Niien said:
Organic said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
I'm conflicted about the old school first round of MMOs and the highly social nature they encouraged. Back then, there really weren't that many MMO players, or gaming options to choose from. People were generous and encouraging, and never thought twice about helping a lower level player. Now, there are literally hundreds of different MMOs a player can choose from and MMO players tend to be extremely transient. Society as as whole is far more disconnected and isolated, despite having more "connections" via social media. I also believe the success of MOBAs shows that many players simply want to log in for 30-60 minutes and feel like they still accomplished something.
As seems indicative via the initial launch of WildStar, there simply aren't enough "hardcore" MMO players around anymore to endure extra challenging content and tons of restrictions on what can be accomplished solo. Casual players foot the bills in most MMOs. If the rewards for a few hours of wipes don't make it worth wiping, folks stop playing. I've played many dozens of MMOs and WildStar was the first game I'd ever reached level cap and had run zero dungeons. It was impossible to find groups outside of hardcore raiding guilds (and I couldn't commit enough hours a day/week to be accepted), the content was challenging enough for the average player that many wipes and 2-3 hours of effort were the typical experience for the level 20 dungeon, and many players just gave up on dungeons all together.
Despite enjoying challenges and content where you needed a group or really struggled (or simply couldn't do the content), I do find myself highly appreciating WOW's raid finder which allows folks who don't have much time will get to see a version of endgame. After all, they pay the same subscription fee, so why shouldn't everyone get to enjoy the content they paid for? A game where most content requires groups is in direct opposition to a society that demands as little hands-on time as possible. While Brad mentioned he's not designing a game for everyone, and I applaud that vision and direction, a game has to have enough players to keep the servers running.
For me, if I'm not having fun, I'm probably not going to play the game. If content requries a group, and forming groups isn't too painful, and the rewards for the effort spent feel adequate, then I think there's a good chance the game can be successful. On the other hand, if there's little to do solo, the process to find someone else is arduous at best, and there's never the feeling of reward, I'll continue my journey to find my next "great MMO experience".
I'll sum this up pretty easily. Ask for a refund now, there is no way this game is meant for someone with your tastes in MMOs. No offense, however there are a ton of games out there for your liking. No idea why you paid to post here to say you want the exact opposite of what VR is offering with Pantheon lol...
The FAQ is ripe with the devs mentioning specific opportunities to ditch old-school pain points as well as bring back the social climate many of us appreciated from MMOs in the 1990s and early 2000s. I don't see how any of my points are in conflict with what the FAQ states or with what the various interviews have mentioned thus far. In fact, those are many of the same things the devs say they're discussing and grappling with in order to make this game. After all, "Our intention [...] is not to bring back ‘everything’ from the old days, but rather to pick and choose what makes sense and what is needed to make a fun, social, cooperative, and challenging game."
That said, the devs have mentioned they want players to be able to log in and play for a couple of hours, making use of tools that will facilitate grouping. That's not a 40+ hour gaming week. That's not hour-long corpse runs. That's not sitting in general chat for hours spamming to find people to run a dungeon with "sometime tonight". That sounds like a pretty reasonable expression of what many gamers have available nowadays. No one plays a game they don't enjoy, regardless of how rose-colored their glasses are. Challenging content isn't fun-free by virtue of being challenging. However, until we all see what the content actually looks like, it's impossible to know if it will be enjoyable.
We're all here because something about what we've seen thus far has made us curious enough to sign up and become involved. I appreciate that your views differ from mine.
I'm sorry to say that all I can hope for is that you're wrong. In my humble opinion playing any MMORPG for a couple hours won't have the overwhelming sense of accomplishment that games like EQ gave you won't be there. That's why I believe time has to be a required factor as that's the most expensive currency people have to offer to a game. If it's not required then people will then get bored and leave as there's nothing tying them to the game.
If this wasn't the case, then one of the 20 other free to play mmos that offer instant groups and 30 minute dungeons would be filled with these gamers you speak of. Also, there would be no reason why you would be here trying to turn this into a casual mess due to you personally not having enough time or not wanting to make enough time. Did you ever think that maybe the kids of today might be able to take your place and be the hardcore raiders? Why would you want to be selfish and not let them have a chance to experience that?
It's patently false that a game needs to be played 8+ hours a day to yield a sense of achievement. Two hours is a pretty solid time investment, much more than the average of 10-15 minute dungeon runs present in the majority of modern games. Not every game has players willing to dedicate that much time to a game. If you want the ridiculous poopsocking and other "hardcore" mechanics, there are emulators available for classic EQ.
It's ridiculous to think that the extreme niche you're trying to speak for can lead to a sustainable population in 2015. Acting as if you speak for all "hardcore" MMO players and asserting that we're being "selfish" is not only ironic, but also insulting and generally incorrect.
Liav said:
Niien said:
I'm sorry to say that all I can hope for is that you're wrong. In my humble opinion playing any MMORPG for a couple hours won't have the overwhelming sense of accomplishment that games like EQ gave you won't be there. That's why I believe time has to be a required factor as that's the most expensive currency people have to offer to a game. If it's not required then people will then get bored and leave as there's nothing tying them to the game.
If this wasn't the case, then one of the 20 other free to play mmos that offer instant groups and 30 minute dungeons would be filled with these gamers you speak of. Also, there would be no reason why you would be here trying to turn this into a casual mess due to you personally not having enough time or not wanting to make enough time. Did you ever think that maybe the kids of today might be able to take your place and be the hardcore raiders? Why would you want to be selfish and not let them have a chance to experience that?
It's patently false that a game needs to be played 8+ hours a day to yield a sense of achievement. Two hours is a pretty solid time investment, much more than the average of 10-15 minute dungeon runs present in the majority of modern games. Not every game has players willing to dedicate that much time to a game. If you want the ridiculous poopsocking and other "hardcore" mechanics, there are emulators available for classic EQ.
It's ridiculous to think that the extreme niche you're trying to speak for can lead to a sustainable population in 2015. Acting as if you speak for all "hardcore" MMO players and asserting that we're being "selfish" is not only ironic, but also insulting and generally incorrect.
Your argument is full of strawmen and assumptions.
No one said a game had to be played 8 hours a day to be rewarding. I played EQ casually at times and still felt totally absorbed by it for those few hours. Why? Because I knew that what I did mattered and was committed towards something greater. Whether the time devoted was more or less, I always knew that there was something to be accomplished.
You don't seem to have the mentality that most of us do. We value the feel of a game that takes time. Time to learn, time to find others to play with, time to travel, time to fight, time to rest, and when things go wrong, time to recover our bodies. That is actually one of the most realistic aspects of a virtual fantasy world. Things take time.
Liav said:
Dullahan said:
Because everything feels more rewarding when risk is involved. Because it feels better to earn something than it does to have it given to you. Because without risk of death and the loss of time, everything is accomplished easier and faster. Thus, everyone knows everything, effectively removing the mystery from a game that relies on mysteries and the unknown to compel players to continue playing; to experience the unknown for themselves.
This doesn't address the question at hand though. There are dozens of death-related mechanics that could be used to add risk and challenge. Why corpse runs specifically?
As to this, yes, I most certainly did answer your question. You just didn't like the answer. The answer, again, was time. The other solutions you will suggest will eliminate the time element and allow players to progress more quickly than they would otherwise. Without the time risk factor things become easier, the sense of mystery is diminished, and it saps your drive to play a game; much like when someone is able to buy things in a game you worked so hard to achieve. If any semblance of reality is going to exist in virtual reality, time must play a part. That is why it must be corpse runs.
The "Us vs. Them" mentality here isn't helpful.
My argument isn't full of strawmen.
Two hours is a reasonable block of playtime. If not 8+, then please elaborate on what you consider a reasonable playtime to "be fulfilled". Do note that this is highly subjective, and I believe it's safe to assume there is a large dropoff in player commitment beyond that. Even in Project 1999 which is a semi-accurate Vanilla EQ emulator has people shuffling in and out of groups in time blocks that average out around that.
