Morraak said:Finn said:I see this whole debate as a clear dilineation of people still trying to hold on to what they interpreted Brad's ramblings from 6+ years ago to mean vs what the true design intent behind those ramblings looks like now that they are being implemented.
I'll be frank. I was not following this game as seriously 6 years ago - it was barely on my radar. I, honestly, do not care what Brad might have said or implied during one of his stream of consciousness blog posts. I do not care whether the game is "niche" or not, whether it was meant to appeal to the "EQ crowd" or not, or that it sticks to what "EQ did" or not.
All I care about is that we get a good MMO.
What matters now is that the team (which has always been involved - this was never "the Brad show") stick to the tenets they have outlined. That they continue to push forward the vision they have. That they stay true to evolving the genre in the direction it should have gone in, had it not gone down the path that led to the current "MMO genre".
To me, there is this group of people who want the game to be "niche". They want the game to be "exclusionary". They want the game to be "for me, but not for you" because they don't want those "evil casual gamers to come in an ruin everything". That group seems to be incapable of understanding that you can create a great MMO, that also just so happens to be appealing to a lot of people. That you can appeal to a lot of people without compromising the vision/tenets. That you can make a great MMO without being "niche".The important part, in all of this (for ME), is that VR stick to their tenets. That they don't sacrifice their vision.
Let go of what happened 5, 6, 7, 8 years ago. Joppa has repeatedly talked about how the core vision has not changed, yet some of you continue to hang on to the pedantic meanderings of someone who is gone. The team now, the team that was with that individual when creating the core design document, is in charge. That's it. Sorry if that sounds harsh.
Stop thinking that just because the paint job may have changed, that the entire blueprint is different.
Brad's gone. Accept it. This isn't loyalty - it's cultish and silly, IMO. You are losing sight of the forest for the trees. You are waging a semantics battle with no consideration to what is actually trying to be communicated.
Move on.Agreed, we can throw in our two cents but ultimately VR needs to make the game according to their vision and tenets. If we in the end don't like it when it comes out, we ourselves could always become game devs and create a game according to our own vision of what an MMO should be. As far as the term niche goes, words are just words; let's wait to actually experience the game and see what we think.
Great answers :)
Finn said:Brad's gone. Accept it. This isn't loyalty - it's cultish and silly, IMO. You are losing sight of the forest for the trees. You are waging a semantics battle with no consideration to what is actually trying to be communicated.
Move on.
He may be gone, but the vision he had is not. I may go on a lim here, but I am quite certain most people joined the project due to Brad, not due to any other member of the team. I for one, honestly don't care about any of them. Not in a harsh meaning, just that I don't care what they think makes a good MMO, since I KNOW Brad knew what made a great MMO. If they agree, great. If they disagree, they are simply wrong in my book. Brad is the reason Pantheon exists and got pledges years ago. If communication is not clear enough to take it for what it is,... if communication needs trying to understand,... then communication is lackluster and needs to be improved.
And if the trees start forming a city rather than a forest, I am certainly not "moving on", but making my opinion heard. And right now I certainly don't see the promised forest, but something different. The whole premise of Pantheon was "get back to the roots that made MMOs fun". That by definition IS NICHE by todays standards. A niche is something that caters to few, rather than the broad masses. And today the broad masses play and want free to play, fast paced, instant gratification, solo playable, loot showering games that can be exchanged for the "new one" every few weeks.
Basically I want Pantheon to stay niche, yes. Because I certainly don't see a reason why I should pay for another of the non niche MMOs. We got hundreds of those already and some may be even good. I just don't care for the content they offer. I care for what Brad promised. Gone or not does not change that. If Pantehon changes, so will my desire to play it. Simple as that.
And while I understand, from a business point of view, that Pantheon NEEDS to get rid of the niche term to send a signal to the masses, it also sends a signal to those that pledged to make it happen. And the idea of having funded yet another of "those" MMOs certainly does not make me happy. Would I try to get my pledge refunded? Not just yet, no. Enough time to steer the ship back on track. If what they communicate now gets released? Yeah, I would certainly consider it depending on how bad it really is at that point.
vjek said:Joppa said:vjek said:If you design your game to attract the largest possible audience, you will, intentionally, if successfull, have to give up every single thing about the game that obtained all the donations for Pantheon from January 2014 until Brad died. If you're ok with that? Then I'm not sure what to tell you, except such an attitude excludes at least one ethical premise: Integrity.
This statement is the perfect example of why we have to expend so many resources whenever we communicate anything publicly. And is a reminder that even when we do, some will only hear what they want to hear and will continue to stir others up into hearing that same thing.
