Fingurs said:
One thing I have to add: I don't understand the h8 for instance content. It helps so many things work/feel/perform better. You dont have to be bothered by outsiders, and (if you played EQ1 endgame) you dont get shafted on encounters for....MONTHS because you are on the wrong time zone.
( My guild in EQ1, blocked the ENTIRE server from Vulak'Aerr 58 out of a possible 59 times. Oh and yes, we were letting loot rot. How many people do you think we made quit? Guilds.)
If I didn't want to be bothered by outsiders, I would go play a single player game.
The negative ramifications to instancing far outweigh the positive for me, especially in the type of game Pantheon will be. I'm not sure how going to a completely unrealistic personal version of a dungeon can "feel" better in a virtual world. To me its nothing but a constant reminder that I'm playing a game.
Instances are absolutely a deal-breaker for me, for any dungeon or raid encounter. Instances are the biggest community destruction device ever created. And on top of that they let far too much gear flow into a game far too quickly, because nothing is contested.
Want to camp the myconid king? Cool anyone can do it, just zone into your own instance and farm to your hearts content... yeah count me out.
Dullahan said:
Fingurs said:
One thing I have to add: I don't understand the h8 for instance content. It helps so many things work/feel/perform better. You dont have to be bothered by outsiders, and (if you played EQ1 endgame) you dont get shafted on encounters for....MONTHS because you are on the wrong time zone.
( My guild in EQ1, blocked the ENTIRE server from Vulak'Aerr 58 out of a possible 59 times. Oh and yes, we were letting loot rot. How many people do you think we made quit? Guilds.)
If I didn't want to be bothered by outsiders, I would go play a single player game.
The negative ramifications to instancing far outweigh the positive for me, especially in the type of game Pantheon will be. I'm not sure how going to a completely unrealistic personal version of a dungeon can "feel" better in a virtual world. To me its nothing but a constant reminder that I'm playing a game.
I have to call you out on this one. Please list the negative ramifications of instancing. I listed mine about open world. Time zone spawning / Lag / newbies have to watch where their going (newbies = money too) / trolling from other guilds.
Check out Destiny some time. Destiny is all zones, but there is actually no loading. (well once in a great while) So you can make it open world, and you go into an area, that suddenly only your guild is in there :)
Trust me, there are ways to make instancing better, and I guarantee you this team knows about those. but to simply scoff at the idea with "ill go play a single player game". Trust me, more people who this game will never see the light of day without, will do the same at the idea of open competition for raid mobs. Its the most glamorized nightmare ever. I have to think most people who champion it, just simply did not live through it. All of us at some point or another (who had a soul, and were not 13) felt really bad at what we were doing, but we had no choice.
I mean certain servers, had SERVER RULES on EQ1 for Ragefire, because so many people called/emailed/wrote letters they couldn't finish their epic.
P.S. Vanguard did something fairly decent (still prefer instancing) where, if you killed the mob within the last 7 days, it was simply hollow to you (you could not attack it, and it could not attack you. Therefor you couldnt troll/etc.. But of course you know what happened right? People got on their alts, and began to troll :)
Rallyd said:
Instances are absolutely a deal-breaker for me, for any dungeon or raid encounter. Instances are the biggest community destruction device ever created. And on top of that they let far too much gear flow into a game far too quickly, because nothing is contested.
Want to camp the myconid king? Cool anyone can do it, just zone into your own instance and farm to your hearts content... yeah count me out.
I was talking about raids, and Im not sure what you mean by farm to your hearts content. There are lockout timers on things. How is not instancing something going to stop non-stop farming? in EQ1, there was this particular mob that dropped a Fishbone Earring. It gave you the ability to breathe underwater (a forgotten concept in MMOs today). Long story short, it was ULTRA rare, and that mob was camped 24/7/365. OR - that mob could be in a group instance that you can hit up every 72 hours with your friends laughing away.
Please tell me why that is worse.
Fingurs said:
Rallyd said:
Instances are absolutely a deal-breaker for me, for any dungeon or raid encounter. Instances are the biggest community destruction device ever created. And on top of that they let far too much gear flow into a game far too quickly, because nothing is contested.
Want to camp the myconid king? Cool anyone can do it, just zone into your own instance and farm to your hearts content... yeah count me out.
I was talking about raids, and Im not sure what you mean by farm to your hearts content. There are lockout timers on things. How is not instancing something going to stop non-stop farming? in EQ1, there was this particular mob that dropped a Fishbone Earring. It gave you the ability to breathe underwater (a forgotten concept in MMOs today). Long story short, it was ULTRA rare, and that mob was camped 24/7/365. OR - that mob could be in a group instance that you can hit up every 72 hours with your friends laughing away.