I'm an advocate for playing games that take time, just not unreasonable amounts of time. If not two hours per session, then what? 4? 6? 8? I don't have enough information to work with here, so forgive me for assuming.
In regards to the bit about corpse runs, you haven't elaborated on why corpse runs are superior to a dozen other mechanics that could replace it without being counterproductive to the game's vision of roughly two-hour play sessions. I can see a lot of corpse retrieval operations taking an unrealistic amount of time. I don't think that a lack of imagination is a viable excuse for rehashing nearly two-decade-old mechanics.
Liav said:
The "Us vs. Them" mentality here isn't helpful.
My argument isn't full of strawmen.
Two hours is a reasonable block of playtime. If not 8+, then please elaborate on what you consider a reasonable playtime to "be fulfilled". Do note that this is highly subjective, and I believe it's safe to assume there is a large dropoff in player commitment beyond that. Even in Project 1999 which is a semi-accurate Vanilla EQ emulator has people shuffling in and out of groups in time blocks that average out around that.
I'm an advocate for playing games that take time, just not unreasonable amounts of time. If not two hours per session, then what? 4? 6? 8? I don't have enough information to work with here, so forgive me for assuming.
In regards to the bit about corpse runs, you haven't elaborated on why corpse runs are superior to a dozen other mechanics that could replace it without being counterproductive to the game's vision of roughly two-hour play sessions. I can see a lot of corpse retrieval operations taking an unrealistic amount of time. I don't think that a lack of imagination is a viable excuse for rehashing nearly two-decade-old mechanics.
That is the strawman my friend. No one said you should have to play over 2 hours at a time to have fun. A game can take a long time and not require you to play 8 hours a day. I played EQ very casually for a long time. Even those few precious hours to me were meaningful, because I knew the risk and challenge involved in making progress. Two hours of exp without dying was time well spent towards a greater purpose.
Geez Louise, well this thread is going to hell right quick! My apologies to the original poster Wandidar, I know when he created this thread, he didn't mean for emotions to come out right HERE! But here they are. Let me address a few comments I've seen in here. On EQ being 'hardcore'. I played from March 2000 to 2003 (left during PoP for a new game when I saw the direction EQ was headed.) I do NOT consider EQ hard core. I believe each individual person, depending on their playstyle determines if the game is hard core or not. In my opinion, it was hard core for the people that were leveling as fast as possible, trying to raid as fast and as much as possible, camping for those keys or drops for hours on end - I didn't give a **** about any of that. I played with friendly people who were more interested in helping each other and enjoying the game. I was not hard core, and the game was not hard core to me.
Which is a good segway in to the time played thing. I don't care how hard the game is, anyone can play it, no matter if they only have two hours or if they have five hours. If someone feels like they're not able to accomplish as much in their two hours of play because the game does not have LFG/LFR tools that automatically place you in groups, or you had to waste some of the time recovering a corpse, or you wasted time navigating becasue there's no detailed map to hold your hand, or you spent too much time travelling cause there's not a portal to every corner of the world - I don't know how to get my point across without offending anyone so I'll just go straight blunt - TOUGH ****! Go play all the other games out there that will be better for you! Crappy attidude you say? The game won't survive when everyone leaves, you say? GOOD! Because I certainly don't want another game that's going to get my hopes up and then pull the rug out from under me just like that craptastic of a game EQNext was going to be!
Now, we all know Pantheon's NOT going to be pussified like all these other games. We also know it's not going to be a mechanical clone of EQ. I'm not talking about all the cool stuff they're adding like colored mana, situational gear etc, I'm talking the stuff that people claim to be over the top hard. If I'm going to go into this next subject, I guess I may as well address a couple of the things you were talking about, Liav. You've mentioned 'rose-colored glasses' twice now... I don't understand how you believe that. I played EQ for four years, many played for more than that in the early years. Do you think we all are misremembering our experiences during those times? I, and many other have played Project1999 in the last few years; still no dislike for the system, still prefer the system over any game since then, or presently. Unless someone was playing on a monochrome monitor, maybe the rose-colored glasses provided a little color for them. I do agree with you on one thing though - I never thought there should be the possibilty for a player to permanently lose their items from their corpse. So THAT, I would tweak, but I'd leave the rest of the corpse run mechanic the same. Honestly, I can't think of any other EQ mechanic I would change other than the permanent loss of items. I don't know how else to put it other than the over-all system in EQ worked man, IT JUST WORKED!
As for why corpse runs specifically should be in Pantheon - my opinion is that they should be in there just because it is the most inconvienent thing for the player. Nothing will force players to focus, try harder and just basically care more, than to have what they dread looming if they fail. I have not played every game and seen every death system out there, but of the ones I have played (and can remember), none of them made me give a **** about dying. Vanguard - run back to tombstone to recover exp was it?-Garbage. WoW, run as a ghost to revive at corpse - garbage. EQ2-Warhammer Online-Wildstar-Aion-Skyforge-CoH-SWG- none of their death mechanics did not make me care about dying. I'm certainly not going to care about dying in Pantheon if I can just keep playing immediately after I died.
I sincerely believe that a lot of people have been made 'soft' by all these mmos out there now. If people will leave Pantheon cause it's too hard and the game does not survive, so be it! Let them, and let the game die! I'd rather the game just shut down, then be left with another dud - THAT'S when people will leave since they'll be able to play the same type of game - for free- anywhere else out there.
Dullahan said:
Liav said:
The "Us vs. Them" mentality here isn't helpful.
My argument isn't full of strawmen.
Two hours is a reasonable block of playtime. If not 8+, then please elaborate on what you consider a reasonable playtime to "be fulfilled". Do note that this is highly subjective, and I believe it's safe to assume there is a large dropoff in player commitment beyond that. Even in Project 1999 which is a semi-accurate Vanilla EQ emulator has people shuffling in and out of groups in time blocks that average out around that.
I'm an advocate for playing games that take time, just not unreasonable amounts of time. If not two hours per session, then what? 4? 6? 8? I don't have enough information to work with here, so forgive me for assuming.
In regards to the bit about corpse runs, you haven't elaborated on why corpse runs are superior to a dozen other mechanics that could replace it without being counterproductive to the game's vision of roughly two-hour play sessions. I can see a lot of corpse retrieval operations taking an unrealistic amount of time. I don't think that a lack of imagination is a viable excuse for rehashing nearly two-decade-old mechanics.
That is the strawman my friend. No one said you should have to play over 2 hours at a time to have fun. A game can take a long time and not require you to play 8 hours a day. I played EQ very casually for a long time. Even those few precious hours to me were meaningful, because I knew the risk and challenge involved in making progress. Two hours of exp without dying was time well spent towards a greater purpose.
You didn't read the post that I replied to, where the person specifically said that a game with sub-two hour play sessions is somehow deprived of a sense of accomplishment?
I feel like you're arguing against me when we both hold the same position. I don't really see how that is a strawman.
Exactly right AgentGenX. Whether it was 2 hours or 8 hours, the game was enjoyable because nothing came easy. There was so much to do and to discover, and it was that knowledge that there was no easy way that made even my commitment of a few hours a day seem worthwhile. If, on the other hand, the element of risk involving time was not in place with EQ1, people would very quickly see and do everything. No one would have been afraid to run through high level zones. No one would have been afraid to delve deeper into dungeons. Everything would be killed quickly and that air of mystery that covered everything in EQ would have quickly evaporated.
Liav said:
Dullahan said:
Liav said:
The "Us vs. Them" mentality here isn't helpful.
My argument isn't full of strawmen.
Two hours is a reasonable block of playtime. If not 8+, then please elaborate on what you consider a reasonable playtime to "be fulfilled". Do note that this is highly subjective, and I believe it's safe to assume there is a large dropoff in player commitment beyond that. Even in Project 1999 which is a semi-accurate Vanilla EQ emulator has people shuffling in and out of groups in time blocks that average out around that.
I'm an advocate for playing games that take time, just not unreasonable amounts of time. If not two hours per session, then what? 4? 6? 8? I don't have enough information to work with here, so forgive me for assuming.
