Raive said:Feyshtey said:Ashenor said:Also if you think a game made for the "hardcore" or "niche" market that we are could survive over a mainstream MMO's that have catered to broader audiances and failed then wow....
This game like it or not needs to be marketed to EVERYONE, not just US. If things have to be added to be more casual friendly i am fine with that if it keeps subs rolling in and paying the costs for the team and what not.
Survive over other MMO's? Not really sure what that means. If you mean that it will not exceed the income of other MMO's I agree. It would not. If you mean that it cant survive at all? I think you're flat out wrong, and that is precisly the philosophy of Visionary Realms. They mean to deliberately design a game that is more niche, knowing full well that they arent going to set any subscriber records. They just want a viable product that brings in a profit by delivering something few if any other studios are delivering.
It can be marketed to everyone all day every day. It does NOT mean that it needs to be DESIGNED for everyone. First, you can't. There are too many variables. And second, in order to stand apart it has to be the one game in development that isnt trying to be as much as it can be to all customers. Almost all other games are already doing that, and the audience here rejects it. We seek something that deviates from what the MMO world has devolved into, and something that harkens back to the roots in Everquest that we loved so much.
Vanguard said the exact same thing...and....well.....you know the rest. (I was there)
I was there too. From beta on. So you'll remember how the management of the game traded hands multiple times, and how even the devs didnt feel really great about the game being pushed live before they felt it was ready. The fate of that game was largely decided by financial decisions that plagued its reputation from release on.
And I'm not trolling you. I'm trying to make the distinction between designing content in order for it to be solo'able, as opposed to designing a core system that allows for solo'ing.
1) "I'm going to build a portion of this zone where I keep mobs x-distance apart so they don't agro, and there's a big area to kite in, and there's some chance of nabbing a wandering named that's not too tough for its level and might be solo'able"
2) "I'm going to build an XP range sufficient that a mob that is low enough level to be killed by a solo player still provides xp, and I'm going to build a believable world where there will sometimes be cases where a mob is alone."
I choose option 2.
Survival for niche games is more that just possible.
Consider EVE Online.
Ruleset: Niche PvP, full loot, time-critical, non-casual friendly.
Subscription: monthly fee
It started small and gained traction by sticking to its guns. It did not try to appease the casuals/free-to-play market - just kept releasing more patches for better content etc
I am not saying Pantheon is like EVE, other than it is also a niche game within the MMO market. Good design, attention to detail, and - like EQ - letting the game make you a better player as you progress will (i sincerely hope) make Pantheon a success.
PS
I believe EVE is over 12 years old?, rose to 65,000 concurrent players between 2011-2014 and is now at about 27-30,000 concurrent players.
Evoras said:Survival for niche games is more that just possible.
Consider EVE Online.
Ruleset: Niche PvP, full loot, time-critical, non-casual friendly.
Subscription: monthly fee
It started small and gained traction by sticking to its guns. It did not try to appease the casuals/free-to-play market - just kept releasing more patches for better content etc
I am not saying Pantheon is like EVE, other than it is also a niche game within the MMO market. Good design, attention to detail, and - like EQ - letting the game make you a better player as you progress will (i sincerely hope) make Pantheon a success.
PS
I believe EVE is over 12 years old?, rose to 65,000 concurrent players between 2011-2014 and is now at about 27-30,000 concurrent players.
EVE proved one thing to the world, people care about some damn good PVP. And again we're talking about a game that may release in 2018, today's market is a bit more of an unforgivable beast than what it was back during our heydays
Raive said:And again we're talking about a game that may release in 2018, today's market is a bit more of an unforgivable beast than what it was back during our heydays
Agreed, the market is less forgiving. But the lesson people can't get through their thick heads is that the most obvious lesson of history is you absolutely cannot survive releasing a game that is just like the others. No matter how much you argue that Pantheon needs to be just like all the rest, doing so will only doom it.
Eve proved that a game that is its own game, and not just another Wow clone can succeed. Regardless of how you choose to characterize it's niche it still a niche and still proves targeting a niche is an effective strategy.
People constantly come here and make argument after argument that boils down to this game needs main stream feature X because players today won't put up with anything else. But they only make themselves look foolish. First by asserting all players are the same, with the same tastes, when that is patently absurd. And second by insisting Pantheon be just like all the other failed games out there, unable to see they are advocating failure, not success.
Kayd said:Raive said:And again we're talking about a game that may release in 2018, today's market is a bit more of an unforgivable beast than what it was back during our heydays
Agreed, the market is less forgiving. But the lesson people can't get through their thick heads is that the most obvious lesson of history is you absolutely cannot survive releasing a game that is just like the others. No matter how much you argue that Pantheon needs to be just like all the rest, doing so will only doom it.
Eve proved that a game that is its own game, and not just another Wow clone can succeed. Regardless of how you choose to characterize it's niche it still a niche and still proves targeting a niche is an effective strategy.
People constantly come here and make argument after argument that boils down to this game needs main stream feature X because players today won't put up with anything else. But they only make themselves look foolish. First by asserting all players are the same, with the same tastes, when that is patently absurd. And second by insisting Pantheon be just like all the other failed games out there, unable to see they are advocating failure, not success.