The point of this podcast episode was to say expressly and simply this:
We are not designing Pantheon to attract the largest possible audience. However, I believe what we're making will resonate with a lot of people. Those are two different statements. And therefore, I do not expect Pantheon to be "niche" because I believe it will resonate with the hearts of adventure-loving gamers. Period.
Please feel free to continue this discussion around the actual premise of the podcast.
IMO:
Sure, let's take a look at the rest of that post, and remove the "largest possible audience" hypothetical:
vjek said: ... Every decision, every design, every implemention; How can this 'thing' appeal to the wider, broader, widest, broadest possible target audience. How can we get more customers. How can we make this 'sticky'? How can we make more money? How can we encourage all our customers to pour their wallents into our bank accounts, instead of just a subscription? How can we improve shareholder dividends? How can we improve share/stock price (if applicable)? How can we make more money? How can we monetize every second of every moment every customer is consuming our service? How can we get in on RMT? How can we shift the entire focus of the game to making it impossible to enjoy without paying us for every interaction, click, and second of time? Loot boxes, cash-shop keys, bags, gear, items, potions, XP, levels.Now it's all in scope, and all on the table, because the ends justify the means, and we MUST appeal to a broader/wider and/or broadest/widest target demographic.
It completely shifts the focus of design and implementation away from anything remotely resembling thematic consistency, fun, or challenge.Sounding familiar? It should. That's the exact design philosophy that removes all of the features that narrow, restrict, or limit the target audience and instead.. expand it to reach exactly one goal: Increase subscribers. Increase subscriber retention. Increase cash shop sales. Increase krono purchases. Increase every RMT feature uptake & use. ...
Now, feel free, anyone, Joppa, Kilsin, Ben, whoever, what above there is false, given the past 25+ years of MMO history?
Because every. single. MMO. I have every seen of, heard of, or played has followed this pattern once they start to appeal to a widER target demographic. (note: NOT largest possible. Not largEST. LargER.)
You're being extremely dramatic, vjek...assuming we will be money hungry like a handful of big-name gaming companies just to suit your argument is very petty mate.
It's funny, looking at the definition of niche answers the question very clearly, in my mind. We're NOT, as Joppa stated, making a game that is targeted to a specialized segment of the market or a small specialized segment of the population, we're making a game for ourselves that we believe will most importantly be fun and attract a lot of other gamers from all walks of life.
Just because we have a large portion of gamers that played EQ, VG and other games around that era while we're in early development doesn't mean we are just targeting those gamers and slapping a niche label on us because of that is very lazy and dishonest.
Rattenmann said:Finn said:Brad's gone. Accept it. This isn't loyalty - it's cultish and silly, IMO. You are losing sight of the forest for the trees. You are waging a semantics battle with no consideration to what is actually trying to be communicated.
Move on.
He may be gone, but the vision he had is not. I may go on a lim here, but I am quite certain most people joined the project due to Brad, not due to any other member of the team. I for one, honestly don't care about any of them. Not in a harsh meaning, just that I don't care what they think makes a good MMO, since I KNOW Brad knew what made a great MMO. If they agree, great. If they disagree, they are simply wrong in my book. Brad is the reason Pantheon exists and got pledges years ago. If communication is not clear enough to take it for what it is,... if communication needs trying to understand,... then communication is lackluster and needs to be improved.
And if the trees start forming a city rather than a forest, I am certainly not "moving on", but making my opinion heard. And right now I certainly don't see the promised forest, but something different. The whole premise of Pantheon was "get back to the roots that made MMOs fun". That by definition IS NICHE by todays standards. A niche is something that caters to few, rather than the broad masses. And today the broad masses play and want free to play, fast paced, instant gratification, solo playable, loot showering games that can be exchanged for the "new one" every few weeks.
Basically I want Pantheon to stay niche, yes. Because I certainly don't see a reason why I should pay for another of the non niche MMOs. We got hundreds of those already and some may be even good. I just don't care for the content they offer. I care for what Brad promised. Gone or not does not change that. If Pantehon changes, so will my desire to play it. Simple as that.
Brad may have been the initial mouthpiece for the company but I can assure you, he was not the only one who created the vision and tenets we adhere to today. Joppa was a big contributor to them as were many other team members past and present. Brad enjoyed posting his thoughts engaging with everyone but behind the scenes, it was a very big team effort.
Brad lives on in Pantheon and always will but one person doesn't create a game of this magnitude.