In regards to the bit about corpse runs, you haven't elaborated on why corpse runs are superior to a dozen other mechanics that could replace it without being counterproductive to the game's vision of roughly two-hour play sessions. I can see a lot of corpse retrieval operations taking an unrealistic amount of time. I don't think that a lack of imagination is a viable excuse for rehashing nearly two-decade-old mechanics.
That is the strawman my friend. No one said you should have to play over 2 hours at a time to have fun. A game can take a long time and not require you to play 8 hours a day. I played EQ very casually for a long time. Even those few precious hours to me were meaningful, because I knew the risk and challenge involved in making progress. Two hours of exp without dying was time well spent towards a greater purpose.
You didn't read the post that I replied to, where the person specifically said that a game with sub-two hour play sessions is somehow deprived of a sense of accomplishment?
I feel like you're arguing against me when we both hold the same position. I don't really see how that is a strawman.
I guess I took that as a general modern games vs older games with more to offer. Modern mmos are designed for brief play sessions. We are looking for a game where you can play for more than a few hours and still feel like you have much to achieve. I never feel like theres a reason to play modern MMOs for more than an hour.
Nevertheless, there are still many people calling for a modern EQ and its a stretch to think what they really want is an EQ without the risk factors. Assuming that they will somehow wilt because Pantheon shares the same death penalty is nothing but doom and gloom to support your position.
Dullahan said:
Liav said:
Dullahan said:
Liav said:
The "Us vs. Them" mentality here isn't helpful.
My argument isn't full of strawmen.
Two hours is a reasonable block of playtime. If not 8+, then please elaborate on what you consider a reasonable playtime to "be fulfilled". Do note that this is highly subjective, and I believe it's safe to assume there is a large dropoff in player commitment beyond that. Even in Project 1999 which is a semi-accurate Vanilla EQ emulator has people shuffling in and out of groups in time blocks that average out around that.
I'm an advocate for playing games that take time, just not unreasonable amounts of time. If not two hours per session, then what? 4? 6? 8? I don't have enough information to work with here, so forgive me for assuming.
In regards to the bit about corpse runs, you haven't elaborated on why corpse runs are superior to a dozen other mechanics that could replace it without being counterproductive to the game's vision of roughly two-hour play sessions. I can see a lot of corpse retrieval operations taking an unrealistic amount of time. I don't think that a lack of imagination is a viable excuse for rehashing nearly two-decade-old mechanics.
That is the strawman my friend. No one said you should have to play over 2 hours at a time to have fun. A game can take a long time and not require you to play 8 hours a day. I played EQ very casually for a long time. Even those few precious hours to me were meaningful, because I knew the risk and challenge involved in making progress. Two hours of exp without dying was time well spent towards a greater purpose.
You didn't read the post that I replied to, where the person specifically said that a game with sub-two hour play sessions is somehow deprived of a sense of accomplishment?
I feel like you're arguing against me when we both hold the same position. I don't really see how that is a strawman.
I guess I took that as a general modern games vs older games with more to offer. Modern mmos are designed for brief play sessions. We are looking for a game where you can play for more than a few hours and still feel like you have much to achieve. I never feel like theres a reason to play modern MMOs for more than an hour.
Nevertheless, there are still many people calling for a modern EQ and its a stretch to think what they really want is an EQ without the risk factors. Assuming that they will somehow wilt because Pantheon shares the same death penalty is nothing but doom and gloom to support your position.
I understand how my comment may have been perceived as such. In short, I despise most modern games. I definitely have a distaste for the quick-to-consume content model that many modern games have. I definitely don't want a game without risk factors, I just want a game with appropriate risk factors. If corpse runs are an appropriate risk factor, then I'm fine with that, even though Vanguard (my second favorite MMORPG of all time) didn't have them.
Ultimately, I want Pantheon to be the best game possible, and thoroughly exploring all of the options seems like a good way to do so. If directly taking mechanics from EQ is the best choice, I'm content with that. I'm not arrogant enough to assert one way or the other, I just enjoy the analysis. It seems strange that corpse runs couldn't be replaced by a dozen other equally risk-inducing mechanics, but I could be wrong.
Liav said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
I'm conflicted about the old school first round of MMOs and the highly social nature they encouraged. Back then, there really weren't that many MMO players, or gaming options to choose from. People were generous and encouraging, and never thought twice about helping a lower level player. Now, there are literally hundreds of different MMOs a player can choose from and MMO players tend to be extremely transient. Society as as whole is far more disconnected and isolated, despite having more "connections" via social media. I also believe the success of MOBAs shows that many players simply want to log in for 30-60 minutes and feel like they still accomplished something.
As seems indicative via the initial launch of WildStar, there simply aren't enough "hardcore" MMO players around anymore to endure extra challenging content and tons of restrictions on what can be accomplished solo. Casual players foot the bills in most MMOs. If the rewards for a few hours of wipes don't make it worth wiping, folks stop playing. I've played many dozens of MMOs and WildStar was the first game I'd ever reached level cap and had run zero dungeons. It was impossible to find groups outside of hardcore raiding guilds (and I couldn't commit enough hours a day/week to be accepted), the content was challenging enough for the average player that many wipes and 2-3 hours of effort were the typical experience for the level 20 dungeon, and many players just gave up on dungeons all together.
Despite enjoying challenges and content where you needed a group or really struggled (or simply couldn't do the content), I do find myself highly appreciating WOW's raid finder which allows folks who don't have much time will get to see a version of endgame. After all, they pay the same subscription fee, so why shouldn't everyone get to enjoy the content they paid for? A game where most content requires groups is in direct opposition to a society that demands as little hands-on time as possible. While Brad mentioned he's not designing a game for everyone, and I applaud that vision and direction, a game has to have enough players to keep the servers running.
For me, if I'm not having fun, I'm probably not going to play the game. If content requries a group, and forming groups isn't too painful, and the rewards for the effort spent feel adequate, then I think there's a good chance the game can be successful. On the other hand, if there's little to do solo, the process to find someone else is arduous at best, and there's never the feeling of reward, I'll continue my journey to find my next "great MMO experience".
I'll sum this up pretty easily. Ask for a refund now, there is no way this game is meant for someone with your tastes in MMOs. No offense, however there are a ton of games out there for your liking. No idea why you paid to post here to say you want the exact opposite of what VR is offering with Pantheon lol...
The FAQ is ripe with the devs mentioning specific opportunities to ditch old-school pain points as well as bring back the social climate many of us appreciated from MMOs in the 1990s and early 2000s. I don't see how any of my points are in conflict with what the FAQ states or with what the various interviews have mentioned thus far. In fact, those are many of the same things the devs say they're discussing and grappling with in order to make this game. After all, "Our intention [...] is not to bring back ‘everything’ from the old days, but rather to pick and choose what makes sense and what is needed to make a fun, social, cooperative, and challenging game."
That said, the devs have mentioned they want players to be able to log in and play for a couple of hours, making use of tools that will facilitate grouping. That's not a 40+ hour gaming week. That's not hour-long corpse runs. That's not sitting in general chat for hours spamming to find people to run a dungeon with "sometime tonight". That sounds like a pretty reasonable expression of what many gamers have available nowadays. No one plays a game they don't enjoy, regardless of how rose-colored their glasses are. Challenging content isn't fun-free by virtue of being challenging. However, until we all see what the content actually looks like, it's impossible to know if it will be enjoyable.
We're all here because something about what we've seen thus far has made us curious enough to sign up and become involved. I appreciate that your views differ from mine.
I'm sorry to say that all I can hope for is that you're wrong. In my humble opinion playing any MMORPG for a couple hours won't have the overwhelming sense of accomplishment that games like EQ gave you won't be there. That's why I believe time has to be a required factor as that's the most expensive currency people have to offer to a game. If it's not required then people will then get bored and leave as there's nothing tying them to the game.
If this wasn't the case, then one of the 20 other free to play mmos that offer instant groups and 30 minute dungeons would be filled with these gamers you speak of. Also, there would be no reason why you would be here trying to turn this into a casual mess due to you personally not having enough time or not wanting to make enough time. Did you ever think that maybe the kids of today might be able to take your place and be the hardcore raiders? Why would you want to be selfish and not let them have a chance to experience that?
