The perfect is the enemy of the good. No good developer ever thinks that a game is perfect - there are always new ideas for great improvements. But that road leads to ruin.
Equally - a crappy release almost always leads to ruin as well. We need to have something that impresses people.
Two examples that come to mind in slightly different ways are SWTOR and Age of Conan. SWTOR had a wonerfully designed game with very few bugs at release. The stories were great. It had, and used, a large budget. It also had a pathetically weak endgame and one of the worst crafting systems in the history of MMOs. But the start, and through level 50, really grabbed people. It is still here. Conan had a really well done starter island with excellent design and voice acting. After that ...not so much. It had a decent run over the years though it is in maintenance mode now.
It is absolutely essential that we have a good game with a good range of classes, good crafting system and good content at release. If not we might as well pull the plug now. I would *not* compromise much on game quality at the start.
Where I would compromise is the extent of the content. Pantheon can get away with a smaller world far better than Vanguard did (as many of us know Vanguard was released in an unfinished state with one of three planned continents mostly unfinished). If Pantheon is released with very little to do from level 30 on and a promise that this will be patched in within 6 months, that is not ideal but is far better than not releasing at all. If the first 30 levels are as well done as Tortage (Age of Conan) was, it will attract and keep people. Very few of us will worry about level 30+ if what we see is wonderfully good. We will trust VR to expand it.
Now I am exaggerating. No content at all from 30+ is unlikely although a very weak set of areas with little endgame is quite possible. As a placeholder. Yet I am serious in suggesting that if it will shave a year off the schedule for release without impacting the great impression we need to make over the first 10-30 levels this could be the best trade-off.
dorotea said:Where I would compromise is the extent of the content. Pantheon can get away with a smaller world far better than Vanguard did (as many of us know Vanguard was released in an unfinished state with one of three planned continents mostly unfinished). If Pantheon is released with very little to do from level 30 on and a promise that this will be patched in within 6 months, that is not ideal but is far better than not releasing at all. If the first 30 levels are as well done as Tortage (Age of Conan) was, it will attract and keep people. Very few of us will worry about level 30+ if what we see is wonderfully good. We will trust VR to expand it.
While I can agree in principle with what you are saying, releasing a game that has no/little content past level 30 could cause as big a backfire as releasing a game full of bugs. There is the concern, by many, that if players were to run out of content before VR could finish filling out the game post level 30, that those players could leave and never return. I know that some percentage of the population will burn through content quickly then sit there at the 'end of content' complaining about having nothing to do. Yet they did that to themselves, rushing through it knowing full well there there would be a wall. I have zero sympathyVR would need to be very upfront with not only the statement that the game is releasing with content from 1 to 30 but also with a specific date as to when the content post 30 will be released and then making sure they dont miss that date.
My bigger concern (and the more likely one in my opinion) is that of the 3 continents, only Kingsreach will release with the full quality and quantity of content. The poor players who choose races that start on Reignfall or Whitethaw will suffer with far less quality and quantity of content. Those contintents will get rushed to 'completion'. I've played enough games where you can see where the developers started building their game and in what order things were done.
As much as I would like to see this game out sooner than later, I would prefer VR not compromise on the content. Release the game with content 1 to 50 with the 3 continents enjoying the same attention to the quality and quantity of content.
After all, you only get 1 chance at a good first impression and this game will definitely need that first good impression.
IMO, the world must be ready. That means, all three continents should exist and we should be able to travel and explore them all. That does not mean that they have to be content complete. If there's supposed to be a dungeon somewhere and it's not ready, then create a block (like a landslide) over the entrance so it cannot be entered. If there's supposed to be a village somewhere and it's not ready, make some ruins there or something and when you later add it in, you declare that it "has been rebuilt" or "recently settled". Content can be patched in later...it does not all have to be ready for launch. What is important is that there's something for each level range up to 50. Definitely not a fan of content "only up to lvl 30" or something like that.
More important IMO is that all the gameplay stuff is ready (races / classes / abilities and game mechanics). These must be fully implemented and tested.