Kilsin said:Just because we have a large portion of gamers that played EQ, VG and other games around that era while we're in early development doesn't mean we are just targeting those gamers and slapping a niche label on us because of that is very lazy and dishonest.
While that is a honest statement right now, it shows that initial marketing was very dishonest. You DID target EQ and VG players VERY directly. You lured us in by promising a true sequel to these games. I wonder when the direction changed, or if initial marketing was really just dishonest to get a starved Crowed of gamers on board, knowing that we would pay anything to get a true EQ2. Feeling a little scammed by now to be frank. Not claiming it was the intent, but it certainly starts to feel like it and I certainly hate that feeling.
Rattenmann said:Kilsin said:Just because we have a large portion of gamers that played EQ, VG and other games around that era while we're in early development doesn't mean we are just targeting those gamers and slapping a niche label on us because of that is very lazy and dishonest.
While that is a honest statement right now, it shows that initial marketing was very dishonest. You DID target EQ and VG players VERY directly. You lured us in by promising a true sequel to these games. I wonder when the direction changed, or if initial marketing was really just dishonest to get a starved Crowed of gamers on board, knowing that we would pay anything to get a true EQ2. Feeling a little scammed by now to be frank. Not claiming it was the intent, but it certainly starts to feel like it and I certainly hate that feeling.
This is the problem with making a game like Pantheon with all the doors and windows open. Suppose we could all see the number of staff turnover, cuts, edits, inclusions, revenue discussions, design decisions and changes for every game ever released, including all the delays and resets. In that case, I think a large portion of you folks would be horrified, but this is game development, some idea's don't work, money needs to be raised and spent efficiently with longevity in mind, tough decisions need to be made, and people make mistakes and have to try and fix them. Still, most companies do all this behind closed doors and start ramping up marketing and hype when they're ready to release, we don't have that luxury, but we still try to be as transparent as possible.
We want as many people as possible to enjoy our hard work; we're not in the market to scam people; we're gamers just like you making a game for ourselves that we think is going to be enjoyed by a lot of people while using the foundation of systems, mechanics and features that we enjoyed from games we have played over the years. The team had no experience in crowdfunding when they launched the Kickstarter all those years ago and had great intentions, but when it failed, reality set in, we needed to make changes and do better, and so the evolution of Pantheon began, what you see today is the result of many lessons learned along the way and were happy with the game and its progress.
I was worried when I first heard about pantheon that it would not being any good and I am still worried. I latched on to the idea that it was not a game for everyone and that excited me. No idea if niche was the word used or not. Well, that and Brad has been part of the only two MMOs I ever liked.
I have felt for some time that all new MMOs have failed to grab me like EQ and VG because they targeted too large of an audience. But I understand what Joppa was saying in the video and his post here. It is clear as day to me they are making a game they feel will be fun and because of that many people will like it. I have been saying that to my friends for years that if someone could make an old-school game like EQ was for me back in the day, people would love it.
Pantheon is my one and only hope and nothing they have done recently has deterred me from that hope. On the contrary I feel good about the game and its recent progress. I am excited to see what the new year will bring us and can not wait to play and find out if my hopes are warranted.
VR thanks for letting people speak freely even when it is hard to hear.
Finn said:Syrif said:Iksar said:All those posts/updates are from the failed and notably different game that Pantheon could have ended up as, but thankfully didn't.
Gee I wonder why people have been posting they are losing faith in Pantheon here, Reddit, and elsewhere. I see this often. Coincidence?
Like it or not those posts came from Brad and VR with intent on the whole point of Pantheon: to NOT be like other mmo's on the Live market. Things like having 1st person emphasis (not 3rd person like WoW), perception of mobs (not level-numbers branded right on mobs like WoW), worldly and meaningful graphics again (not Shrek-like, plasticy graphics like WoW) and so much more. Apparently, you have failed to notice what Brad and the community envisioned from the beginning, that I was present at, and that seems to be vanishing even more so since his passing. I am not at all surprised (one only needs to look to the current mmo market and this exact argument over the past 20 years). Poor design and poor creativity. I've seen a lot of people come, then go. Pantheon is looking too much like WoW and Shrek, and that is just sad.
I tend to think that it is because the game is now 8 years in development and still not in alpha, not because of some perceived deviation from what "Brad said" 7 years ago...
Actually, I'm sure that's a contributing factor too, haha! But, that's not what I'm referring to. "It's not the wait, but the change." Much of what I read and hear are just like the OP- people are losing faith in Pantheon due to a change in direction, a change in design, poor decision-making, and contradiction (I've been following this too long to state the obvious, you can do the research for yourself). VR has contradicted itself right here in this thread; VR said it is targeting a niche audience multiple times, and now is acting like niche isn't a thing.
