Today I read the latest Pantheon news. 7-figure funding has been secured to aid in the development of the game. This is exciting; this gives the team resources to continue or expedite the game's release schedule.
But I am also concerned. New money often means new stakeholders, which can drastically change the direction of a game. In the news statement, the new board member Chris Kronenthal is quoted saying "I am confident that gamers of all types will enjoy this epic adventure!"
This line makes me scream "NO!" in my head. Since the beginning, I have been under the impression that Pantheon would be special, catering to the pledgers. Catering to a niche gaming community who wanted something unique, challenging, and even quirky. To gamers who didn't like it, we would say "too bad, play something else".
For me, the downfall of MMO culture has been the greedy desire to appeal to everyone. We've replaced challenging, rewarding and social gameplay with instantly-gratifying, no-challenge (and no consequence), anti-social screen-clicking. Everyone in these forums realize this, and that's why we are here.
Of course, if I could love this game and have every other gamer also enjoy it, that would be win-win; but I think that is an unlikely ideal. Kronenthal's statement tells me one of two things: a) he doesn't fully understand this community and what we want out of this game, or b) he intends to change the direction of the game despite the community's desire.
Am I just being paranoid?
I trust that this game, especially with Joppa's involvement, is still being developed with the original goal in mind: creating a game that builds upon the spirit of traditional MMOs. I would withhold judgment on press releases that are aimed at attracting more investors who are okay not gaining any sort of creative control. It's not a wise marketing strategy when trying to attract investors to say that your plan is to build a game that's only going to retain a small, niche audience.
You are right Sicario. And if the world falls in love with Pantheon AFTER the vision has been realized, that's awesome. There's no reason to believe that won't happen, since I think this is the game the MMO community needs, whether they all realize it or not. In that sense, perhaps Kronenthal is simply being optimistic; I hope that's all it is.
It might be more accurate to say that they wanted, and hopefully still want, a game in keeping with their core prinicples *even* if that means it will be a niche game.
Doubtlessly they want the largest audience they can get without sacrificing the reason they started in on making the game in the first place.
So I don't think it is in any respect inconsistent for them to hope that gamers of all types will subscribe to this epic adventure. Or for them and their backers to do whatever they can to make the game look as good as possible (both gameplay and appearance) to try and attract a wide audience. Or for them to compromise on a few things.
If we wind up with a game with the audience of a real mainstream MMO we should all be happy as long as we don't wind up with a game that plays like a mainstream MMO.
I am not worried. Pantheon does not have a known intellectual property that will attract many players. Pantheon is not likely to be so much prettier than other games that people will flock to us for the appearance. The only real hope they have for a large market is to push exactly the things we want in the game that are different from other MMOs and hope that a lot of people will be attracted. Failing that they will wind up with a hopefully successful niche game but that isn't the dream.
VR have stated a number of times that they will only accept money from investors that understand their vision and where the game's destination lies. I think every investment is a cause for light concern, but I am sure VR are vetting them pretty thoroughly and would be pretty confident that there will not be a conflict of interests and that they will not be steard off their initial course.
I am sure I have read somewhere that VR have already turned down investors because they were not the right fit.
I believe there is a third way to interpret the quote:
c) once players taste or re-taste the joys of a "back to the core" mmo, people will love the experience, no matter their age or mmo experience.
MettleRook: For me, the downfall of MMO culture has been the greedy desire to appeal to everyone.
Agreed. Let us hope that VR's vision prevails. It is certainly in the ascendancy now.
chenzeme said:I am sure I have read somewhere that VR have already turned down investors because they were not the right fit.
And because you read it somewhere it's true? Interesting.
What's more likely, that VR have been turning down investors for 7 years or if they didn't accept money from this investor they would be shuttering their doors this year?
Olympeus said:chenzeme said:I am sure I have read somewhere that VR have already turned down investors because they were not the right fit.
And because you read it somewhere it's true? Interesting.
What's more likely, that VR have been turning down investors for 7 years or if they didn't accept money from this investor they would be shuttering their doors this year?
Facetious to say the least.
From everything VR have said in the past and continue to say, I think it is much more likely that VR will be true to their word and turn down investment that is not in line with their vision than take money and have their game forced to be something they have not intended. I will post the stream(s) and its time stamp that confirms my initial statement when I find it, or I will retract if I can't. I wonder if you would do the same?