Please tell me why that is worse.
Because then there is no limit to how many Fishbone Earrings can enter the market in any given period of time, it is an *, or Unlimited. It is all dependent upon how many players choose to do it. This will render the Fishbone Earring basically irrelevant, instead of the valuable item it was on Everquest.
Fingurs said:
I was talking about raids, and Im not sure what you mean by farm to your hearts content. There are lockout timers on things. How is not instancing something going to stop non-stop farming? in EQ1, there was this particular mob that dropped a Fishbone Earring. It gave you the ability to breathe underwater (a forgotten concept in MMOs today). Long story short, it was ULTRA rare, and that mob was camped 24/7/365. OR - that mob could be in a group instance that you can hit up every 72 hours with your friends laughing away.
Please tell me why that is worse.
Instances are 100% worse. Because the fishbone earring wouldn't not be ultra-rare if there were instances that could be hit-up 72 hours and this discussion and your memory would have even occured. Tell me one item post EQ that evokes even close to the memories/satisfaction that you had from the obtaining an item in EQ. And, what made EQ even better, was typically if you were in a guild/perma group, you were with your friends chatting anyhow, so the "camp" didn't seem bad. That is 1000 times better than being able to run my own instance version of a dungeon so I can get my fishbone earring with ease. Would it be a complete dealbreaker for me like Rallyd - probably not, but I would be extremely disappointed.
Stories and memories wouldn't have occurred in EQ if it had instances. Everyone is looking at it from the loot angle which is also valid, but the community angle is my #1. For example.. trains, shouting, ooc, contested mobs, etc. all made the zone feel "alive." Seeing high level groups run past you / hearing people OOC - Mask rotting - 7 minutes to claim it - don't bring trains, etc. . Instances kill all feeling of a dungeon being real.
Further, if you run instances, more than likely it's going to be a crawl type dungeon where you complete in 30 minutes, or, if it is not, and it is an instance of a camp type dungeon you're going to have to have some sort of LFG finder to port you to that instance to join a group if a member leaves. Or, you would need to get out of the instance, add the member, and re-instance - it screams breaking immersion.
Contested content is a good thing, not everyone needs the best item within the first 3 months. And, having the Ultra-Rare item just out of reach, but oh so close, is a good thing - that carrot is ever dangling.
But, not to derail this thread any further, I would hope to the OP point that there is some serviceable gear for truly elite/skilled 6 man groups at end game. Possibly, even content that is "meant" for 10-12 people that can be handled by an extremely capable group. I do still think there should be a separation of the best raid gear versus the 6 man group gear though.
*Edit, See Rallyd's above for the TLDR version of my post, haha
Rallyd said:
Fingurs said:
Rallyd said:
Instances are absolutely a deal-breaker for me, for any dungeon or raid encounter. Instances are the biggest community destruction device ever created. And on top of that they let far too much gear flow into a game far too quickly, because nothing is contested.
Want to camp the myconid king? Cool anyone can do it, just zone into your own instance and farm to your hearts content... yeah count me out.
I was talking about raids, and Im not sure what you mean by farm to your hearts content. There are lockout timers on things. How is not instancing something going to stop non-stop farming? in EQ1, there was this particular mob that dropped a Fishbone Earring. It gave you the ability to breathe underwater (a forgotten concept in MMOs today). Long story short, it was ULTRA rare, and that mob was camped 24/7/365. OR - that mob could be in a group instance that you can hit up every 72 hours with your friends laughing away.
Please tell me why that is worse.
Because then there is no limit to how many Fishbone Earrings can enter the market in any given period of time, it is an *, or Unlimited. It is all dependent upon how many players choose to do it. This will render the Fishbone Earring basically irrelevant, instead of the valuable item it was on Everquest.
The reason it was valuable in Everquest besides its actual use, was the fact that no one with a reasonable schedule couldn't get their hands on it. Due to these 24/7/365 campers (hello bots aka China).
So is your worry here market value of items? What about fun value of acquiring them?
Your point is well taken, but its misguided. Unless of course your goal is to become the #1 tradesman in the game, then well - you are making 100% sense. However the irony here is, by making something droppable/tradeable and open for competition, will only flood the market faster due to the people you will attract. (professional botters from China) I mean it got so bad in WOW that China has laws on how much time you can spend on an MMO, because people were quitting jobs and selling crap to Americans because that was much more profitable for them.