It's patently false that a game needs to be played 8+ hours a day to yield a sense of achievement. Two hours is a pretty solid time investment, much more than the average of 10-15 minute dungeon runs present in the majority of modern games. Not every game has players willing to dedicate that much time to a game. If you want the ridiculous poopsocking and other "hardcore" mechanics, there are emulators available for classic EQ.
It's ridiculous to think that the extreme niche you're trying to speak for can lead to a sustainable population in 2015. Acting as if you speak for all "hardcore" MMO players and asserting that we're being "selfish" is not only ironic, but also insulting and generally incorrect.
Actually... I never specified an amount of time. I just said in my personal opinion I don't believe two hours would be enough to amount to any sense of accomplishment. If you're talking about 2hrs after you travel to your destination and then find a group or vice versa, than maybe two hours is plenty for you. However there are 1000s of people who spend way more than 4-8hrs a day on the computer playing video games. So there isn't much thought needed to know for a fact that there are plenty of people that will lead to a sustainable population in 2017 when a game such as Pantheon is released.
I would argue that I'm not the one being selfish as I'm not the one attempting to turn the only game that might have a chance to stand apart from all the other common crap that has been released in the last 8+ years. I never said I have 40+ hours of week to play, however I still want them to make a game that I and 10000s of others think was one of the best games every made. Even if that means that I can't dedicate as much time to it as I could when I was in high school. Anyone trying to dumb it down to anything less are the ones being selfish as they are the ones with the excuse that they don't have time. If they don't have time to invest into a game like Pantheon, then they have the obvious choice to go play any one of the other 100+ convenience games that caters to them and their lack of time. This is literally the only game of its kind being made that is offering something different. Why people want to change that is beyond me.
People make time for the things they want in life. If they want to game for 8hrs a day, they will find a way to make it happen. I'm sorry you personally don't have that kind of time to dedicate to gaming and it makes you upset. I'm sorry you were insulted by reading some forums with someone of a different opinion than yourself.
Oh and btw... playing EQ on p99 right now as I write this. Can you name any other MMORPG that you would dedicate hours of your time to that is 17 years old on a regular basis?
Niien said:
Liav said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
I'm conflicted about the old school first round of MMOs and the highly social nature they encouraged. Back then, there really weren't that many MMO players, or gaming options to choose from. People were generous and encouraging, and never thought twice about helping a lower level player. Now, there are literally hundreds of different MMOs a player can choose from and MMO players tend to be extremely transient. Society as as whole is far more disconnected and isolated, despite having more "connections" via social media. I also believe the success of MOBAs shows that many players simply want to log in for 30-60 minutes and feel like they still accomplished something.
As seems indicative via the initial launch of WildStar, there simply aren't enough "hardcore" MMO players around anymore to endure extra challenging content and tons of restrictions on what can be accomplished solo. Casual players foot the bills in most MMOs. If the rewards for a few hours of wipes don't make it worth wiping, folks stop playing. I've played many dozens of MMOs and WildStar was the first game I'd ever reached level cap and had run zero dungeons. It was impossible to find groups outside of hardcore raiding guilds (and I couldn't commit enough hours a day/week to be accepted), the content was challenging enough for the average player that many wipes and 2-3 hours of effort were the typical experience for the level 20 dungeon, and many players just gave up on dungeons all together.
Despite enjoying challenges and content where you needed a group or really struggled (or simply couldn't do the content), I do find myself highly appreciating WOW's raid finder which allows folks who don't have much time will get to see a version of endgame. After all, they pay the same subscription fee, so why shouldn't everyone get to enjoy the content they paid for? A game where most content requires groups is in direct opposition to a society that demands as little hands-on time as possible. While Brad mentioned he's not designing a game for everyone, and I applaud that vision and direction, a game has to have enough players to keep the servers running.
For me, if I'm not having fun, I'm probably not going to play the game. If content requries a group, and forming groups isn't too painful, and the rewards for the effort spent feel adequate, then I think there's a good chance the game can be successful. On the other hand, if there's little to do solo, the process to find someone else is arduous at best, and there's never the feeling of reward, I'll continue my journey to find my next "great MMO experience".
I'll sum this up pretty easily. Ask for a refund now, there is no way this game is meant for someone with your tastes in MMOs. No offense, however there are a ton of games out there for your liking. No idea why you paid to post here to say you want the exact opposite of what VR is offering with Pantheon lol...
The FAQ is ripe with the devs mentioning specific opportunities to ditch old-school pain points as well as bring back the social climate many of us appreciated from MMOs in the 1990s and early 2000s. I don't see how any of my points are in conflict with what the FAQ states or with what the various interviews have mentioned thus far. In fact, those are many of the same things the devs say they're discussing and grappling with in order to make this game. After all, "Our intention [...] is not to bring back ‘everything’ from the old days, but rather to pick and choose what makes sense and what is needed to make a fun, social, cooperative, and challenging game."
That said, the devs have mentioned they want players to be able to log in and play for a couple of hours, making use of tools that will facilitate grouping. That's not a 40+ hour gaming week. That's not hour-long corpse runs. That's not sitting in general chat for hours spamming to find people to run a dungeon with "sometime tonight". That sounds like a pretty reasonable expression of what many gamers have available nowadays. No one plays a game they don't enjoy, regardless of how rose-colored their glasses are. Challenging content isn't fun-free by virtue of being challenging. However, until we all see what the content actually looks like, it's impossible to know if it will be enjoyable.
We're all here because something about what we've seen thus far has made us curious enough to sign up and become involved. I appreciate that your views differ from mine.
I'm sorry to say that all I can hope for is that you're wrong. In my humble opinion playing any MMORPG for a couple hours won't have the overwhelming sense of accomplishment that games like EQ gave you won't be there. That's why I believe time has to be a required factor as that's the most expensive currency people have to offer to a game. If it's not required then people will then get bored and leave as there's nothing tying them to the game.
If this wasn't the case, then one of the 20 other free to play mmos that offer instant groups and 30 minute dungeons would be filled with these gamers you speak of. Also, there would be no reason why you would be here trying to turn this into a casual mess due to you personally not having enough time or not wanting to make enough time. Did you ever think that maybe the kids of today might be able to take your place and be the hardcore raiders? Why would you want to be selfish and not let them have a chance to experience that?It's patently false that a game needs to be played 8+ hours a day to yield a sense of achievement. Two hours is a pretty solid time investment, much more than the average of 10-15 minute dungeon runs present in the majority of modern games. Not every game has players willing to dedicate that much time to a game. If you want the ridiculous poopsocking and other "hardcore" mechanics, there are emulators available for classic EQ.
It's ridiculous to think that the extreme niche you're trying to speak for can lead to a sustainable population in 2015. Acting as if you speak for all "hardcore" MMO players and asserting that we're being "selfish" is not only ironic, but also insulting and generally incorrect.
Actually... I never specified an amount of time. I just said in my personal opinion I don't believe two hours would be enough to amount to any sense of accomplishment. If you're talking about 2hrs after you travel to your destination and then find a group or vice versa, than maybe two hours is plenty for you. However there are 1000s of people who spend way more than 4-8hrs a day on the computer playing video games. So there isn't much thought needed to know for a fact that there are plenty of people that will lead to a sustainable population in 2017 when a game such as Pantheon is released.
I would argue that I'm not the one being selfish as I'm not the one attempting to turn the only game that might have a chance to stand apart from all the other common crap that has been released in the last 8+ years. I never said I have 40+ hours of week to play, however I still want them to make a game that I and 10000s of others think was one of the best games every made. Even if that means that I can't dedicate as much time to it as I could when I was in high school. Anyone trying to dumb it down to anything less are the ones being selfish as they are the ones with the excuse that they have families and don't have time. If they don't have time to invest into a game like Pantheon, then they have the obvious choice to go play any one of the other 100+ convenience games that caters to them and their lack of time. This is literally the only game of its kind being made that is offering something different. Why people want to change that is beyond me.