Add: Joppa said in thread, "some people hear only what they want to hear." But, now it seems VR only says what they want to say, even if it means contradicting themselves with initial pledgers. I wonder how they got their start, afterall? People would appreciate transparency- no one likes to feel backstabbed. Anyway, I agree with the OP 1000%, it is these unfortunate events that make me lose faith in Pantheon, too.
If Pantheon goes on to be wildly successful, many people will attribute that success to "The Vision" of Brad. If Pantheon struggles or fails, a lot of the blame will be placed squarely on the shoulders of Joppa. We're all familiar with the concept of Risk / Reward and I would wager that most adventurers would give pause before charging into that battle. Speaking of adventures ...
I'm an adventure-loving gamer. My brothers are adventure-loving gamers. My wife and daughter are adventure-loving gamers. I very much enjoy the thought of being able to go on an adventure through Terminus with all of my loved ones. Even though we all have different levels of experience, playstyles, and preferences ... the prospect of going on an adventure in a virtual world resonates with each of us. Speaking of worlds ...
What is the world supposed to represent? To use a metaphor, it should function like a really good Indian curry dish. The unique flavors that go into the dish are what create the complexity and beauty of the "melting pot flavor of the world." The ginger doesn't want to convince the pepper to become ginger. The coriander doesn't want to convince the cumin to become coriander. It's the difference between these flavors and textures that make the overall dish so bold and satisfying to our palate. Differences are not only acceptable in this context, they are encouraged. Speaking of acceptance ...
There were some setbacks that will forever be a part of the story here but I commend VR for not succumbing to the hardships of adversity. Pantheon is in a wonderful place if you're an adventure-loving gamer. Onward and upward!
My take on Pantheon and it's association with 'Niche' has always been that Brad's vision was to target the real MMORPG audience niche.
I said this in one sentence on the Discord but I'll expound on it here...
Most games that label themselves as MMORPG's these days are actually designed as Single Player RPG games but set in a shared space. You see lots of other players running around playing the game, but you don't need to play with them. Sometimes you can group with these other players and perhaps there are some places that require such groups... but generally speaking you can play the game by yourself and the actions of other players have very little or no impact on your own gameplay experience. Since the players are in a shared space, techincally they can be called MMO since the term simply means Massively Multiplayer Online. But since the players are mostly not really playing together per-say, the multi-player aspect is pretty shakey.
The true spirit of the real MMORPG experience is in the fact that your experience in the game should be effected by the multiple players who are playing with you. The 'Old School' MMORPG, as they are often referred to, were all about this Multiplayer experience. Even players who were not in your immediate party could effect your gameplay. Their actions or inaction could change how your personal adventure played out and the sucess or failure you faced.
The word Niche (as it applies in this case) is Defined: A specialized segment of the market for a particular kind of product or service.
So in the Video Game market there are many Niches. These are the ones that we are referencing:
The Single Player RPG Niche.
The Single Player RPG in a Shared Space Niche.
The full on MMO RPG Niche.
Brad's goal for Pantheon was to make this game a true MMORPG and not just a Single Player RPG set in a shared space. And so that was the Niche he was targetting. Some of you have quoted him as using this Term specifically. But this particular Niche is not small. It is a specialized segment of the Video Game Market, but as previous games have proven, there are a lot of people in this Niche.
The trouble is that some People (aka Potential Players) have assumed that Brad was only targetting a sub-niche of a sub-niche of this larger MMORPG Niche. His saying things like: 'Audience who want a Challenge' was taken to mean that he was only trying to target a smaller 'Hardcore' MMORPG fan base and not the full MMORPG fan base. Essentially they heard 'a Niche within a niche of the MMORPG Niche.
Joppa and Minus in the first episode of the new Podcast simply were trying to clarify that the Goals for Pantheon are to be appealing to all MMORPG fans and not just a Sub-Niche of a sub-niche of that Genre. They pointed out that this has always been the vision and that those who interpreted it as not so have been mistaken. To most of us, this clarfication is not really a surprise but it is nice that they took the time to really hash it out and explain why Pantheon has never been about targetting a smaller niche audience of the greater MMORPG fanbase.
We know though that there are some players who liked the idea of a very targeted sub-niche of the MMORPG niche. I'm sure many of us who have been around for any length of time could point a finger at several names on these forums who are very vocal with their displeasure at anything that proves that Pantheon is not so specialized for a sub-niche as they assumed or wanted it to be. Even in this very thread some of them have already piped up to voice this very thing.