So I'll meet you halfway, if you throw in - NO DROP. :)
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
Fingurs said:
One thing I have to add: I don't understand the h8 for instance content. It helps so many things work/feel/perform better. You dont have to be bothered by outsiders, and (if you played EQ1 endgame) you dont get shafted on encounters for....MONTHS because you are on the wrong time zone.
( My guild in EQ1, blocked the ENTIRE server from Vulak'Aerr 58 out of a possible 59 times. Oh and yes, we were letting loot rot. How many people do you think we made quit? Guilds.)
If I didn't want to be bothered by outsiders, I would go play a single player game.
The negative ramifications to instancing far outweigh the positive for me, especially in the type of game Pantheon will be. I'm not sure how going to a completely unrealistic personal version of a dungeon can "feel" better in a virtual world. To me its nothing but a constant reminder that I'm playing a game.
I have to call you out on this one. Please list the negative ramifications of instancing. I listed mine about open world. Time zone spawning / Lag / newbies have to watch where their going (newbies = money too) / trolling from other guilds.
Check out Destiny some time. Destiny is all zones, but there is actually no loading. (well once in a great while) So you can make it open world, and you go into an area, that suddenly only your guild is in there :)
Trust me, there are ways to make instancing better, and I guarantee you this team knows about those. but to simply scoff at the idea with "ill go play a single player game". Trust me, more people who this game will never see the light of day without, will do the same at the idea of open competition for raid mobs. Its the most glamorized nightmare ever. I have to think most people who champion it, just simply did not live through it. All of us at some point or another (who had a soul, and were not 13) felt really bad at what we were doing, but we had no choice.
I mean certain servers, had SERVER RULES on EQ1 for Ragefire, because so many people called/emailed/wrote letters they couldn't finish their epic.
P.S. Vanguard did something fairly decent (still prefer instancing) where, if you killed the mob within the last 7 days, it was simply hollow to you (you could not attack it, and it could not attack you. Therefor you couldnt troll/etc.. But of course you know what happened right? People got on their alts, and began to troll :)
So as not to derail this topic, I responded to your post in a thread about instancing.
Raidan said:
Fingurs said:
I was talking about raids, and Im not sure what you mean by farm to your hearts content. There are lockout timers on things. How is not instancing something going to stop non-stop farming? in EQ1, there was this particular mob that dropped a Fishbone Earring. It gave you the ability to breathe underwater (a forgotten concept in MMOs today). Long story short, it was ULTRA rare, and that mob was camped 24/7/365. OR - that mob could be in a group instance that you can hit up every 72 hours with your friends laughing away.
Please tell me why that is worse.
Instances are 100% worse. Because the fishbone earring wouldn't not be ultra-rare if there were instances that could be hit-up 72 hours and this discussion and your memory would have even occured. Tell me one item post EQ that evokes even close to the memories/satisfaction that you had from the obtaining an item in EQ. And, what made EQ even better, was typically if you were in a guild/perma group, you were with your friends chatting anyhow, so the "camp" didn't seem bad. That is 1000 times better than being able to run my own instance version of a dungeon so I can get my fishbone earring with ease. Would it be a complete dealbreaker for me like Rallyd - probably not, but I would be extremely disappointed.
Stories and memories wouldn't have occurred in EQ if it had instances. Everyone is looking at it from the loot angle which is also valid, but the community angle is my #1. For example.. trains, shouting, ooc, contested mobs, etc. all made the zone feel "alive." Seeing high level groups run past you / hearing people OOC - Mask rotting - 7 minutes to claim it - don't bring trains, etc. . Instances kill all feeling of a dungeon being real.
Further, if you run instances, more than likely it's going to be a crawl type dungeon where you complete in 30 minutes, or, if it is not, and it is an instance of a camp type dungeon you're going to have to have some sort of LFG finder to port you to that instance to join a group if a member leaves. Or, you would need to get out of the instance, add the member, and re-instance - it screams breaking immersion.
Contested content is a good thing, not everyone needs the best item within the first 3 months. And, having the Ultra-Rare item just out of reach, but oh so close, is a good thing - that carrot is ever dangling.
But, not to derail this thread any further, I would hope to the OP point that there is some serviceable gear for truly elite/skilled 6 man groups at end game. Possibly, even content that is "meant" for 10-12 people that can be handled by an extremely capable group. I do still think there should be a separation of the best raid gear versus the 6 man group gear though.