People make time for the things they want in life. If they want to game for 8hrs a day, they will find a way to make it happen. I'm sorry you personally don't have that kind of time to dedicate to gaming and it makes you upset. I'm sorry you were insulted by reading some forums with someone of a different opinion than yourself.Oh and btw... playing EQ on p99 right now as I write this. Can you name any other MMORPG that you would dedicate hours of your time to that is 17 years old on a regular basis?
You never specified an amount of time, which is why I asked. I play games for extremely long play sessions, way longer than 2 hours if they're consistently engaging. However, the claim that there are tens of thousands of people willing to do so is relatively bold, at least in the NA market. Pantheon isn't aiming to capture tens of thousands anyway, so that's fine.
I'm insulted by the constant assumptions you're making about me and my character, less so than your disagreement.
Regarding playing an emulator for a 17 year old game, I can't really say, because there's only one or two MMOs that old. I play P99 as well, although I've recently started to find it boring.
Please be respectful of each other folks, everyone is entitled to their opinion, there is no right or wrong in this instance, as it comes down to personal preference.
We have stated many times that we understand the time constraints that modern people have in 2015 and have also stated that our game will be able to be played in chunks of 1-2 hours time slots, if someone wants to, but that players enjoyment of the game will come down to their personal taste and how they choose to spend those 1-2 hours.
Time doesn't equal challenge, but time is an important factor in the game, especially being based around grouping and social interaction, if someone expects to log in and play for 1 hour solo and achieve the same as someone who is prepared to log in and play 4-6 hours as part of a group or raid, then maybe this game isn't for them.
What we do online in pantheon for those 1-2 hours is completely up to you, if staring at the beautiful scenery and talking to friends or random community members is worth an hour of fun for you, then more power to you! If you want to spend it grinding out mobs solo or in a small to large group then great, and if you wish to put the effort in and create or join a group or raid to tackle harder content then that is awesome, but it comes down to each individual player and what they like doing within their given allocated playtime.
By all means discuss different aspects of time spent vs challenge vs achievement, but please do not argue over each others opinions, it is not constructive, nor is it helpful to anyone and it's not an argument that can ever be won.
Please play nice, I don't want to have to close this thread as there is some great discussion going on.
So let me see if I can reel this one back in.
It's interesting (but probably not surprising) that my thread quickly turned into a debate on CR's - because that is a topic full of passion for players. But I wasn't being nearly that specific in my post.
For the sake of clarification - NO - I wasn't talking about things like laggy play, disconnects, etc... those CLEARLY must be fixed.
What I WAS talking about are things like this:
- You have killed uber doober boss mob 430 times looking for ONE item... and 430 times, it dropped a fungus clump
- You were levitating across some vast area to get from point A to point B without having to deal with all the baddies below you, and weren't alert enough to see the "Your levitation spell is about to fade" message... suddenly finding yourself on the ground, dead.
- Your guild has tried numerous times to kill "mob that laughs at guilds who can't kill me" - and failed. Thus contiually getting laughed at by the mob.
- You attack a mob that looks like you should be able to kill it... and instead find yourself at your bind point in one swipe from the mob
- Zone sweepers!
- You were greedy enough to loot 4 bazillion bronze iron swords to vendor for cash - and the weight makes what should have been a 5 minute run take 20.
- You accidentally hit the barmaid, and she quite intentionally hits you back... and she's TOUGHER than you.
- You think you have escaped from the mob you attacked, realized you couldn't beat, and ran from... but just before you got to the zone line - it feared you and then killed you.
- You logged in and ran to get a drink of water while you were going from splash screen to in the game... but it takes you a few minutes. It's only AFTER you get back that you realize (from the mountain of YOU corpses) that you bound yourself in a very, very bad place last night
- You decide to run back to town before turning in for the night - and you are dead tired. You wake up 2 hours later at your bind point... with no idea what zone you were in when you died, or where your corpse might be in that zone... and realize you will be spending the next night spending some quality time just finding yourself.
Let's isolate negative emotional impacts:
Some things that hit you negatively on the emotional scale - you do to yourself... BUT - can be changed by the developer so that they won't. For example, hitting that barmaid. In today's games, you get a nice little message that says "you really don't want to do that." - the chance to do to yourself something that might cause you angst has, in that case been removed so that it won't. Similarly, devs can simply code out (or never code in) frustration points. How many games have zone sweepers these days?
Yes, CR's are one of these points - but CR's are just one example...
My broader question is whether or not you want devs limiting or trying to limit the emotional scale you will feel in the game... good OR bad.
Because to me, when people say: "I don't like this, or that in the game" - what they are OFTEN not saying is "I don't like the way that makes me feel while I play" Understanding that multiple and seemingly opposed notions can cause the same emotional impact. For example - players can get frustrated because something is too hard. They can also get frustrated if something is too easy.
AgentGenX said:
....... I do agree with you on one thing though - I never thought there should be the possibilty for a player to permanently lose their items from their corpse. So THAT, I would tweak, but I'd leave the rest of the corpse run mechanic the same. Honestly, I can't think of any other EQ mechanic I would change other than the permanent loss of items. I don't know how else to put it other than the over-all system in EQ worked man, IT JUST WORKED!.......
Agreed, and that's where I think graveyards can come in handy as a last reserve. If you can't get to your corpse for some reason, you could have the option to wait it out for 24 hours (or whatever they deem a good time), heck make it a 7 day timer, after which your items are retrievable at the graveyard. Some would say "Well why not just mail them to you after the timer expires?", and I would say, because not only are you inconvienenced by the time you will be without that equipment, but you also will have to make a return trip to that zone/regions graveyard to collect your stuff.
Of course the other methods of returning to your corpse or summoning your corpse could also be available.
Like you, I disliked the permanent loss of equipment possibility, and on my first PoFear raid, came close to that.
I would prefer this game to be as wild west as possible. I want to be able to attack any NPC I want and face the consequences. I want to be looking over my shoulder for the group of mobs/mob that pat around the zone killing unsuspecting players. Games like this need danger in order to hold my interest. I don't want to feel safe all the time like I do in most MMO's. Hard raid/group content is also a must in my eyes, everyone shouldn't be able to see everything if they won't/can't put in the time needed to do it, including me. Sometimes these situations can be frustrating, sometimes a lot of fun too. It just depends on your mood/emotional state of mind at the time.
I believe most of us on this website want a group oriented game that promotes a positive server wide community, which rewards players who take risk and work together through communication in order to defeat our enemies. The developers will make a great game that they enjoy playing and will change things accordingly when it makes sense. Too many players want this game to be exactly like EQ. I really enjoyed EQ too, but it wasn’t the best game I’ve ever played. EQ did a lot of things really well and I want all of them to be included in this game. I however have seen multiple games do some things better and a lot of things worse. IMHO the developers should take the best ideas from previous games they’ve worked on or played and add them into their game. Ultimately it will be up to the developers to decide which game mechanics they decide to keep from older games and which ones they will choose from newer ones.
I want the team to keep the good things about the past and make them even better for us today.
Wandidar said:
What I WAS talking about are things like this:
- You have killed uber doober boss mob 430 times looking for ONE item... and 430 times, it dropped a fungus clump
- You were levitating across some vast area to get from point A to point B without having to deal with all the baddies below you, and weren't alert enough to see the "Your levitation spell is about to fade" message... suddenly finding yourself on the ground, dead.
- Your guild has tried numerous times to kill "mob that laughs at guilds who can't kill me" - and failed. Thus contiually getting laughed at by the mob.
- You attack a mob that looks like you should be able to kill it... and instead find yourself at your bind point in one swipe from the mob
- Zone sweepers!
- You were greedy enough to loot 4 bazillion bronze iron swords to vendor for cash - and the weight makes what should have been a 5 minute run take 20.
- You accidentally hit the barmaid, and she quite intentionally hits you back... and she's TOUGHER than you.
- You think you have escaped from the mob you attacked, realized you couldn't beat, and ran from... but just before you got to the zone line - it feared you and then killed you.