Sarim said:IMO, the world must be ready. That means, all three continents should exist and we should be able to travel and explore them all. That does not mean that they have to be content complete. If there's supposed to be a dungeon somewhere and it's not ready, then create a block (like a landslide) over the entrance so it cannot be entered. If there's supposed to be a village somewhere and it's not ready, make some ruins there or something and when you later add it in, you declare that it "has been rebuilt" or "recently settled". Content can be patched in later...it does not all have to be ready for launch. What is important is that there's something for each level range up to 50. Definitely not a fan of content "only up to lvl 30" or something like that.
More important IMO is that all the gameplay stuff is ready (races / classes / abilities and game mechanics). These must be fully implemented and tested.
I remember back to DAoC where I played in the Midgard realm. Half the realm wasn't even itemized. Albion enjoyed armor/weapons/spells up to level 50 while Midgard didn't have that past level 30. There we all sat, for months on end, with nearly half of our content missing. So to your statement that we should be able to travel and explore them all yet they dont need to be content complete is ridiculous. You cannot have one content more complete than any other. MMOs are never 'complete' in that once release the content is forever unchanged. Of course new content gets introduced as time goes by but at release each of our continents must be equally complete in all aspects. One content cannot be 'better' than the others because the developers ran out of time/money so had to rush-job at the end. Vanguard did that and look what happened.
Sarim said:That does not mean that they have to be content complete.
I really disagree here. A dead city or outpost takes away far more than it adds. When you are exploring a city and end up in a clearly unfinished neighborhood the entire feeling of exploration is ruined. Give me 3 cities to actually explore rather than 8 cities with dead neighborhoods and placeholder NPCs that are rushed to launch.
There is a quality so low no quantity of it can make it serviceable. I would rather have an actual ghost town than a creepy half completed town.
Vandraad said:You cannot have one content more complete than any other.
Of course you can. You wouldn't even know thats how its supposed to be without following the game production. For all you know VR secretly tossed around an idea of a fourth continent for a while but cut it for a future expansion already. Why is it so crazy for them to cut things down to two continents only? It is far better for the game to not put players into a half completed continent at all than it is to inclued some rushed version full of bugs, missing drops, placeholder NPCs, etc.
Jobeson said:Vandraad said:You cannot have one content more complete than any other.
I really disagree here. A dead city or outpost takes away far more than it adds. When you are exploring a city and end up in a clearly unfinished neighborhood the entire feeling of exploration is ruined. Give me 3 cities to actually explore rather than 8 cities with dead neighborhoods and placeholder NPCs that are rushed to launch.
I'll clarify that the continents to which I'm referring are the continents on which the player races start. Skar, Dark Myr and Ogres start on Reignfall. Would you be happy if you chose one of those races then quickly found out that your continent was unfinished with no content past level 30 while the Humans, Halflings and Elves over on Kingsreach enjoyed content up to 50? You'd be rightly pissed off.
dorotea said:As much as I would like to see this game out sooner than later, I prefer VR not to compromise on the content. Release the game with content 1 to 50 with the 3 continents enjoying the same attention to the quality and quantity of content.
After all, you only get 1 chance at a good first impression and this game will definitely need that first good impression.
If they start playing Jenga now, it will all come down.
Necros and Bards were always expansion fodder IMO.
Don't forget that VR will not show all progress made in the graphics arena (and a lot of other areas too) for surprise value. Given the quality of "out of game" artwork thus far, I have little worry in that respect.
Optimizing classes cannot be fully complete until all classes are in game, and comparisons made between them all. We must wait for the framework to allow pets in game before final balancing can begin. There is nothing worse than picking a role that is difficult to make in game progress while another class blasts their way through with no problem because of play imbalance.