*Edit, See Rallyd's above for the TLDR version of my post, haha
Loot tables boys! Make the loot table large, and introduce tiers of items. Why does Final_Boss_01 always have to drop the Fishbone earring? Ultimately, do you want people to feel like they have to play for 8 months to acquire 1 item? There is a point of diminishing returns here. There is a reason why the games were mentioning don't have the success of others. You have to balance difficulty a little with fun. This is one of the ways.
I understand the satisfaction of acquiring an item after a while, but I think it should be because it was so hard to beat Final_boss_01, not because after 78 days of camping off and on for 6 months, I finally got this item. Seriously - Who is going to want to sign up for that? REALLY?
"Was typically if you were in a guild/perma group, you were with your friends chatting anyhow, so the "camp" didn't seem bad" - This is not realistic to expect of people. While most people who are currently posting on this forum would probably not have an issue with this, realize you are people who (like me) are not the norm. You are enthusiastically discussing a game that has yet to even show you what a class will look like. In order for them to even give you a game, they will have to attract people who would never in a million years stomach what were doing right this second. Who knows, maybe Ill be proven wrong - But I've been playing since Ultimate Online - Making things obscure never works for a games longevity. You went on to talk about running my own instance.... I said group instance, so that same group of friends would come with you, and adventure! Instead of neglecting their family and cholesterol problem and pound away cans of Pepsi / chips staring at a screen for hours borderline chatroom. (come on laugh a little)
I dont think we are derailing it at all, this dude asked about what is endgame.... Its anyone's guess. Like I said, we have yet to even see a class outlined. We have names, but with the mana stuff, at this point a Wizard could be someone who wears plate, and casts charisma spells for all I know. So its all good :)
Lastly - While nothing is final, I am fairly certain it is nearly impossible to make a game without zones. In the podcasts they pretty much said there WILL BE ZONES. So by default it looks like they prefer it. Wether or not they distribute Raid Mobs within the public random areas, vs a specialized dungeon/area remains to be seen.
I just ask that they take a strong, strong look at exactly how much fun competition was in prior MMOs. I think they will find that for every person who said "woohoo!" 10 said, Well - I could never get to that level, so I just stopped playing.
EDIT: wow Yellow background color was a horrible idea.
Actually they have stated before that there will not be instances in Pantheon, except for in story-telling scenarios. The zones you are talking about, are Everquest type Zones, basically the opposite and easier alternative to seamless world. You speak a story of entitlement, that every player should be able to experience every facet of the game, just because they pay the monthly fee. If this is the game you're looking for, I have 30 different AAA MMO's in the past 10 years that I'll sell you for free, but Pantheon will not be thus.
Without competition human spirit itself dies. When the world turns into Star-Trek and nobody needs anything anymore because they automatically have their needs met, competition will be the only thing left, and we will still hold it dear.
It is certainly not impossible to make a game without instances, just watch Brad McQuaid show you how in the coming years.
@Fingurs
It looks to me like your solution is to compromise massively multiplayer gameplay and the integrity of a virtual world in favor of convenience.
That doesn't usually go over too well here.
Rallyd said:
Actually they have stated before that there will not be instances in Pantheon, except for in story-telling scenarios. The zones you are talking about, are Everquest type Zones, basically the opposite and easier alternative to seamless world. You speak a story of entitlement, that every player should be able to experience every facet of the game, just because they pay the monthly fee. If this is the game you're looking for, I have 30 different AAA MMO's in the past 10 years that I'll sell you for free, but Pantheon will not be thus.
Without competition human spirit itself dies. When the world turns into Star-Trek and nobody needs anything anymore because they automatically have their needs met, competition will be the only thing left, and we will still hold it dear.
It is certainly not impossible to make a game without instances, just watch Brad McQuaid show you how in the coming years.
Np - Tell me of 1, ANY MMO, that has displayed your model and succeeded. Don't say EQ1, because the changed... drastically, and they also had next to no competition before the WOW monster ate them.
Devs need to eat too. :)
Dullahan said:
@Fingurs
It looks to me like your solution is to compromise massively multiplayer gameplay and the integrity of a virtual world in favor of convenience.
That doesn't usually go over too well here.
I am just being a realist. I dont think the goal of VR is to design a game for 500 people. They are hoping for at least 100k. The game you are talking about, is just not realistic in 2015. Very very few people will sign up to have cool online virtual friends, and dont really care about getting loot. You're going to have to meet in the middle. Some instancing, some open world, protect the rare items from being sold on playerauctions/ebay/insert_random_site_01.