___
Ben Dean: "This always comes down to if its a good match" ... "We need to make the game we want to make. We have a very clear vision, and sometimes that just doesn’t match up with potential partners. The most important thing for us is to find the right match"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVBK5HIcb-U - from 28:40 into the interview.
I guess I wont be retracting...
So as a thought exercise, could the new funding be from Daybreak? EG7 bought Daybreak late last year. EG7, in it's December investor presentation, mentioned how Everquest was a very valuable IP. It also said there was an unannounced new product coming from Daybreak (along with upgrades of DC Universe and Lord of the Rings Online). So EG7 is pouring money into Daybreak. Right after this Pantheon got its seven-digit funding. And Daybreak is known for cash shops, which is just now under consideration.
If Daybreak did want to create a new EQ3 and didn't want to start from scratch, where would they look? If Pantheon was rebranded, they could say that it was created by Brad McQuaid.
zoom said:So as a thought exercise, could the new funding be from Daybreak? EG7 bought Daybreak late last year. EG7, in it's December investor presentation, mentioned how Everquest was a very valuable IP. It also said there was an unannounced new product coming from Daybreak (along with upgrades of DC Universe and Lord of the Rings Online). So EG7 is pouring money into Daybreak. Right after this Pantheon got its seven-digit funding.
If Daybreak did want to create a new EQ3 and didn't want to start from scratch, where would they look? If Pantheon was rebranded, they could say that it was created by Brad McQuaid.
Not a chance in the world.
Ben Dean has stated that VR has actually turned down deals with publishers and investors because they didn't meet VR's Standards and didn't share their Vision. That fact alone should put a lot of worry to rest. A studio that needs money to create the game we all want to play actively refusing to get in bed with publishers and investors who don't meet their standards. This means those Investors or Publishers that make the cut are in fact investors and publishers with the same values and visions as VR.
We have turned down MANY offers of partnership and investment due to visions not aligning. We are able to do that thanks to our communities support through pledge sales and smaller investors and for that, we are extremely grateful.
We will continue to turn offers down until we find one that's right for us.
We continue to develop the game based on our original tenents.
Kilsin said:We have turned down MANY offers of partnership and investment due to visions not aligning. We are able to do that thanks to our communities support through pledge sales and smaller investors and for that, we are extremely grateful.
We will continue to turn offers down until we find one that's right for us.
We continue to develop the game based on our original tenents.
Kilsin, it is great to hear that VR is sticking to its guns with regard to funding. I think in the long run, that the playerbase that so avidly supports this game will be rewarded with the game we believe in so much. Thanks!
The games industry went from challenging, to hand-holding, and subsequently turned the community into a bunch of snowflakes that chase carrots all day, every day.
Along came games such as Demon Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, Hades and Hollow Knight (to name a few), and people came to the sudden realisation that, being challenged, and overcoming those challenges is actually far more rewarding (especially in the long term) than an easy click-fest that rewards you every step of the way for achieving / overcoming nothing. Those rewards also mean nothing, and the cycle continues until everyone is miserable, addicted to the carrot that never remedies their hunger. The MMO market is stuck in this loop, really, really badly, and my hope is, Pantheon will become the Dark Souls of the MMO genre. No hand holding, no a$$ wiping, genuine repurcusions to your own actions and actually having to take ownership for wrecking yourself due to complacency. I genuinely believe that, once the MMO community realise what this kind of play style is like, and how challenging it is, they will really fall in love with it when they start to experience and understand the risk vs reward design principle.
Right now, they have no risk, endless rewards.
I discovered Hades this week, and it is wrecking me, but I cannot stop thinking about playing it. That's a rare thing for me these days, it's the challenge that I relish, and I really miss that in the MMO genre.
I wonder how many Investors actually think the only way to make tons of cash is the MMO model most MMOs use today.
I wonder how many Investors actually played Everquest and got addicted to its playstyle of unforgiving challenge=reward.
I think its just about raking in tons of cash with a surefire proven way, without noticing that actually this is not something alot of MMO old timers like. To me WoW was the beginning of the downfall of MMO s today, (or maybe someone knows better why we just got all this boring endless reward solo mmos today?) simplied solofriendly new playerfriendly to gather a big crowd, while not all parts of WoW are easy or bad, most things that got in my opinion copied because of it, are something i dont want to see in a good MMO.
