items that now mean nothing.
It was whatever you made of it, it is a bundle of memories from a different time. If you want to reduce the experiences and memories to a whole lot of grinding for pixelated items that now mean nothing then there is nothing anyone can do to help as that pretty much reduces all games (and honestly many facets of life) to a meaningless nothing in the end. As if experiences, memories, and/or nostalgia are worthless.
OCastitatisLilium said:disposalist said:VR do not have to cater to the lowest common denominator to grow their player base at all.
I'm taking about VR staying true to their vision but players outside the intended niche, who are used to more 'mainstream' games, finding that Pantheon does, actually, appeal to them.
PLayers who have gotten used to the the modern MMORPGs and forgotten how much better it was, or who have never really experienced a challenging, group-oriented, open-world MMORPG before.
That's still audience grabbing. VR sticking to their vision, and pulling in mainstream players, are two different things. The only way a mainstream person is going to look at Pantheon and possibly find it interesting, is if VR added mechanics or other such things from other mainstream games, things that the forums have clearly stated they don't want. So to have VR entice people from just the niche that this game is targeted for is still audience grabbing, no matter how you word it.
Nah. VR do not have to add 'mainstream' features to pull in some of the mainstream audience any more than a good steakhouse has to put cheap burgers on the menu to pull in some of the people who eat at MacDonalds.
Pantheon will appeal to modern players because challenge and group-play will simply be appealing to some that haven't really experienced it before.
OCastitatisLilium said:I also doubt that oldschool gamers have forgotten what games were like, they just choose not to play games like it anymore, again because of time. All of us here clearly haven't forgotten what games were like, so I'm curious as to why you think there are people out there that have forgotten. If they are playing other MMO's, what makes you think that they are going to leave it for Pantheon, unless pantheon has things in it from those games to get them to play, or what makes you feel that they are playing them because they have forgotten? what if they are happier with it despite them having played EQ for years?
Maybe 'forgotten' isn't the right word, but I myself have played modern MMORPGs and you do start to just 'get used to' what they feed you. The convenience and the themepark becomes normal.
They may not be yearning for an old-school game like Pantheon, but players that are currently 'happy' with WoW or whatever may well see Pantheon, give it a try and 'remember' what was so good about challenge and group play.
OCastitatisLilium said:I'll give you that there might be some that haven't experienced what EQ offered, but again, there is always EQ or P99 if they wanted to experience that. Not to mention they probably watch oldschool gamers play EQ or P99 and just don't like it.
It's pretty laughable to think any significant number of 'modern' gamers might be happy playing P99 or even 'modern' EQ. Even with the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia, I - someone desperate for a decent old-school MMORPG - could only stick it for a couple of months. It was better than some modern MMORPGs, but still not a 'good' experience these days.
The graphics, sound, UI, etc. make it like going back to listen to music on old, hissy, stretched cassette tapes. It's just too painful.
OCastitatisLilium said:They might take a peek as Pantheon, but if it doesn't appeal they aren't going to play.
Agreed. That's the whole point. The hope (and the fair expectation) is that it *will* appeal to a good healthy number of them.
OCastitatisLilium said:Though, we also have to remember that the generation that are here now, are the kids of people that played games like EQ and Classic WoW, and it could very well be that some of these parents aren't wanting their kids to play games like that anymore, because they remember the negatives of the game and don't want the negative impacts on their kids.
Huh? The social aspects of classic MMORPGs were fantastic, especially when compared to the either absense of interaction or the abuse flying around in modern games. If there are any parents that don't want their kids to play Pantheon because of bad memories of EQ, then those parents won't be letting their kids play *any* games. I doubt there are many and it's kinda moot.
OCastitatisLilium said:In any event, the bottom line here is that if VR are targeting the niche, but are trying to get other players invovled outside of it, it's audience grabbing still. This is one of the downsides to targeting a niche is that, if you want or need to have more revenue, then you need to target outside of it in turn possibly upsetting the niche that you have targed; but if you don't then you end up either losing quality of the product to the niche, or just outright leaving the niche behind.
I'm happy to agree to disagree, but I certainly disagree.
VR *are* targeting a niche, but, because it will be a polished, modern game (re. graphics, sound and UI) it will be interesting and 'acceptable' enough to modern gamers to at least try and many will find they love the gameplay, just like the many that loved EQ gameplay back in 1999 though they had never played anything like it before.
Yes, there is a danger and temptation to change the game to gain greater appeal. Other games have done this and suffered, or have been successful, but still disappointed their original fans.
Everything VR have ever said related to this leads me to believe they are fully aware that would be disasterous to the core audience they are intentionally targeting, though and that they have no intention of risking that.