- You logged in and ran to get a drink of water while you were going from splash screen to in the game... but it takes you a few minutes. It's only AFTER you get back that you realize (from the mountain of YOU corpses) that you bound yourself in a very, very bad place last night
- You decide to run back to town before turning in for the night - and you are dead tired. You wake up 2 hours later at your bind point... with no idea what zone you were in when you died, or where your corpse might be in that zone... and realize you will be spending the next night spending some quality time just finding yourself.
Let's isolate negative emotional impacts:
Some things that hit you negatively on the emotional scale - you do to yourself... BUT - can be changed by the developer so that they won't. For example, hitting that barmaid. In today's games, you get a nice little message that says "you really don't want to do that." - the chance to do to yourself something that might cause you angst has, in that case been removed so that it won't. Similarly, devs can simply code out (or never code in) frustration points. How many games have zone sweepers these days?
Yes, CR's are one of these points - but CR's are just one example...
My broader question is whether or not you want devs limiting or trying to limit the emotional scale you will feel in the game... good OR bad.
Because to me, when people say: "I don't like this, or that in the game" - what they are OFTEN not saying is "I don't like the way that makes me feel while I play" Understanding that multiple and seemingly opposed notions can cause the same emotional impact. For example - players can get frustrated because something is too hard. They can also get frustrated if something is too easy.
I have a love/hate relationship with almost all of the above examples except the first example I abusultely hate random loot drops. I always find it stressful and truly dislike camping mobs for 100's of hours while asking your guild/friends to help you. I don't know how long I tried to get the dagger I believe off a mob that randomly spawned on the Bridge of Destiny in Vanguard for my rogue. I would spend hours their every week camping the placeholders on the different bridge positions. The bridge was for raids and good groups and it took a lot of effort just to get the mob to spawn who had a random chance to drop the item you wanted. The dagger had to be extremely rare because I believe I only ever saw one person on the entire server be lucky enough to have it and I believe it was somebodies alt. They logged their alt on because it dropped I believe and they ran it over and gave it to him. I would honestly prefer the NPC be super rare but when I get him to actually spawn I want the chance to get the item I'm camping not some super low percentage.
How much the devs respond to the emotions of the forum community, which range from "nearly hysterical" to "batcrap crazy bordering on sociopath" on most game forums, depends on whether the devs want to make a game they want to play or one they want to sell the most copies of. CCP builds EVE to be how CCP wants it, and if you can't handle that, then don't play. Plenty of devs are like that, FROM Software in Japan most notably.
Obviously bugs and glaring technical issues must be handled with immediacy, but every time someone goes on their class forum to complain about why their class obviously sucks the worst and is clearly most hated by the devs, this should not prompt a "balancing" effort to make such people happy. On every class forum, in every class based video game ever made, every class sucks and is hated by the devs the most. Nobody wants my class on a raid, nobody loves me, everyone hates me, this game sucks and I shoulda stuck to Solitaire on Windows!!! Welcome to gaming forums since Ultima Online was in beta.
Hopefully the devs of Pantheon get that. I have faith that they do, given that I was one of the Kunark/Velious era guides in EQ1, and they didn't do a lot of "let's alter the game every time a druid screws up a quad kite and thinks that's our fault" knee jerk nerfs. And even though I got hit with a few "not in The Vision" nerfs, like charm being disabled in the entire Kael Drakkel zone (yay for enchanter charm squads dropping the SoRZ and AoW before that nerf!) and all that, the original trilogy EQ1 days let players have all the rope they needed to hang themselves and not much knee jerk reprogramming happened. That was McQuaid's world back then, and I doubt P:RotF will be patched every time someone on the forums says the game is too hard.
EDIT - if a game is properly hard, say somewhere between Velious-era EQ1 and Dark Souls 2, there will be dramatic reactions in both directions. Some folks will love the game with the fury of a teenage crush, and others will hate it with a singular ferocity. If I am developing a game for the "we want the game to be tough" niche player, I am OK with the haters because I know as much as they hate the game, the folks who love it do so with equal intensity.
I always refer back to games like BloodBorne/Dark Souls. Go read the reviews...the players either give it a 10 or a 0. You love it or hate it, and there's no in between. A really hard game will be like that. I keep my fingers crossed for Visonary Realms to get this right.
If anything, I'd hope VR makes P:RotF as much like that as possible. I want to read nerdrage reviews where people found it so difficult they threw the keyboard/mouse at the wall, with tons of expletives, teeth gnashing, etc. Good. Then it will be just about where I'd like it to be. :D
Venjenz - let me further refine:
Setting forum banter aside... how much, within the developent process, do you want the devs considering and gearing the game toward specific emotional impact?
As an example - when WoW was in development, there was a blue post that stated their over-riding design philosophy in everything they did was "Am I having fun right now" - which means that they were essentially striving to target one single emotional response for every moment of their game.
One can only guess that this concept played a part in the elimination of zone sweepers for example - because getting squashed at random from out of the blue could be deemed "not fun right now"
Should devs be trying to micro-manage emotional response to that degree in ther thought process? I think this thread might just be me struggling with the slippery slope of "Well, this is too hard - or this is too frustrating, so we'll ease it up" - and managing that fine line when it comes to implementing game mechanics... especially as it pertains to developing a game with limited dollars.
Not sure how many remember in the VG forums - but the dev posts on death penalties seemed to sway in the wind for a while. We're trying this, no, we're trying that, or maybe this...
And I assume all of that was in relation to how players would feel upon death.
@Wandidar - Does a zone sweeper make any sense in the overall theme/design of the game? The reason WoW did not have zone sweepers was because a bunch of the devs and quest writers were long time EQ1 players who had been curb stomped by either Sgt Slate or Dragoon Zytl in EC, and they didn't think that was fun. But Slate and Zytl made sense in their placement in EQ1. They still make sense, and any time my nostalgia gets the better of me and I resub EQ1 for a month or two, I always go to the Commonlands on a field trip just to whack out Slate with my necro. It's like part of the resub process almost, I do it so predictably. Still hate him after all these years.
But EQ1 fans, like the ones playing right now, still, to this day, just took those "wtf just happened?" slapdowns and kept on plugging away. As I said before, if the devs are worrying about how you feel, they are trying to sell boxes, not make a great game. WoW sold a bazillion copies by coddling a new type of MMO player into the fold, and holding their hands the entire way to max level, and even well into heroic content. Doesn't make it a great game, just a popular one. P;RotF could make that game. Hell, anyone can. They'll lose though, because WoW is already out there being WoW, and it eats clones for breakfast, but they could make the game given that the blueprint exists already. Last decade is pretty solid on that score.
The games that last, albeit with much smaller subscription numbers, are the games where the devs made THEIR GAME and if you chose to play it, cool. I think, looking back at some of the EQ NExt reboots, resets, etc...that's where Smedley was and just said nope, not making another WoW clone to get lost in the white noise. No idea what NExt will end up being, but it is likely it will be less WoW clone than it might have begun as.
So I say let the player handle their emotions on their time and dime, and just build the game. If it takes 6 months of people wailing and moaning how it is impossible to beat UberRaidBoss_01 until someone does it and then puts same mob on farm, well then so be it. Let them wail and moan. Don't make pop music, make metal/jazz/punk. No, you won't sell as many records as Justin Beiber, but you get to keep your soul.
I want The Vision...the real McQuaid...because that is as close to perfect MMO PVE thinking as it gets, and The Vision didn't make that fall of the East Karana cliff pleasant, or the raid wipe at the Fear portal any fun. The Vision said waiting 15 minutes for a boat happens, so it will in Freeport and Butcherblock. The Vision says it might suck to have to run through level 35 spiders to get to level 12 content, but that's where the content for level 12 in Lake of Ill Omen is, so quit crying and get running. Etc etc. There's a game already out there that holds your hand, pats your head and kisses your boo-boos. There's lots of them. I hope P:RotF doesn't add to that pile.
Liav said:
Niien said:
Liav said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
Niien said:
Organic said:
I'm conflicted about the old school first round of MMOs and the highly social nature they encouraged. Back then, there really weren't that many MMO players, or gaming options to choose from. People were generous and encouraging, and never thought twice about helping a lower level player. Now, there are literally hundreds of different MMOs a player can choose from and MMO players tend to be extremely transient. Society as as whole is far more disconnected and isolated, despite having more "connections" via social media. I also believe the success of MOBAs shows that many players simply want to log in for 30-60 minutes and feel like they still accomplished something.