But it isn't really a surprise to these people either... These people have been moaning about it for a long time now. They knew. They cry and say (paraphrased) 'After Brad died... the vision died with him' and lament that everything is changed. But nothing has really changed... they forget that even when Brad was alive they were still of the same mind, struggling to come to grips that his vision has always been to appeal to the entire MMORPG fanbase.
Most of their frustration comes from the fact that other games that use the title 'MMORPG' have a lot of players who don't get along well with others and they don't want those players in Pantheon. Yet this goes back to the fact that many of those games, as I explained already, are using the title MMORPG when they are really just Single Player RPG's in a Shared space. So of course they are going to draw in the players who don't play well with others.
Pantheon is not using the title incorrectly though. Pantheon really will be a MMORPG in it's origional glory. So the players it will attract are the type of players who really do want to play with others and will not appeal to those who want that Single Player type of game.
Many of the people who expected a sub-niche of a sub-niceh game tell us all the time that they have given up hope... but they are still here and they haven't really given up hope. They just wish that Pantheon could be more Niche than it actually is, and they will continue to hope right up until the day it's released and then they will stand tall and say "I told you so! This game isn't what we were promised" because they really believed that Brad was promising them a sub-niche of a sub-niche of a MMORPG niche game. Yet they will still play and enjoy the game... and they know it... because they are still true MMORPG fans and Pantheon will still push enough of their pleasure buttons to satisfy them more than most of the other games out there.
And when the crowd of players who expect a Single Player RPG in a shared space game realize that Pantheon is not that game... they will fade away and we won't need to worry about them.
Anywho... that's my take. Feel free to disagree :-)
Zorkon said:Nlaene said:
Bazgrim actually posted a video in regards to this.
Noticed it posted on youtube (I subscribe to Baz) ...
didn't have time to watch it...Now I'm looking for it and can't find it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7NtPhQcrW0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAGDmPhUWWI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFqA7th9ox0
Zorkon said:Noticed it posted on youtube (I subscribe to Baz) ...
didn't have time to watch it...Now I'm looking for it and can't find it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NFqA7th9ox0
Zorkon (and anyone else who is still here and concerned)- this is the link of Bazgrim's you may be looking for, not the other links just posted before this. This one is about the niche subject. You can hear what Joppa says.
People are *right* to be concerned the audience for Pantheon May be becoming too broad and seeing the Vision slowly vanish, and the direction changing since the beginnings.
I'm going to emphasize again: the point of these first two episodes was to emphasize our expectation that Pantheon is going to be a game that resonates with a lot of people and to disempower the word “niche” in its negative connotation, which is often wielded in the context of Pantheon to gate-keep potential fans of the game and hamstring our efforts to evolve what an MMORPG experience can be.
Where it seems like some people are getting hung up is the notion that we are looking for ways to deviate from Pantheon's core vision in order to attract the most people possible, which is frustrating because that's exactly what I said we are not doing (which is why I mentioned earlier this thread contains the best examples in recent memory of how people will hear what they want to hear and stir others up to hear the same).
I want to assure anyone who cares about the ultimate direction and outcome of this game that this is not our goal. Having worked with Brad to establish the vision and tenets for Pantheon - they are just as much mine as his and I have no plans to deviate from them. But the exact details on how the various elements of the game are executed may not always be what someone expected, particularly when we aren't doing it the exact same way it was in EverQuest.
There are some of you who have seemingly drawn a line in the sand and refuse to see Pantheon as anything other than a Brad-only vision to re-create EverQuest. Even after we have made it abundantly clear that this is a shared vision, that Brad intentionally surrounded himself with a team who has contributed to and molded that vision into what it has become. Having been his friend, I know he would take issue with so many people's crucial contributions being overlooked and discounted so thoroughly - just like he took issue with EverQuest being soley credited to him.
/rant off
Now, more to the point:
A clone of EverQuest would admittedly be a "niche" game - and there's nothing wrong with that. But I believe a game made in the spirit of EverQuest, embracing all that it did well while also innovating/evolving various game systems and embracing modern advances would not be a "niche" game. I believe there are many, many people out there who would love a game like we're making. This doesn’t mean we are making Pantheon specifically to attract the largest amount of people - we wouldn’t have a death penalty, for example, if that was our goal. But I believe what we're making will resonate with a lot of people.