One note; personal preferences are just that; one person's dropped superfluous class is another player's dreams dashed. I think the current roles are fine; with more promised for a later release. We know what we are getting and changing stuff now will cause a back lash from those that want to play any dropped classes. It may well lead to further development disruption and delays, too. Restricting classes right out of the traps is a sure way to alienate a tonne of potential customers. Nope. We need to go with the classes VR have promised already. Let VR publish what they think is right, what they think will be popular, fun, reliable and, at the end of the day, profitable.
Personally, I dont want a paired down game at all. I want VR's vision. I have waited since just after the start of Pantheon, I can wait a little longer for the complete game, not a game that has a good stab at it, and falls short. A half hearted game will not attract new blood or have the longevity that the vision deserves. Once alpha hits, I would expect that the world's mechanics are set with bug finding and polish being the order of the day. Before that (pre-alpha) is for development, redefining and redesigning if things dont work. Opening the game up when it is not ready, would cause Pantheon to suffer a critical wound which no cleric could heal.
Jobeson: ...would it ruin the game in your eyes?
Yes! Yes it would! I have seen the vision and that is what I want. If I was promised a golden chalice and was presented with a tin can, I would not be happy.
Vandraad said:I'll clarify that the continents to which I'm referring are the continents on which the player races start. Skar, Dark Myr and Ogres start on Reignfall. Would you be happy if you chose one of those races then quickly found out that your continent was unfinished with no content past level 30 while the Humans, Halflings and Elves over on Kingsreach enjoyed content up to 50? You'd be rightly pissed off.
That is exactly where the rushed cities and locations are. Such as LOTRO where the elves have a beautiful starting area unless you go exploring and then you have mannequin NPCs standing about staring at you in unfinished areas. To walk from a completed nice starting street crafted with care to a neighborhood of zombies ruins the experience. Its better to just block off the alley than show half completed work. Players will not be happy if it is rushed or even if the starting city forces us all onto a boat to kingsreach, but you again think cutting content means not cutting starting races too. If there is no reignfall to load up why have PCs make reignfall races?
Three-four years of production time shaved off by eliminating Reignfall from launch is the level of cutting I am referring to.
Classes too if necessary. I don't want to be one of the classes who simply has placeholder icons for abilities not even created yet. Whether that is the druid or the bard if a third of their abilities don't work DONT allow people to select that class at launch.
chenzeme said:I can wait a little longer for the complete game, not a game that has a good stab at it, and falls short.
You say a little longer, I ask 5 years longer?
Jobeson: You say a little longer, I ask 5 years longer?
Thunderleg: Fair question given the history to date.
Maybe a fair question, yes. I have to ask where the 5 years value comes from? Insider knowledge? I doubt it. I think it will not take anywhere near that time frame to open up to alpha. Once in alpha's polishing, bug crunching and content creation phase, then I dont think it will take that long to get to beta. I believe beta will be the shortest phase too. To get to live? A while yet. To get to alpha proper, not as long as you are expecting, that's for sure. But that's my guess and, to be honest, it is no better than yours. It is just as guess. We are not part of the development team so, who knows and VR are not telling. :D
But to answer you directly; yes, I can wait as long as the game needs as long as it is as promised.
Remaining phases of drevlopment.
1. Finish pre-alpha.
2. Finalize an alpha-ready game. Given that pre-alpha is not so much game testing as testing of basic features and mechanics - this could take a while. Given that VR has said (a while ago and maybe they have changed their minds) that they want alpha to be as polished and final as most games are when they get to beta this could be a *long* while.
3. Finish alpha. Pre-alpha has taken far longer than some of us expected (does not mean anything went wrong - means that our expectations were wrong). Given that alpha will be the first testing of a real game albeit in initial stages this can easily take a full year or more.
4. Finalize a beta-ready game. Should take far less time than the interregnum between pre-alpha and alpha.
5. Finish beta. Should take far less time than alpha but less time can still be 3-6 months or more.
6. Finalize a release-ready game. Should not take long at all.
Unless I am basically wrong about something it seems manifestly obvious that release is still multiple years away, barring a significant infusion of resources. Alpha starting next year is a fair hope - anything sooner is a pipe-dream. Getting from the start of alpha to release in a year or less - not going to happen.