As seems indicative via the initial launch of WildStar, there simply aren't enough "hardcore" MMO players around anymore to endure extra challenging content and tons of restrictions on what can be accomplished solo. Casual players foot the bills in most MMOs. If the rewards for a few hours of wipes don't make it worth wiping, folks stop playing. I've played many dozens of MMOs and WildStar was the first game I'd ever reached level cap and had run zero dungeons. It was impossible to find groups outside of hardcore raiding guilds (and I couldn't commit enough hours a day/week to be accepted), the content was challenging enough for the average player that many wipes and 2-3 hours of effort were the typical experience for the level 20 dungeon, and many players just gave up on dungeons all together.
Despite enjoying challenges and content where you needed a group or really struggled (or simply couldn't do the content), I do find myself highly appreciating WOW's raid finder which allows folks who don't have much time will get to see a version of endgame. After all, they pay the same subscription fee, so why shouldn't everyone get to enjoy the content they paid for? A game where most content requires groups is in direct opposition to a society that demands as little hands-on time as possible. While Brad mentioned he's not designing a game for everyone, and I applaud that vision and direction, a game has to have enough players to keep the servers running.
For me, if I'm not having fun, I'm probably not going to play the game. If content requries a group, and forming groups isn't too painful, and the rewards for the effort spent feel adequate, then I think there's a good chance the game can be successful. On the other hand, if there's little to do solo, the process to find someone else is arduous at best, and there's never the feeling of reward, I'll continue my journey to find my next "great MMO experience".
I'll sum this up pretty easily. Ask for a refund now, there is no way this game is meant for someone with your tastes in MMOs. No offense, however there are a ton of games out there for your liking. No idea why you paid to post here to say you want the exact opposite of what VR is offering with Pantheon lol...
The FAQ is ripe with the devs mentioning specific opportunities to ditch old-school pain points as well as bring back the social climate many of us appreciated from MMOs in the 1990s and early 2000s. I don't see how any of my points are in conflict with what the FAQ states or with what the various interviews have mentioned thus far. In fact, those are many of the same things the devs say they're discussing and grappling with in order to make this game. After all, "Our intention [...] is not to bring back ‘everything’ from the old days, but rather to pick and choose what makes sense and what is needed to make a fun, social, cooperative, and challenging game."
That said, the devs have mentioned they want players to be able to log in and play for a couple of hours, making use of tools that will facilitate grouping. That's not a 40+ hour gaming week. That's not hour-long corpse runs. That's not sitting in general chat for hours spamming to find people to run a dungeon with "sometime tonight". That sounds like a pretty reasonable expression of what many gamers have available nowadays. No one plays a game they don't enjoy, regardless of how rose-colored their glasses are. Challenging content isn't fun-free by virtue of being challenging. However, until we all see what the content actually looks like, it's impossible to know if it will be enjoyable.
We're all here because something about what we've seen thus far has made us curious enough to sign up and become involved. I appreciate that your views differ from mine.
I'm sorry to say that all I can hope for is that you're wrong. In my humble opinion playing any MMORPG for a couple hours won't have the overwhelming sense of accomplishment that games like EQ gave you won't be there. That's why I believe time has to be a required factor as that's the most expensive currency people have to offer to a game. If it's not required then people will then get bored and leave as there's nothing tying them to the game.
If this wasn't the case, then one of the 20 other free to play mmos that offer instant groups and 30 minute dungeons would be filled with these gamers you speak of. Also, there would be no reason why you would be here trying to turn this into a casual mess due to you personally not having enough time or not wanting to make enough time. Did you ever think that maybe the kids of today might be able to take your place and be the hardcore raiders? Why would you want to be selfish and not let them have a chance to experience that?It's patently false that a game needs to be played 8+ hours a day to yield a sense of achievement. Two hours is a pretty solid time investment, much more than the average of 10-15 minute dungeon runs present in the majority of modern games. Not every game has players willing to dedicate that much time to a game. If you want the ridiculous poopsocking and other "hardcore" mechanics, there are emulators available for classic EQ.
It's ridiculous to think that the extreme niche you're trying to speak for can lead to a sustainable population in 2015. Acting as if you speak for all "hardcore" MMO players and asserting that we're being "selfish" is not only ironic, but also insulting and generally incorrect.
Actually... I never specified an amount of time. I just said in my personal opinion I don't believe two hours would be enough to amount to any sense of accomplishment. If you're talking about 2hrs after you travel to your destination and then find a group or vice versa, than maybe two hours is plenty for you. However there are 1000s of people who spend way more than 4-8hrs a day on the computer playing video games. So there isn't much thought needed to know for a fact that there are plenty of people that will lead to a sustainable population in 2017 when a game such as Pantheon is released.
I would argue that I'm not the one being selfish as I'm not the one attempting to turn the only game that might have a chance to stand apart from all the other common crap that has been released in the last 8+ years. I never said I have 40+ hours of week to play, however I still want them to make a game that I and 10000s of others think was one of the best games every made. Even if that means that I can't dedicate as much time to it as I could when I was in high school. Anyone trying to dumb it down to anything less are the ones being selfish as they are the ones with the excuse that they have families and don't have time. If they don't have time to invest into a game like Pantheon, then they have the obvious choice to go play any one of the other 100+ convenience games that caters to them and their lack of time. This is literally the only game of its kind being made that is offering something different. Why people want to change that is beyond me.
People make time for the things they want in life. If they want to game for 8hrs a day, they will find a way to make it happen. I'm sorry you personally don't have that kind of time to dedicate to gaming and it makes you upset. I'm sorry you were insulted by reading some forums with someone of a different opinion than yourself.Oh and btw... playing EQ on p99 right now as I write this. Can you name any other MMORPG that you would dedicate hours of your time to that is 17 years old on a regular basis?
You never specified an amount of time, which is why I asked. I play games for extremely long play sessions, way longer than 2 hours if they're consistently engaging. However, the claim that there are tens of thousands of people willing to do so is relatively bold, at least in the NA market. Pantheon isn't aiming to capture tens of thousands anyway, so that's fine.
I'm insulted by the constant assumptions you're making about me and my character, less so than your disagreement.
Regarding playing an emulator for a 17 year old game, I can't really say, because there's only one or two MMOs that old. I play P99 as well, although I've recently started to find it boring.
My apologies I didn't see you ask, I have no idea how long someone should be required to play honestly. I also didn't mean to attack you or anyone else. I suppose I let my feelings get the best of me when I replied and I shouldn't have done that. I feel as though some of the trolls outside of these forums don't mind spending $5 bucks to try to entertain themselves here by getting people to rage over their "let's make it easy" posts. Obviously I'm an easy target if they are here lol.
The reason I am so quick to jump is due to the fact that I personally think that if VR starts giving in and making convenience calls now that it won't stop until we have another MMORPG clone of the last 8+ years, which holds no one's attention, and dies in less than a year. I just want the game to have as much player interdependence as it can get. That's what I feel made EQ great. It wasn't that the game was super hard, it was that everything required help and communication from others. Encouraging people to communicate is what made friends or more. When we can do everything ourselves... there's no reason to communicate and no friendships are made.
Anyway going to quit rambling here. I guess we will all with have to wait and see what VR decides to do. Either way I think if they stick to 90% of their vision a lot of people will be happy as it will be 89% different from everything else out there.
Don't sweat it Nilen, I'm pretty sure we're on the same page.
Pantheon is my dream come true, given that the development stays on the same lines as outlined in the various statements about the nature of the game. I'm 100% on board to go back to the roots of the genre and invest years of my life into it.
I think they'll get it right - I just like to pick at the details, much the same way that some are picking at the hero/lore aspect outlined in another thread here.
At the end of the day, we all want the same thing - a really ******* good game.