This MMO style seems to be able to draw in alot of young players fast, or at least it was able to since today there so many F2P or whatever model they use to milk some customers(its always PVP 99% PVP) MMOs that dont even interest me slightly. I like to group and my PVP actually is being among the best in PVE. But in order to do so PVE actually needs challenge and not solofriendliness so grouping really is king.
I hope the time of a turnover in the MMO world has come with Pantheon all of its tenets represent a really good game. (This will be able to rake in tons of cash dear non believing Investors.)
I would bet on it since many players are waiting since about 15 years to get this playstyle again, its something that almost or actually doesnt exist anymore today, at least not in MMOs. And i bet its not just something for old timers like me. The younger generation at least some of them (maybe even most of them) sure can get addicted to is as well.
I know while reading our forums , there are so many different opinions about the details that make a MMO good, you surely never find a game with all the parts being to your liking. But as long as it sticks to the Phanteon tenets we should be pretty much save.
And maybe in the future there will be alot of Phanteon MMO style copies out there :) . Till the younger generation wants the solonochallengeinstantreward style back heh.
Olympeus said:chenzeme said:I am sure I have read somewhere that VR have already turned down investors because they were not the right fit.
And because you read it somewhere it's true? Interesting.
What's more likely, that VR have been turning down investors for 7 years or if they didn't accept money from this investor they would be shuttering their doors this year?
There's a big difference between constructive criticism and cynicism.
You've turned into a complete and utter troll recently; contributing nothing to the forum except pointless negativity.
Kilsin said:We have turned down MANY offers of partnership and investment due to visions not aligning. We are able to do that thanks to our communities support through pledge sales and smaller investors and for that, we are extremely grateful.
We will continue to turn offers down until we find one that's right for us.
We continue to develop the game based on our original tenents.
Lovely to hear Kilsin. Hopefully reassures a lot of slightly worried posters/lurkers in the thread.
"I am confident that gamers of all types will enjoy this epic adventure!" just sounds like boilerplate rhetoric. I wouldn't read too much into it.
Thanks for responding to the thread Kilsin. I think your response put the argument to rest, assuring us that you guys are not taking funding out of desperation. Unless people straight up want to call you guys liars. At which point, I'm not sure why they're here.
Daybreak is a longshot but with changes of personnel and organization and ownership perhaps the more personal reasons that neither side would welcome such a partnership no longer apply.
If Daybreak agreed to keep VR as a quasi-independent studio (in keeping with Daybreak's reorganization a while back) perhaps with no ownership interest in VR and agreed to the level of creative autonomy that VR requires this just could work. Now that a Swedish company owns Daybreak and could guarantee that Daybreak would live up to its commitments. Which VR might not necessarily 100% trust without such a guarantee.
Conceivably Daybreak could become publisher on truly arms-length terms with no investment at all and no control at all. With VR having the right to terminate the relationship at will subject to commercially normal terms and conditions. Any funding could come strictly from the Swedish company which VR has no particular reason to dislike or distrust subject to guarantees of creative control acceptable to VR.
Granted this is a longshot but with the Swedish purchase it is *less* of a longshot than it was when some of us raised the possibility after Daybreak's reorganization and Brad moving on to a hopefully better place.
You have to understand that Brad has been down this path before, and seen how badly it can turn out. Everquest and then Vanguard both suffered from the pressures of publishers and distributors that were willing to provide funding. But at a substantial cost to the substance of the game, and the pressures to release before the product was ready. Brad may not be with us anymore, but it was a fundamental part of the business plan to avoid these situations ever coming up again. I have some faith that the team was heavily instilled with these ideals.
You have to remember there is risk in everything you do. VR is going to need money and more funding is good. It is also good to question where this money comes from and if they are going to try to pressure VR into changing the game. I have reason to believe that VR is only going to accept money from people that accept their vision for the game. I have been following this game for years but have only recently pulled the trigger on giving them my money. It is because after all the years of watching this game over its long development that I can see they are sticking to their vision.
Appreciate the response Kilsin, reassuring indeed. And thanks for the discussion/viewpoints everyone. You've quelled my concernes!