So let’s do a quick check list:
- Will Pantheon be a group-centric game? Yes. Grouping in Pantheon will be the most fulfilling game experience and will always lead to greater rewards. However, we also want to see paths for solo-viability as well, similar to the paths that existed in EverQuest, with even more possibilities in Pantheon for players who think creatively.
- Will Pantheon have a death penalty? Yes. I emphasized in the podcast that a death penalty, and one that is actually felt, is necessary to create a truly immersive experience. But I also believe real tension can be achieved without an overly punitive death penalty. And that's the key. The main assertion I made regarding the death penalty is that it is not something we are going to drive so strongly and so harshly that we end up alienating a lot of people who would/could have otherwise loved everything Pantheon is going to be.
The other consideration we’re taking into account for the death penalty is to make sure that it’s not parasitic to our other game systems or gameplay goals. A death penalty is critical to the fabric of the game. However, where some may see us “watering it down” for the sake of attracting more players, the reality is that the severity of the death penalty needs to be commensurate with the other game systems that form the complete experience. In other words, we would be designing against ourselves if we implemented an overly punitive death penalty while encouraging players to go out, explore, discover, take risks and uphold our longstanding goal of a 2-3 hour core play experience.
And I’ll refrain from touching on the effect 96% rez sticks had on the feeling of tension in EQ. I’d like for death to always create tension in Pantheon, so this is an area I feel like we can improve.
- Will Pantheon be a highly challenging game? Yes. Significantly moreso than EverQuest was (which is also a factor that must feed into how the death penalty is balanced). But we won’t be beating players over the head at level 1. The nuances, challenge and complexities of the game will unfold over time.
- Will travel be long and meaningful? Meaningful is a bit subjective, but I think a true sense of “arrival” is part of making the world feel truly massive (i.e. the first time you made the run from Qeynos to Freeport on foot). And we have no intention of overloading the game with fast-travel options. However, I do firmly believe that faster forms of movement and a careful application of fast-travel elements that players can open up for themselves over time is an important part of the player growth and prestige arc.
If the core tenets of Pantheon are the exact reasons why I believe it will resonate with so many, why would I deviate from them to attract people? Do you seriously think we believe, after watching what has happened with New World most recently, that the current trends are the way to go? Have we not said the exact opposite of that over and over and over again? Does it not follow, therefore, that some people are only hearing what they want to hear in this podcast, while ignoring the attempts to clarify and double down on our actual direction and goals?
To me the key isn't how much they do to attract more people the key is how much they *keep* from the core principles thay have had.
If, at release, Pantheon has very slow leveling and progress, a significant death penalty, slow traveling and maybe a few other things that don't come to mind right now (got home an hour ago from a root canal I am not at 100%) it may not be perfect but it will be a big step ahead of WoW and LOTRO and SWTOR and other MMOs I know.
From day one (is it really five years already and I was a latecomer?) my philosophy has been that they can compromise on whatever they need to to have a successful game as long as what is left is a lot better than what is out there now.
Joppa said:I'm going to emphasize again: the point of these first two episodes was to emphasize our expectation that Pantheon is going to be a game that resonates with a lot of people and to disempower the word “niche” in its negative connotation, which is often wielded in the context of Pantheon to gate-keep potential fans of the game and hamstring our efforts to evolve what an MMORPG experience can be.
Where it seems like some people are getting hung up is the notion that we are looking for ways to deviate from Pantheon's core vision in order to attract the most people possible, which is frustrating because that's exactly what I said we are not doing (which is why I mentioned earlier this thread contains the best examples in recent memory of how people will hear what they want to hear and stir others up to hear the same).I want to assure anyone who cares about the ultimate direction and outcome of this game that this is not our goal. Having worked with Brad to establish the vision and tenets for Pantheon - they are just as much mine as his and I have no plans to deviate from them. But the exact details on how the various elements of the game are executed may not always be what someone expected, particularly when we aren't doing it the exact same way it was in EverQuest.
There are some of you who have seemingly drawn a line in the sand and refuse to see Pantheon as anything other than a Brad-only vision to re-create EverQuest. Even after we have made it abundantly clear that this is a shared vision, that Brad intentionally surrounded himself with a team who has contributed to and molded that vision into what it has become. Having been his friend, I know he would take issue with so many people's crucial contributions being overlooked and discounted so thoroughly - just like he took issue with EverQuest being soley credited to him.