Pantheon will not have the luxury of being without competition like UO / Everquest. I mean come on - there is a reason why this game wasn't fully funded, and dudes who walk 30 miles to work get nearly the same amount in 2 weeks. All I am asking for is to be a little more open minded.
Fingurs said:
Rallyd said:
Actually they have stated before that there will not be instances in Pantheon, except for in story-telling scenarios. The zones you are talking about, are Everquest type Zones, basically the opposite and easier alternative to seamless world. You speak a story of entitlement, that every player should be able to experience every facet of the game, just because they pay the monthly fee. If this is the game you're looking for, I have 30 different AAA MMO's in the past 10 years that I'll sell you for free, but Pantheon will not be thus.
Without competition human spirit itself dies. When the world turns into Star-Trek and nobody needs anything anymore because they automatically have their needs met, competition will be the only thing left, and we will still hold it dear.
It is certainly not impossible to make a game without instances, just watch Brad McQuaid show you how in the coming years.
Np - Tell me of 1, ANY MMO, that has displayed your model and succeeded. Don't say EQ1, because the changed... drastically, and they also had next to no competition before the WOW monster ate them.
Devs need to eat too. :)
Np - Tell me of 1, that had meaningful PVE and wasn't a completely PVP based game, that TRIED? I was a skeptic like you, I was worried they would have instances again in Pantheon, when they told us they would not, we rejoiced. In Brad I trust.
Rallyd said:
Fingurs said:
Rallyd said:
Actually they have stated before that there will not be instances in Pantheon, except for in story-telling scenarios. The zones you are talking about, are Everquest type Zones, basically the opposite and easier alternative to seamless world. You speak a story of entitlement, that every player should be able to experience every facet of the game, just because they pay the monthly fee. If this is the game you're looking for, I have 30 different AAA MMO's in the past 10 years that I'll sell you for free, but Pantheon will not be thus.
Without competition human spirit itself dies. When the world turns into Star-Trek and nobody needs anything anymore because they automatically have their needs met, competition will be the only thing left, and we will still hold it dear.
It is certainly not impossible to make a game without instances, just watch Brad McQuaid show you how in the coming years.
Np - Tell me of 1, ANY MMO, that has displayed your model and succeeded. Don't say EQ1, because the changed... drastically, and they also had next to no competition before the WOW monster ate them.
Devs need to eat too. :)
Np - Tell me of 1, that had meaningful PVE and wasn't a completely PVP based game, that TRIED? I was a skeptic like you, I was worried they would have instances again in Pantheon, when they told us they would not, we rejoiced. In Brad I trust.
I wanna say VR doesn't deserve you, but a lot of these guys aren't even getting paid right now, so - Thanks for your commitment. TERRIFIC 3rd Podcast Topic, eventhough they will probably tell you its too soon to make any big calls.
Good talk guys. :)
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
@Fingurs
It looks to me like your solution is to compromise massively multiplayer gameplay and the integrity of a virtual world in favor of convenience.
That doesn't usually go over too well here.
I am just being a realist. I dont think the goal of VR is to design a game for 500 people. They are hoping for at least 100k. The game you are talking about, is just not realistic in 2015. Very very few people will sign up to have cool online virtual friends, and dont really care about getting loot. You're going to have to meet in the middle. Some instancing, some open world, protect the rare items from being sold on playerauctions/ebay/insert_random_site_01.
Pantheon will not have the luxury of being without competition like UO / Everquest. I mean come on - there is a reason why this game wasn't fully funded, and dudes who walk 30 miles to work get nearly the same amount in 2 weeks. All I am asking for is to be a little more open minded.
Your argument is based on fallacy and assumption. You have no basis of comparison where a game like Pantheon or classic EQ has been in competition with modern games. By 2005, EQ was so diluted, of course it was overrun by World of Warcraft. Vanilla WoW did everything EQ in 2005 was doing, but better.
Dullahan said:
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
@Fingurs
It looks to me like your solution is to compromise massively multiplayer gameplay and the integrity of a virtual world in favor of convenience.
That doesn't usually go over too well here.
I am just being a realist. I dont think the goal of VR is to design a game for 500 people. They are hoping for at least 100k. The game you are talking about, is just not realistic in 2015. Very very few people will sign up to have cool online virtual friends, and dont really care about getting loot. You're going to have to meet in the middle. Some instancing, some open world, protect the rare items from being sold on playerauctions/ebay/insert_random_site_01.