We will wait, because we must wait. Let us do it with all the patience and optimism we can muster.
dorotea said:Remaining phases of drevlopment.
1. Finish pre-alpha.
2. Finalize an alpha-ready game. Given that pre-alpha is not so much game testing as testing of basic features and mechanics - this could take a while. Given that VR has said (a while ago and maybe they have changed their minds) that they want alpha to be as polished and final as most games are when they get to beta this could be a *long* while.
3. Finish alpha. Pre-alpha has taken far longer than some of us expected (does not mean anything went wrong - means that our expectations were wrong). Given that alpha will be the first testing of a real game albeit in initial stages this can easily take a full year or more.
4. Finalize a beta-ready game. Should take far less time than the interregnum between pre-alpha and alpha.
5. Finish beta. Should take far less time than alpha but less time can still be 3-6 months or more.
6. Finalize a release-ready game. Should not take long at all.
Unless I am basically wrong about something it seems manifestly obvious that release is still multiple years away, barring a significant infusion of resources. Alpha starting next year is a fair hope - anything sooner is a pipe-dream. Getting from the start of alpha to release in a year or less - not going to happen.
We will wait, because we must wait. Let us do it with all the patience and optimism we can muster.
I agree with you on most of this and you make good points. I would say though that Alpha next year is a pipe dream. They wont go to Alpha until they are ready to start testing all content expected at release. We will be in Alpha for at least a year, and Beta testing will likely be for load/stress testing within a few months of full release. I'm predicting at least 2 years (likely more) before Alpha testing... even with an infusion of cash/resources, because it isn't "so much" a lack of resources that is slowing their progress as much as it is their desire to progress slowly (to ensure they're getting it the way they want it). I'm ok with that, because more resources = more potential deviations (as well as more scope creep). I give this game at least another 4 years before release (with at least 1 year of Alpha) if we maintain the current pace. The difficult content isn't even the combat mechanics (which they are "seemingly" spending an inordinate amount of time on... but the quest/adventuring system(s) and the development of the game's motivator to create a desire in players to want to explore and progress for a reason other than "grinding" just to grind. The questing content is going to take years in itself (to be done well). In a game where there won't be magical icons over the NPCs' heads, or magic trails leading to points of interest, there will need to be a reason to interact with an NPC instead of randomly speaking to or attacking everyone you see... and hoping that you didn't miss something because NPCs aren't always static. They have a ton of work to do still before Alpha. The game should be close to fully developed before Alpha... Alpha should be bug testing - including testing quest circumvention, faction interactions, terrain clipping (this could be a huge one by itself considering vertical traversal). Alpha testing is where players should be trying to break the game... we can't break content that doesn't exist. Players (outside of this community) will use a few hours of Beta testing to evaluate the entirety of the game... The game will need to be pretty polished before Beta.
Darch said:I'm predicting at least 2 years (likely more) before Alpha testing ... The questing content is going to take years in itself (to be done well).
I agree with the questing content likely taking a long time and the problem is we don't have a good reference for it. The questing/keeper content is massive and not really started from what we have seen. I am guessing the reason it has been delayed this long is communications between servers as well as the dynamic spawning they are after that is tied into the network library. So until that is largely done we won't see the questing keeper stuff and that will then take a long period of time.
The only thing possibly saving Alpha is the scope of the completed keeper/questing can be much smaller. It can be more of a proof of concept implementation than actual tens of thousands of hours spent weaving it through the world. That said, readjusting the scope of Pantheon's likely launch with current funding is something I think we need to do and when it comes to this kind of action, the sooner its done the better.
I hope that the questing content takes a long time - not because I am that patient but because that would mean that there is a lot of that content. Some people on the forums have argued for a game that has relatively few quests and a lot of places to camp. Arguing that this is more "old school" and less structured and more in keeping with just throwing new characters into a living world where they aren't especially important and may never become especially important. Pointing out that compared to current MMOs Everquest was actually misnamed because it had far less reliance on quests than has become the norm.
