I have a suggestion to make. I think it would be a good idea if one server could be a dedicated base game server aka "Classic" or "Vanilla".
A patcher that can handle multiple versions and patch them accordingly and handle the billing for each type. Multiple live versions, like P99 launcher has now, is a good idea to have I think.
It would allow such a classic server to exist without post launch cost & time. Should be "easy peasy" if planned and executed this way.
It would also allow different tuned servers. Even complete new reskinned games from the same time, keeping developers on staff but reusing tons of existing code to build whole new games for VR but bound to a single client smart patcher that can offer flavors of the game for the customers desire or needs.
With modern CVS, large cheap disk space on the server, cheaper RDBMS database operational costs, I don't think that it's too much to ask for or that it would be beyond this teams ability.
One server should be left alone without expansions. This would let VR kick back and not have to worry about the issue and just collect the cash. If population drops to too low for profit then it could be turned off but knowing how hardcore classic types are. The programming costs should not be more than what's coming in. Last patch level before 1st expansion and any changes for security or fair play but no nerfing.
Vash.,
I don't really agree.
Half of the reason vanilla servers excel is because the content that gets added on is undesirable to some, so they'd prefer to go back and experience what they consider to be the "pure" game. The other half is nostalgia.
The problem with having a vanilla server right off of the bat is because neither of these components that would drive someone to play on one exist, and likely won't exist for several years after release.
I also disagree that the game should have many different servers with many rulesets. If you splinter the playerbase too much, you'll end up with 30 ghost town servers. Truth be told, if everyone had the game exactly the way they wanted it to be, there would be exactly one possible server to completely satisfy a given person. You can't satisfy everyone, and splintering the playerbase to satisfy as many people as possible will honestly be a negative for the quality of the game over time.
This is a very intersting topic given the situations with EQ1/2, p1999, Runescape and WoW. We see from Eq/p199 and runescape that they are very popular. Unfortunately EQ1/2's servers are not as vanilla as they should be and we can learn from this. I am not sure about keeping a vanilla Pantheon server right now (it would be interesting to see if there is interest for this server) but VRI should definitely keep the code so that a vanilla Pantheon server could be implemented in the future.
The whole appeal of classic servers in EQ and WoW were that they offered a different experience than the following expansions. In EQ that was up to Velious. In WoW, it usually includes TBC.
In Pantheon, the game shouldn't change that way. There shouldn't be a need for a classic server.
Nevertheless, if there is one thing you can learn from the past, its that you should save all your old builds, just in case.
I agree with Dullahan, for once. If the game changes to severely and horribly that people feel encouraged to play an earlier build, that is a failure of development. Making a vanilla server off the bat is basically surrendering and saying that you can't make compelling content past the first year or two of development.
I would have to disagree that it's "surrendering". To what? It's a game and like D&D it has revisions and people still can DM and use papers from older versions. It's not a surrender you might just like the old character creation paperwork and have little figure set lol.
It's not that hard to code this and no one get's "hurt" if they just run one server of such type. I don't see why others would oppose it as if it would detract from there server or expansions. Since it would roll to the last patch they could transfer people off for a fee (except the high tier pledges get free xfers if they dont want to stay on vanilla). I don't see a downside. Right now a huge demand for such a product exists why not cash out. As if it would hurt the game.. I just don't see how it can hurt. If anything it's just another selling point. Because it's also right now there is a media wave and a subcluture growing. And it's base is mostly eq1 and wow addicts. If they could make them happy they would be supportive of other products. This could generate a little "buzz" too and would piss off other companies that are too stupid to do it even thought they have the servers, software to do exactly that already in there own hands.
You also have to consider, the developers have a vision for the game. The story and world will be changing and evolving. Especially early on, they will probably be adding all kinds of stuff post-launch that they couldn't get to. A server in its classic state may not represent the game the way they envisioned it.
Thanakos said:I'm not sure how much demand there would be for a vanilla server at first but by all means they should keep all the original files locked up for one in the future.
Vash said:I have a suggestion to make. I think it would be a good idea if one server could be a dedicated base game server aka "Classic" or "Vanilla".
A patcher that can handle multiple versions and patch them accordingly and handle the billing for each type. Multiple live versions, like P99 launcher has now, is a good idea to have I think.
It would allow such a classic server to exist without post launch cost & time. Should be "easy peasy" if planned and executed this way.