-The challenge. Learning how to play your class without everything spelled out right to you. Corpse runs, losing a significant ammount of XP when you die
-Adventuring without quests or maps telling you where to go!!!!! Thats what the older MMORPGs were all about and many of the new games are missing that adventerous feeling where YOU need to explore and find what to do/ how far you can progress / risk vs reward
-Gear upgrades. Gear upgrades were significant items that took time to replace. And even once you replace that item you probably wont forget it. In newer games youl bow right through a full set of gear in a matter of levels and not even remember any items
-The questing. Quests were meaningful and took TIME and EFFORT to complete. And usually had a nice reward that would be useful for quite a while
-No random group generators / it was uo to YOU to make friends, join guilds, ask for help. That brings a whole new social aspect to the game when someone helps you and your expected to help them in the future if they need it. Develop good friends
All we need are some of these same aspects of gaming with better graphics and gameplay. Cant wait for Pantheon :D
The challenge is missing from modern games. I do not like how games have evolved to attract as many people as possible for a short period of time. Back when I played Donkey Kong, or Marior Brothers, etc. the goal was to play the game until you were good enough to beat the game. You die three times you start all over. You keep playing till you master the parts you died on, then you die later in the game...and start over again. Eventually you'd beat the game and feel proud of your accomplishment.
Without making a long story out of it, I'll just simply say that I want a chllenging game that is designed to be engaging for a LONG time. The risk/reward seems to be missing in many modern games. They are built around the theory of reward/reward instead haha.
older games were often full of creative solutions to overcome technical limitations while still immersing the players. i remember playing a famicom jrpg where you can tell whom to talk to without floating exclamation points. the game simply flipped the npc back and forth or would walk in circles or left and right as if pacing, etc.
there was a text based mud that tied chat to a crystal amulet that you had to rub to project and receive thoughts from other players. you can’t just create a new character and start spamming chat without investing a little time to acquire one.
traveling to new lands or far away places was a big deal in older mmos. nowadays it is just a matter of asking for a portal or summon to cater to the lowest common denominator of gamers under the veil of convenience as if there weren’t busy people who had jobs and played games back then.
people will find ways to overcome the many obstacles in a challenging game world because it is presented as such from the beginning. the players that kept playing were precisely the ones that kept the game going for years and years.
The more telling question is:
What separates the older GAMERS from the new
Because every answer you get from asking the other question has its roots in this one.
It doesn't matter whether games changed to accomodate shifting trends in gamers, or gamers changed because games were evolved on purpose to shift gamers thinking in certain directions (although the latter is what I believe mainly happened by design by the industry). There are definite personality and behavioral traits that the profile of an older game like EQ will bring out "on average", vs more modern MMOs and games in general.
In Everquest's early years, these were the behavioral expectations you accepted and worked within:
- grouping was the norm, soloing was unusual and limited to certain classes and scenarios
- guilds consisted of strangers in RL more often than just RL friends. because the game itself was the social media platform that brough everyone together socially (apart from some message boards used to pass along game news, info and opinions). It wasn't uncommon for an entire guild to only know of each other in-game. You didn't feel like an tier-2 outsider joining a guild of "RL buddies", because everyone was an outsider.
- there was no gear score or auto group finder BS and the only reason why anyone would even want to know what gear you had, was mainly to know how much competition for item X there may be if it dropped. Your inclusion in a group was predicated on your reputation and the simple need for your role and level. Groups often tried to invite those who had the hardest time getting a group, when a spot that wasn't earmarked for a specific role came up. You could often just talk your way into a group spot if you politely asked a GL to consider you when someone leaves.
- the reputation and server-based persistent fame (or infamy) of your character mattered, and could ruin your ability to get a group because word spreads if you did bad things, from KS'ing to ninja looting to just being a chat channel jerk. And the permanence of a server's population meant good folks prospered while bad folks suffered, just like a self-policing and self-organizing game world should be able to naturally do.
- helping others was as much fun as getting your own items and quests done. Because everyone understood that progression of others was an extension of your own progression, and you would also receive help when your needs arose. And players worked on large goals in incremental small stages, like getting steps for Epics done across the whole guild, getting certain items to certain classes first, and so on. Players liked helping other players, it was part of the game's appeal.
- instant gratification in any form was non-existent. Tokens-for-everyone for gear were non-existent. Gear stats mattered a LOT, but gear upgrades were expected to be infrequent. You gave any loot to someone in your group as an upgrade, not take it yourself merely to sell it. You knew you had to work for even a chance at getting a certain gear item or quest item. It was normal to come away from a day (or week) of adventuring with more XP and AAs, but no new loot to wear.