Pantheon will not have the luxury of being without competition like UO / Everquest. I mean come on - there is a reason why this game wasn't fully funded, and dudes who walk 30 miles to work get nearly the same amount in 2 weeks. All I am asking for is to be a little more open minded.
Your argument is based on fallacy and assumption. You have no basis of comparison where a game like Pantheon or classic EQ has been in competition with modern games. By 2005, EQ was so diluted, of course it was overrun by World of Warcraft. Vanilla WoW did everything EQ did, but better.
Everquest + Everquest 2 all time subs under 1 million. (google it)
WoW - 10 million+
WoW = everything you hate.
Not sure how my argument is invalid. It might be lofty sure, but its far from invalid.
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
@Fingurs
It looks to me like your solution is to compromise massively multiplayer gameplay and the integrity of a virtual world in favor of convenience.
That doesn't usually go over too well here.
I am just being a realist. I dont think the goal of VR is to design a game for 500 people. They are hoping for at least 100k. The game you are talking about, is just not realistic in 2015. Very very few people will sign up to have cool online virtual friends, and dont really care about getting loot. You're going to have to meet in the middle. Some instancing, some open world, protect the rare items from being sold on playerauctions/ebay/insert_random_site_01.
Pantheon will not have the luxury of being without competition like UO / Everquest. I mean come on - there is a reason why this game wasn't fully funded, and dudes who walk 30 miles to work get nearly the same amount in 2 weeks. All I am asking for is to be a little more open minded.
Your argument is based on fallacy and assumption. You have no basis of comparison where a game like Pantheon or classic EQ has been in competition with modern games. By 2005, EQ was so diluted, of course it was overrun by World of Warcraft. Vanilla WoW did everything EQ did, but better.
Everquest + Everquest 2 all time subs under 1 million. (google it)
WoW - 10 million+
WoW = everything you hate.
Not sure how my argument is invalid. It might be lofty sure, but its far from invalid.
WoW didn't gain it's playerbase from instancing or any actual gameplay mechanics, it gained it from advertisement and popularity. WoW was a cultural phenomenon, during the time which WoW was a major player, there were 20x the amount of MMO gamers compared to when EQ was a major player. that means if EQ had 500k it was just as successful in its own current time market as WoW was with 10 million. Your arguement is invalid.
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
Fingurs said:
Dullahan said:
@Fingurs
It looks to me like your solution is to compromise massively multiplayer gameplay and the integrity of a virtual world in favor of convenience.
That doesn't usually go over too well here.
I am just being a realist. I dont think the goal of VR is to design a game for 500 people. They are hoping for at least 100k. The game you are talking about, is just not realistic in 2015. Very very few people will sign up to have cool online virtual friends, and dont really care about getting loot. You're going to have to meet in the middle. Some instancing, some open world, protect the rare items from being sold on playerauctions/ebay/insert_random_site_01.
Pantheon will not have the luxury of being without competition like UO / Everquest. I mean come on - there is a reason why this game wasn't fully funded, and dudes who walk 30 miles to work get nearly the same amount in 2 weeks. All I am asking for is to be a little more open minded.
Your argument is based on fallacy and assumption. You have no basis of comparison where a game like Pantheon or classic EQ has been in competition with modern games. By 2005, EQ was so diluted, of course it was overrun by World of Warcraft. Vanilla WoW did everything EQ did, but better.
Everquest + Everquest 2 all time subs under 1 million. (google it)
WoW - 10 million+
WoW = everything you hate.
Not sure how my argument is invalid. It might be lofty sure, but its far from invalid.
Theres even more people playing League of Legends. Whats your point?
Arguing that a game like Pantheon will not be successful on the basis that other games that weren't like Pantheon weren't more successful than mainstream themepark games is fallacy. Thats simply a dishonest comparison and a misrepresentation of what Pantheon hopes to achieve.
I tried my hardest to migrate to the instancing thread, but I failed.
edit: ps cant wait to raid in Pantheon (relevance)
Dullahan said:
I tried my hardest to migrate to the instancing thread, but I failed.
edit: ps cant wait to raid in Pantheon (relevance)
I did notice that, thank you for the effort ;)
Mephile, I believe that if you liked what XI had to offer in terms of challenges in an engaging social environment, then you would most likely like a game like Pantheon, even if it wasn't 100% of what you personally would want from a game. I do like and appreciate that you are trying to bring in some other aspects from other well known games and as long as those aspects/features aren't based off of convenience, then I personally would be open minded to them.