It would also allow different tuned servers. Even complete new reskinned games from the same time, keeping developers on staff but reusing tons of existing code to build whole new games for VR but bound to a single client smart patcher that can offer flavors of the game for the customers desire or needs.
With modern CVS, large cheap disk space on the server, cheaper RDBMS database operational costs, I don't think that it's too much to ask for or that it would be beyond this teams ability.
One server should be left alone without expansions. This would let VR kick back and not have to worry about the issue and just collect the cash. If population drops to too low for profit then it could be turned off but knowing how hardcore classic types are. The programming costs should not be more than what's coming in. Last patch level before 1st expansion and any changes for security or fair play but no nerfing.
Vash.,
My friend.. I understand why you want this, but I also think you are underestimating what 20 years newer technology can... & will do for MMORPG 2.0. Pantheon will be NOTHING like what you experienced in EQ, even though it will play the same.
Even with expansion story-packs, there will be no need for epochs within Pantheon... as things can come dynamically and randomly now. And from day one, each server will have it own trajectory and path... impossible to re-create within a 64bit game world.
But the kicker is.. you will not need a Vanilla server because 5 years out Pantheon will not be stale... No need for nostalgia.
Hieromonk said:My friend.. I understand why you want this, but I also think you are underestimating what 20 years newer technology can... & will do for MMORPG 2.0. Pantheon will be NOTHING like what you experienced in EQ, even though it will play the same.
Even with expansion story-packs, there will be no need for epochs within Pantheon... as things can come dynamically and randomly now. And from day one, each server will have it own trajectory and path... impossible to re-create within a 64bit game world.
But the kicker is.. you will not need a Vanilla server because 5 years out Pantheon will not be stale... No need for nostalgia.
What in the actual **** is an MMORPG 2.0?
You keep saying that and it's driving me crazy not knowing what it's supposed to mean.
Liav said:What in the actual **** is an MMORPG 2.0?
You keep saying that and it's driving me crazy not knowing what it's supposed to mean.
Pretty sure he's coining Pantheon as a second gen MMO, though it would be a 3rd gen MMO.
Anyway ontopic , there is exactly 0 demand for a vanilla Pantheon server. Why? Because the game doesn't even exist yet. You don't get the demand for these classic servers until years after the games been out with a bunch of expansions that have completely changed the way the game started. Now I do agree with the others that said they should keep copies of older builds so they can do this later on, but the demand won't be there for at least 3 - 5+ years after the game is launched.
It would suck to have played Pantheon up until an expansion is announced and then to find out that your server won't be advancing. Alternatively, you could designate it as vanilla right from launch but then you're asking people to forgo expansions which they know nothing about. Even if server transfers are offered it will be disruptive and separate people.
Even if it is a 3rd gen MMO I still don't know what exactly that signifies either.
Aena said:Even if it is a 3rd gen MMO I still don't know what exactly that signifies either.
Right? I mean, we're not playing on consoles. "Next gen" is really nothing but a buzzword pushed by studios to make their product seem better than it actually is. It's an embellishment that has absolutely no real meaning.
It's even funnier when you consider that Pantheon is being built with the pre-existing Unity engine. While it may be using a specific generation/build of Unity that still doesn't really convey that the game somehow transcends the fact that behind the scenes, it's represented in 1's and 0's just like anything else.
Aena said:It would suck to have played Pantheon up until an expansion is announced and then to find out that your server won't be advancing. Alternatively, you could designate it as vanilla right from launch but then you're asking people to forgo expansions which they know nothing about. Even if server transfers are offered it will be disruptive and separate people.
Even if it is a 3rd gen MMO I still don't know what exactly that signifies either.
To solve the "getting stuck" on a vanilla server, transfers would have to be cheap, if not free, and easy to get to a "live" server.
I agree that there should be a Vanilla serfver that is untouched by updates other than bug fixes.
What most people dont understand is that when EQ/EQ2 create a so-called calssic server is that its not a true classic/vanila server because none of the original data is still there, all the data has been updated with each expansion. The only way to preserve that vanilla data and integrity of a possible vanilla/classic server in the future is to create it now and save all the headace of restoring and "unmodifying" back-ups of old data. I am currently playing EQ2 on the Time Locked server and trust me when I say that all the expansions ruin the true classic feel of EQ2, they cant just undo expansion content and call it classic, in the end its weak, lame feel. When I played EQ1 on the progression servers (the very first two), I remember they did a decent job of actually making it feel classic, but look how long they took to revert all that data, the cost of doing that could have been better spent on new content, persistent bug fixes (at that time there were still a lot of them), and listening to the class disparity whiners.