Having a difference of opinion or simply coming at a discussion with a different perspective does not constitute trolling. Given the devs have a laundry list of various issues they're discussing in order to strike the right balance for their vision, it only makes sense that the community will have different opinions on the same points of discussion, too; especially this early in a development cycle when games have the tendecy to feel like they are THE game someone's waited 5, 10, or 15 years to experience again. As I've said before in this thread, we all have an interest in this game for one reason or another and are hopeful the end product turns out to be something we'd like to play.
@Wandidar - I think having a singular emotion promoted during all parts of development can be an easy litmus test for a product. Am I having fun and enjoying myself? If yes, then it stays. If no, is there something about what's been developed that makes it unsuccessful or boring or frustrating? Do players feel that way because they don't understand the solution or because the mechanic is just poorly implemented? That said, I do not want every moment of my gameplay to be "joyful". I have played games where I was devastated by something that happened to my character as part of the storyline or even because a main NPC I'd grown fond of suddenly dies or you see their dream crushed. Those moments aren't "joyful", but those moments are highly rewarding and moving, and worth every moment leading up to the reveal.
I'm an adult and don't need to be micromanged, especially not emotionally. However, I do believe devs need to have a reason for everything to be in a game and that those "things" (mechanics, NPCs, mobs, loot drops, scenery, story, etc.) serve a purpose. If it's fluff, that's great, too. But at least acknowledge it's fluff and not try to pass it off as high art. Delving into challenging content can be very joyous, thrilling, and exciting! Nothing like finally downing a boss your guild's been struggling with for a week or two and hear the joyous screams of "YEAAAAAAAHHHH!" over Ventrilo and "Grats" flowing through /g chat.
If nothing else, this thread has proven that gamers are as passionate as ever and that we're all still hopeful a future game will provide for us opportunities to re-experience some of our favorite gaming moments.
Here's the good news, twofold:
1. We will tweak and alter the severity of the death penalty during beta, in an attempt to dial in on what is best for the game and our target audience.
2. If our target audiences remains split after this testing, we have the option of making alternate ruleset servers, where, amongst other things, the death penalty could vary in severity.
Liav said:This doesn't address the question at hand though. There are dozens of death-related mechanics that could be used to add risk and challenge. Why corpse runs specifically?
I'm late to the party (and apologize for the novel in advance), but I wanted to add my thoughts here as I never really saw this question directly addressed. I am also pro corpse retrieval, and I'll try to give you a list of reasons why other than just saying "Because it's hardcore."
Joppa had this quote awhile back, and I'm going to borrow it because I agree 100%. "To me, 'naked corpse runs' are much more punishing than experience loss, and they actually invoked fear in me, not just frustration."
And corpse retrieval was beneficial to the overall game experience and often invoked fear in EQ for the following reasons:
1. Strategy. If your group wiped, you all were gearless and had to return to the spot the dungeon where your gear was. Ok.. so how is this just not annoying and "hardcore?" Well, it added another dimension of strategy to EQ - I owned a set of back-up corpse retrieval gear. I almost view this in the same sense that Brad is saying multiple gear sets will be required for Pantheon today (although for different reasons in Pantheon with climates, etc.). Yes, it could be a pain to use the time to recover your gear, but, oftentimes, it was as challenging to try to clear to my corpse as it was to fight in the more difficult part of the dungeon I was at.
2. Social Dyamics. And.. Corpse recovery created social interdependence among strangers, pick-up groups, and random friendly ressers. I met many good friends from the random passer-bys that offered assistance with corpse retrieval or a res. Or, even gave a SoW for corpse recovery. Further, it gave higher level players a reason to go back to low level zones to assist with corpse recoveries, resses, etc. Another unique aspect of EQ that added to the social dynamics.
3. Character/Server Reputation. My first character in EQ was a Barbarian Warrior. And, I know with the harsh death penalties it added more of a sense of "heroism" ability to the player. I know I often stayed behind to taunt the mob so the gnome could sprint of Unrest, and, yes, it often ended in my death and a punishing corpse retrieval. However, I also earned a very good server reputation of an excellent tank. I also saw many a tank run to the zone first, or a wizard/cleric "gate" and leave the group to die, etc. which resulted in a negative reputation. And, I agree, this one is more of a stretch and could be accomplished with a less harsh penalty, but, with EQ's punishing penalty - it magnified it.
4. Time. Yes, I know this is a controversial point especially with the 2 hour window that is being budgeted for playtime. However, anything that I've ever accomplished in life (or a game) that was meaningful, took time. And, while time invested does not always equal challenge if the content itself isn't challenging - time can heighten the challenge if the content itself is challenging. Yes, fear of a corpse retrieval "may" keep a player from exploring more dangerous aspects of a dungeon due to time constraints; however, I would argue, why is that a bad thing? I want a player to fear and respect the environment - and time is the most valuable commodity to do so. Installing a graveyard into a zone where the only fear is exp loss won't do it. Exp loss is recoverable, time is not.
5. Time (from a different perspective). One of the positive benefits of corpse recoveries and the time it took a player to do so is also of benefit to developers and the game as a whole. Yes, corpse recoveries could be argued as a time sink, but, for my aforementioned reasons, I think it is an extremely positive one. And, it carries the side benefit of making content and progression typically take longer, which equates to players taking longer to achieve max level, etc.
6. Corpse retrievals directly increase challenge and risk. I touched on this in point 4, but wanted to expand it. Your argument against corpse retrievals is they keep people from engaging in risk-taking behavior from fear of death and a long corpse recovery, which would indicate that you agree that corpse recovery adds to challenge/risk (or at the very least respect and fear of death). Again, I would argue, why is this a bad thing? I don't want everyone to experience all the content at the same speed or potentially even ever if you are unprepared, less skilled, etc. If you have a fear of wiping from the named mob - take a better group, or... work together in an MMO and take two groups (guild?). I would argue that it's counterproductive to water down the mechanics. Remove the challenge and risk, and then you remove the reward from accomplishing a watered down "challenge."
7. Corpse recovery isn't near as bad as being advertised. Yes, permanent corpse loss and gear rot sucks, and I would agree, that could be on the table to be removed. However, outside of that scenario, once you knew a high level cleric in EQ or were in a high level guild, corpse retrieval rarely was an issue, unless, you tried to do something challenging individually. For example, trying to solo the Ghoul Magus in Gukbottom. However, even then, a few shouts typically could get me a res, or /guildchat. Where corpse recovery could "suck" was during the Journey from 1-50. However, that fear of death that was magnified, and the additional fear of corpse recovery (running naked through Dagnor's Cauldron with Goblin Tidal Lord's?) added an element to EQ that would never have been realized with Graveyard resses in a safe spot in Unrest. Many of my fondest memories of EQ came through the journey of 1-50, not anytime afterward. And, no, it's not rose colored glasses as I experienced similar feelings with P1999 nearly 15 years later.
I think a good compromise would be to offer player spells/skills much earlier than EQ did. Instead of having the first cleric res without exp at 29? Have it at 15-20. Have a Necromancer's (or summoner) first corpse summon along a similar scale. There's plenty of mechanics that could be tweaked, I just don't want to see the challenge be trivialized in order to cater to the "2 hour chunk."
My final thoughts: I am one of the one's today that fall squarely into the "2 hour chunk" (on a great day); however, I want Pantheon to have all the challenge of EQ1 and I'd be ok with more. However, there's a reason that I'm ok with this - I have a difference of expectations. I won't be the first to max level, first to complete all the major quests, first grandmaster blacksmith, best gear, etc. It may take me a year+ to achieve max level; however, I'd be ok with that, and, that's where I would argue that most people's troubles are today. They want the "challenge" of old school within their own time constraints - it's "not" going to happen. What can happen though is people enjoying a challenging game reaching max level at a much slower pace. However, just because you won't be a server first, still doesn't mean you can't be the most skilled player.
And.. I could go on with many more points, but you get the idea, it's obviously a passionate topic of mine and sorry for not staying on topic Wandidar. I don't think the Devs should appeal to our emotions - we should be in their world - Pantheon.
TLDR: Corpse retrival should be in due to increasing strategy, social dynamics, server reputation, challenge, risk, and overall game experience.