/rant off
Now, more to the point:
A clone of EverQuest would admittedly be a "niche" game - and there's nothing wrong with that. But I believe a game made in the spirit of EverQuest, embracing all that it did well while also innovating/evolving various game systems and embracing modern advances would not be a "niche" game. I believe there are many, many people out there who would love a game like we're making. This doesn’t mean we are making Pantheon specifically to attract the largest amount of people - we wouldn’t have a death penalty, for example, if that was our goal. But I believe what we're making will resonate with a lot of people.
So let’s do a quick check list:
- Will Pantheon be a group-centric game? Yes. Grouping in Pantheon will be the most fulfilling game experience and will always lead to greater rewards. However, we also want to see paths for solo-viability as well, similar to the paths that existed in EverQuest, with even more possibilities in Pantheon for players who think creatively.
- Will Pantheon have a death penalty? Yes. I emphasized in the podcast that a death penalty, and one that is actually felt, is necessary to create a truly immersive experience. But I also believe real tension can be achieved without an overly punitive death penalty. And that's the key. The main assertion I made regarding the death penalty is that it is not something we are going to drive so strongly and so harshly that we end up alienating a lot of people who would/could have otherwise loved everything Pantheon is going to be.
The other consideration we’re taking into account for the death penalty is to make sure that it’s not parasitic to our other game systems or gameplay goals. A death penalty is critical to the fabric of the game. However, where some may see us “watering it down” for the sake of attracting more players, the reality is that the severity of the death penalty needs to be commensurate with the other game systems that form the complete experience. In other words, we would be designing against ourselves if we implemented an overly punitive death penalty while encouraging players to go out, explore, discover, take risks and uphold our longstanding goal of a 2-3 hour core play experience.
And I’ll refrain from touching on the effect 96% rez sticks had on the feeling of tension in EQ. I’d like for death to always create tension in Pantheon, so this is an area I feel like we can improve.
- Will Pantheon be a highly challenging game? Yes. Significantly moreso than EverQuest was (which is also a factor that must feed into how the death penalty is balanced). But we won’t be beating players over the head at level 1. The nuances, challenge and complexities of the game will unfold over time.
- Will travel be long and meaningful? Meaningful is a bit subjective, but I think a true sense of “arrival” is part of making the world feel truly massive (i.e. the first time you made the run from Qeynos to Freeport on foot). And we have no intention of overloading the game with fast-travel options. However, I do firmly believe that faster forms of movement and a careful application of fast-travel elements that players can open up for themselves over time is an important part of the player growth and prestige arc.If the core tenets of Pantheon are the exact reasons why I believe it will resonate with so many, why would I deviate from them to attract people? Do you seriously think we believe, after watching what has happened with New World most recently, that the current trends are the way to go? Have we not said the exact opposite of that over and over and over again? Does it not follow, therefore, that some people are only hearing what they want to hear in this podcast, while ignoring the attempts to clarify and double down on our actual direction and goals?
Thank you Joppa for posting very excited for this game to come out when it does. In regards to those videos I was very happy with the interviews that have been posted.
The bullseye isn't the only part of a target. It is at the center, but it is also the smallest; having inner and outer rings are what make the target whole. This is an MMO. There isn't one specific audience member to be targeted. No one player is getting 100% of what they want, and the same went for EQ/Vanguard. Even after this MMO releases, there will no doubt be players arguing on the forums that their class isn't receiving enough attention compared to other, more popular classes. That seems to be the nature of this genre. You can't please everyone, nor would trying be worthwhile...as has been shown with MMOs for some time.
We didn't get everything we wanted back in the day, but all of us did get what we needed out of those earlier MMOs--challenge, interdependence, and that sense of adventure. So far nothing suggests that won't be the case for PRotF. If there was a niche or target audience back then and if there is one now, it's the developers themselves. Make the game world you all want to play in. That's the bullseye to aim at, imo. Then the alpha/beta testers. Then the gaming community as a whole.
Rattenmann said:While that is a honest statement right now, it shows that initial marketing was very dishonest. You DID target EQ and VG players VERY directly. You lured us in by promising a true sequel to these games. I wonder when the direction changed, or if initial marketing was really just dishonest to get a starved Crowed of gamers on board, knowing that we would pay anything to get a true EQ2. Feeling a little scammed by now to be frank. Not claiming it was the intent, but it certainly starts to feel like it and I certainly hate that feeling.
You were never "promised a true sequel" of EQ/VG, and Pantheon was never marketed only to people who want a "true EQ2". That's just you seeing what you wanted to see.