While I concede the validity of these points - that isn't the game I want and it isn't a game that I think will live long and prosper. Having a handful of quests and hundreds of hours of killing pigs or wolves for 2 xp per kill strikes me as Everboring.
Questing content going to take years in itself...
It really depends on two things; how many people are creating and designing the quests and the tools that enable staff to build those quests and get them in game.
I suspect that VR have a quest build system that will be a "drag and drop" affair. Insert quest nodes, connecting to other nodes, attaching requirements on the connections, enter descriptions and speech text, etc. in the same way they are building NPCs and the like. It will probably allow builders to get these quests directly into test environments to allow testers to use them very quickly. Once marked as being tested and complete, it is simple to update the main game databases. If this system is easy to use and learn and is robust and reliable, then it will not take long for anyone to put a single quest line into the game. There maybe specific coding requirements along the way for some aspects of some quests (non standard results/requirements/rewards and the like), but once in the game engine and in the quest builder, it is childs play to generate quests in game.
The ideas and design is where the real creation skill is at and where most of the time will be spent, the insertion into Pantheon itself, not so much. Mostly, it comes down the personnel numbers and their creation qualities, who are specifically employed with designing quest briefs. Anyone (once trained) should be able to get a quest in game with the quest building tool; for quality and engaing quests, you need people with great imaginations and communication skills.
Once again, we have no idea how many staff members will be employed to do this task. Will it take years? Months? Somewhere in between? Its a guessing game and meaningless without insider knowledge. I understand people's pessimism, but ultimately any time frame we come up with are guesses, no better, no worse. Unless we are told by VR how long or how many, then we simply dont know (me included). I think it will be quicker than a lot of people here, but I may be as wrong as anyone else.
Firstly, let me speak about all the stuff I have seen for this first year as pre-alpha pledger:
- when I started, there was still tiling problems, and people where sort of gliding when you looked at them. There was no weather and no crafting. Most spells where not really there are the number of classes was still quite limited. A lot of people complain about the graphics, but the old graphics weren't that great and most animals were unity assets with very various states of quality. Trees were mehhh. Itemization was kinda there, but somewhat lacking.
- Fast forward: tiling is seemless. Just for those that don't know what i am speaking of: TF is divided in a set of smaller sized tiles that are loaded as you move. Weather, especially rain and fog, has been introduced, and afetr a long time, night/day cycle is back. Certain mobs have traits although they are sometimes not very identifiable (most of the time it is kinda hard to see the difference for some of them). We are back to one race only which has beedn improved these last couple of months. female humans don't run with legs wide apart as if they just came down from 5 days horse riding. Itemization, spells, crafting has progressed immensly and there are a lot of other things that has been brought into the game.
Now, all that being said. At the rate it is progressing, I do not see how three continents could be finished and polished in a reasonnable timeframe. They are, after all, quite massive. Also, there are some races that have such specific environment requirements that they objectively would represent an enormous time investment. Giving the team size, I would prefer a solid and massive continent that is polished and a subset of races that for some would be a stranded subset of the other continents population than a semi-finished everything.
If you are talking released version, then a badly unfinished game will die quickly after release. If we are talking alpha and pre-alpha, then one complete continent makes sense. But I feel anything less could be the end of the project. Alpha needs stuff for testers to do while waiting for the next test instruction set. Beta needs the game fleshing out content wise and polishing. Release could get away with a complete zone and all player levels, then introduce other areas over the next few months. But it needs all classes to 50 in my view.
IMO, they should throw mashed potatoes at the wall and work from that. Might be big, might be messy but at least it's all there.
Instead they are taking ages to polish one little turd.
Get all of it in, let it be broke, fix what you can as quick as you can (i.e. low hanging fruit) and have the whole game there. They need to stop with this, put something in, see if it works with other things that are in and tweak it for months, then reimplement it again and do the same cycle. This is just bad management. Because the next thing you put in is going to break everything else. Just get it all in there.