- fear of the game world was ever present. On purpose. Along with landscape travel options, the world seemed huge because it was dangerous. No mob leashes, higher-level mobs intermixed or roaming and varying mob run speeds meant you better watch your a__ in a lot of places. Places were often legendary because it was hard to stay alive even with a full group, and trains kept you listening and paying attention. You knew if you died, death hurt in terms of lost travel time (unless you had a rez), loss of XP (and even level), and abandoning your corpse was not an option since your gear was still on it. There was a reason wizards and druids had an evac spell that actually got used. So yeah ... actual fear of the game was real.
I feel like today's MMO's just really have minimal sense of accomplishment outside of raiding.
I started playing games with an old MUD called Gemstone. Leveling sometimes took a week or more at higher levels. Early on, if someone got to level 20 they were given a special title "Lord/Lady", and it was a HUGE deal.
Played that game for 8 years before I reached the max level, and every minute was awesome.
Everquest was kind of the same. Getting to level 50 initially was such a big deal. Nowadays, they've made MMO's so easy. Selling "level boosters" in stores. Having minimal lower level content that is only built around leveling as quickly as you can, to get to the "real" content.
I personally feel like a MMO should start at level 1, and be great all the way through. While there is a huge accomplisment to reach max levels, I hate the mentality that "the real game begins at max level".
OCastitatisLilium said:This here also sounds like loot boxes, which everyone can agree no one wants; the only difference is that you aren't spending money to get them, you are spending time. The whole 'just one more cycle' is the same as 'just one more pull', 'just one more hand', 'just one more spin of the wheel'. All this is, is gambling with a different currency. Lootboxes have a loot table with percentages of how often things will be handed out when you open it. Mobs with a known rare drop also have a loot table with percentages of how common things will spawn on death. From the most common, to the very rare, they both have that table and continue to draw a person in. Though with lootboxes, you are spending money and opening them in a hope of getting that 0.1% chance to get Gloves of Power +4; where as you are killing the same mob over and over again in the hopes of getting that same 0.1% chance to get Gloves of Power +4. One is time and one is money, there is no difference. It's gambling, and honestly, neither should be in the game. Sure, you can word both differently to make it seem like it's not the same thing, but it is at its core.
I see where the coorelation is between this and gambling that you're trying to make but I think you are reaching a little too far for it. For instance I can drive my car on the road, but I am gambling that every person is paying attention and I have no accidents. I can go eat at a restaraunt but I'm gambling that I don't get food poisoning. You can compare this to any activity if you so wish. Doesn't mean the people that make the cars have a problem, doesn't mean that the chef at the restaraunt has a problem or is insufficient. So I don't really agree with what you're saying on this.
I play on P99 still to this day, and there are still people that inhabit the lower level areas and starting dungeons for various reasons, but mostly it is to get loot. There is no EXP there for them, there is no cash drops off the mob significant enough to add up to anything. But there is items, whether it be worn items, quested items or whatever. There is still a reason for people to be in that zone and occupying it. Makes the game feel more vibrant and active. I go to lower zones and camp random items on my character all the time. It passes the time while I'm LFG. So yes in a way we are gambling that the mob will drop what we are hoping it drops. But there is effectively no way to keep that from happening that I can see. Unless you give everyone gear from a quest completion, which will ultimately end in gambling to get quest item drops or gambling that the mobs will be up and not taken. Either way you're gambling taking a step down the street.
Iksar said:OCastitatisLilium said:I've played EQ and P99...unfortunately it just doesn't hold up to what I use to think of it. EQ, looking back on it now after having spent this much time away from it, was just that, camp checks and grinding for hours on end for nothing more than pixilated items that now mean nothing.
It was whatever you made of it, it is a bundle of memories from a different time. If you want to reduce the experiences and memories to a whole lot of grinding for pixelated items that now mean nothing then there is nothing anyone can do to help as that pretty much reduces all games (and honestly many facets of life) to a meaningless nothing in the end. As if experiences, memories, and/or nostalgia are worthless.
Agreed!
Personally when I look back at my time in UO, EQ, EQ2 in its early days I have a treasure trove of great memories. Sure some stuff was tedious, but it was tedious for everyone and it was the nature of the game. For me it wasnt about chasing the next pixel, it was about socializing and spending time with friends. I fondly remember the bonds and friendships forged (many of whom I still talk to to this day) while experiencing this brutal landscape together... As "together" was the only way up.
A sense of wonder. I don't specifically think its the developers faults either. I was born in november of 87, in december my brother got an NES. I have lived all of one month of my entire life without video games. After so long its hard to keep shocking people and coming up with new inovative ideas (console) generation after generation. Think of how many countless worlds we have traveled to, adventures we have been on, or creatures we have defeated over the last 35 years.
Instant gratification
So much quality of life that the games pretty much play themselves
Cash shops, micro transations & pay to win
Greedy suits
/sad face