This is the age of immovable opinions based on peer disinformation and unwillingness to actually be corrected once you have a passionate stance. It's terribly sad. I don't think Joppa could possibly be any more clear, it's now up to those who are so certain their feelings based on past grievances are the only truth, to step back and actually consider what is being presented to them in rebuttal to their argument instead of just rushing to form another feels based response
Naunet said:Rattenmann said:While that is a honest statement right now, it shows that initial marketing was very dishonest. You DID target EQ and VG players VERY directly. You lured us in by promising a true sequel to these games. I wonder when the direction changed, or if initial marketing was really just dishonest to get a starved Crowed of gamers on board, knowing that we would pay anything to get a true EQ2. Feeling a little scammed by now to be frank. Not claiming it was the intent, but it certainly starts to feel like it and I certainly hate that feeling.
You were never "promised a true sequel" of EQ/VG, and Pantheon was never marketed only to people who want a "true EQ2". That's just you seeing what you wanted to see.
Naunet- actually, that's a bit misleading. Mind you, VG isn't even a sequel to EQ for that matter, but the mode is similar. The EQ and VG communities were most certainly very targeted in the beginnings though, as was DAOC (again, similar mode) as well as others. I know this because I was there (feel free to see when my profile was created). VR has said such over the years. Furthermore, VR has even said they are targeting a specific audience; it's quoted in this thread (I remember hearing it multiple times, too). Like VG, the point of Pantheon was to bring back tenets of "mmorpg" as it once existed in a different direction from the mainstream of today. And then: to morph and modernize unique successes into a brand new world with some new ideas, technology, and development. Also simply known as a "vision" or "direction." For example, the 3rd-world perspective emphasis (mainstream) is now being utilized in Pantheon streams, where as the other direction had an emphasis on 1st-world perspective. Now, that's a very different feeling and worldy experience. In the beginnings incredible developers (really not just Brad) knew that, as can be seen in their successes and masterpiece. I realize it can be difficult to comprehend, but this is merely just one example of many. It's difficult for Pantheon to be exceptionally different from mainstream 2021 when such things happen.
It sure feels like a lot of straws are being clutched at right now..
Come on man, because they are showing streams in 3rd person.. that's a bit rich imo
I've said it before but here it is again, for those who want a new game that is very similar to OG EQ, take a look at Monsters & Memories.
That is arguably a niche game as they are aiming for a very specific experience and player segment.
Syrif, you have used the following hashtags what seems like a thousand times on this very forum:
#communitymatters #makenightmatteragain #factionsmatter #riskvsreward #deathpenalty #HardRaiding #respectyourguild #HellLevels #worldsnotgames #sticktoyourvision #restoreMMORPG
All of those things that you have promoted over the years are still part of the plan with the possible exception of hell levels. You promote #worldsnotgames but are more angry about a third-person perspective that has been featured since the very beginning than you are happy about the transition from zones to a truly seamless world? That makes no sense to me. There has been no deviation with the vision. Brad had been pretty consistent in his messaging, for many years and on several platforms (including his blog entries) in saying that Pantheon was aiming to cast a broader net to try and reach more people because he was confident that the type of game that Pantheon has always strived to be would resonate on a far-reaching level. He asked us to help with that. If you read one of his final messages on the boards ( https://seforums.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/11130/added-2-dev-diaries/view/post_id/215930 ) you'll see that the events that have recently transpired are aligned with what he seemed to have wanted.
A healthy dose of skepticism is fine. You can ask questions and challenge status quo in a respectful/productive manner. Suggesting that Pantheon is basically a hybrid of Shrek and WoW seems like pretty obvious trolling. Be a part of the solution rather than getting bogged down in that FUD ecosystem. Casting a broader net doesn't mean that the tenets/philosophy/vision is being compromised. Some of that responsibility falls on us and it's really quite simple to achieve. Be kind and considerate to newcomers. Help people understand how the concepts you promote with your hashtags can be the makings of a great adventure and then help them connect the dots to the implementations that VR is revealing.
Some people feel that: "The word "niche" is just an awful word to use for a game".
I personally believe it is what has attracted the people that are "currently" interested in the game and will only attract more people, opposed to discourage them. But I get the desire to steer away from the word "niche" because "some" people relate it to exclusivity, or elitism and we want inclusivity... even though niche doesn't mean to exclude.
I can totally understand the desire to steer away from a negative image of exclusivity. I think a different approach could be explaining what niche means (and doesn't mean) to PRotF instead of suggesting that PRotF is not being designed to be different than the modern MMO.
Some MMO players won't like it, by definition, that is niche. We need to get the negative connotation away from the word. It is not exclusivity, it is just not appealing to all. USMC is a niche branch of the military, that's neither good nor bad, it's just something that's not for everyone.