So, yes, make a vanilla locked server now (to save devolper time and money later on). I had heard an idea, from some other MMO in devlopement, create a locked vanilla server but use it like you would a starter/newbie area except that its the entire original launched game. Allow free one-way transfers to other live servers (assuming the first expansion was released) and you conintue onward. This doesnt mean everyone has to start on that Vanilla server on launch, it just means its like every other server at launch up until the next expansion is released at which time it just wont be updated except for bug fixes.
I think a lot of that has more to do with the fact that SOE and DBG are grossly incompetent. The fact that their TLP code and Live code are so closely entwined that they can't make certain changes on TLP without it affecting Live is pants on head retarded.
Really though, I still disagree. If Pantheon needs a vanilla server, it's a failure of the developers to make good content in later expansions. Otherwise, you're just needlessly spreading the playerbase around which reduces the population of every other server.
I imagine if they launched with a vanilla server, it would simply just be an unpopulated waste of server space for several years or indefinitely.
I guess I am not against this but for now as a systems guy I would not waste the resources on it. Get the game released and then revisit this if there is a demand. I think VR is pretty receptive to ideas and I think they would give this an honest look and review at that point.
Ox
Vash said:I have a suggestion to make. I think it would be a good idea if one server could be a dedicated base game server aka "Classic" or "Vanilla".
A patcher that can handle multiple versions and patch them accordingly and handle the billing for each type. Multiple live versions, like P99 launcher has now, is a good idea to have I think.
It would allow such a classic server to exist without post launch cost & time. Should be "easy peasy" if planned and executed this way.
It would also allow different tuned servers. Even complete new reskinned games from the same time, keeping developers on staff but reusing tons of existing code to build whole new games for VR but bound to a single client smart patcher that can offer flavors of the game for the customers desire or needs.
With modern CVS, large cheap disk space on the server, cheaper RDBMS database operational costs, I don't think that it's too much to ask for or that it would be beyond this teams ability.
One server should be left alone without expansions. This would let VR kick back and not have to worry about the issue and just collect the cash. If population drops to too low for profit then it could be turned off but knowing how hardcore classic types are. The programming costs should not be more than what's coming in. Last patch level before 1st expansion and any changes for security or fair play but no nerfing.
Vash.,
How about we wait until we see what the game is before making absumptions that expansion will not improve the gameplay. LMAO.
People just be making any threads now a days.
Just my opinion but I feel like $40 xpacs play a role in why MMOs change so much from their original concept. To get players to justify paying that $40 every xpac time and time again it seems that the devs pack so much new content that they wind up adding in new features and new systems and new concepts every time that eventually you no longer have the same core gameplay you had with the original game.
I'm sure it's not impossible to keep the core concepts in line over the years with creating expansions. I just feel like there is more pressure to cram in so much stuff into these xpacs.
I'd suggest no xpacs that cost money. Increase the monthly sub and then add in smaller more frequent updates. Even though VG had really no other choice I liked how the world there grew. It felt more organic. Maybe a little slower then I'd like within a healthy development environment but I liked how there was never a giant xpac where 5 new systems and features were added to the game all at once. A new zone opened up here. A raid zone there. A few bosses here. A new 5 level cap there. A giant griffon questline here. Pota there. I don't know, I prefer this type of expansion than I do the $40 WoW or even $40 EQ xpac.
edit. I didn't want to stray too far off topic but I feel like expanding the game's world in this manner would help fend off the need for a 'vanilla' server down the road. It could help with keeping the core game in tact for a very long time, maybe even the entirety of the game.
@Noobie I'd say you are really giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Looking back over the MMOs that have drastically changed, I think there was no other reason for the changes than attempting to broaden their audience. It don't see it as being a type of moment where they were like, wow we have all these great ideas, lets pack them in here. No, those ideas were tailored exactly according to the pattern which was to create a wider appeal, even if it meant fundamental changes to the game and betraying the core audience.
Dullahan said:@Noobie I'd say you are really giving them the benefit of the
Looking back over the MMOs that have drastically changed, I think there was no other reason for the changes than attempting to broaden their audience. It don't see it as being a type of moment where they were like, wow we have all these great ideas, lets pack them in here. No, those ideas were tailored exactly according to the pattern which was to create a wider appeal, even if it meant fundamental changes to the game and betraying the core audience.