Correct, Pantheon does need to be its own game. No one wants this game to be like WoW, or its clones. Pantheon needs to have its own identity, but an identity that makes sense at keeping itself upright. What is being argued is folks want an all or nothing kind of a game where its either you group or you don't do the pve content. Saying we want this game to be like others is far from true, what we are saying is that as much as we loved EQ/VG, we want more than just that. Those games had the concepts which is great, we want to improve upon those concepts, not just make this a copy/paste with updated graphics. That simply won't cut it.
Raive said:
Correct, Pantheon does need to be its own game. No one wants this game to be like WoW, or its clones. Pantheon needs to have its own identity, but an identity that makes sense at keeping itself upright. What is being argued is folks want an all or nothing kind of a game where its either you group or you don't do the pve content. Saying we want this game to be like others is far from true, what we are saying is that as much as we loved EQ/VG, we want more than just that. Those games had the concepts which is great, we want to improve upon those concepts, not just make this a copy/paste with updated graphics. That simply won't cut it.
I reread a couple of my responses to you, and I can see where you might be getting a mixed message from me. Let me try to clarify.
There's a significant difference between building a game in which solo'ing is possible and where a casual player can still find a path to advancement, and building content in a game with a mind specifically on providing a path for solo-friendly advancement.
I am fully a proponent of the former, and fully reject the latter. These are not contradictory positions.
I do not propose that the game be built so that you must group. I almost cant play a game like that. I do not propose that everyone should be able to have success solo'ing. I have no desire to play that game. I hope for a game that shoots the gap, where the best advancement will be in a group, where the best items will be obtained by groups or raids, and where the creative player with a little finesse playing the right classes can find a degree of success solo.
Raive said:Correct, Pantheon does need to be its own game. No one wants this game to be like WoW, or its clones. Pantheon needs to have its own identity, but an identity that makes sense at keeping itself upright. What is being argued is folks want an all or nothing kind of a game where its either you group or you don't do the pve content. Saying we want this game to be like others is far from true, what we are saying is that as much as we loved EQ/VG, we want more than just that. Those games had the concepts which is great, we want to improve upon those concepts, not just make this a copy/paste with updated graphics. That simply won't cut it.
I don't see anyone making this argument. The more I read this thread, the more it sounds like people are arguing over two slightly different shades of grey and attempting to characterize them as black and white.
What I'm making is that there should be content that progressively increases in difficulty that may require more and more out of the player(s) to the point that yes solo is out of the question, maybe duo, trio, or full blown group. Alot of EQ dungeons followed that path. Maybe I wasn't clear in identifying a strict "solo players way to progress". The players will figure that out themselves but through the content that is avail, there should be risk v reward walking up to a certain kodiak and attempting to solo it or not. What I do NOT agree with is there be a certain sanctioned off bit of content that is the "solo-player" path of progression. It should all be mixed in together. If I feel like dire charming a pet and soloing in Halls of Honor then thats my risk v reward.
Raive said:What I'm making is that there should be content that progressively increases in difficulty that may require more and more out of the player(s) to the point that yes solo is out of the question, maybe duo, trio, or full blown group. Alot of EQ dungeons followed that path. Maybe I wasn't clear in identifying a strict "solo players way to progress". The players will figure that out themselves but through the content that is avail, there should be risk v reward walking up to a certain kodiak and attempting to solo it or not. What I do NOT agree with is there be a certain sanctioned off bit of content that is the "solo-player" path of progression. It should all be mixed in together. If I feel like dire charming a pet and soloing in Halls of Honor then thats my risk v reward.
And I'm saying that happens naturaly without concious thought toward making content that is a solo, or a duo, or a 6 man group designed encounter. A group of 6 might be required if they are all level 20, whereas a duo in their mid-20's can handle it, and a solo that is 28 can. Trying to custom make content with a solo player in mind overly complicates the situation. At best you should adjust the level spread who can consume that content and still get xp.
Well I'm sure the thought process comes up with creating a dungeon and mob population/density is put into consideration. Take Unrest for example, I would imagine (and can be completely wrong) when they placed the mobs they did, the spacing, respawn timing, and overall difficulty that they said "yeah sure players could solo this stuff, but if they want the stuff from inside the house, they may wanna bring a friend or two". Thats the approach that should be taken into consideration, you're knocking out two birds with one stone. Its not custom, its not specialized, its generic mob population with a progressive difficulty entry that has clear barriers on mob strength that the players can deem as "solo-content" or not. The grand thing about all of this, this is an approach we all have grown all too familiar with with most EQ "main-stream" dungeons. Another example that came to mind was Lavastorm/Najena/Sol A & B. The solo/duo folks stayed on the main lands while venturing in as they lvl'd up if they could take the entry mobs. As the groups went right on in.
Ths is what I've been going on since I guess the start of the thread.
I would instead argue that they said, "Hey, wouldnt it be cool if this zone supported groups of people from low teens all the way to mid-30's?".
In fact, that was specifically mentioned as a design thought for the last live-stream, with the intentional design of the dungeon supporting a wide range of group levels. It's the scaling of how far below a player's level still gains xp that defines if the content is still viable for a solo player.
Hell, even if they don't still get xp content absolutely intentionally design for a group can still benefit a higher level player that no longer gets xp if they can get gear that they still find useful.
Ashenor said:Anyone that says they did not just stand around EC tunnel or in town hours on end with nothing to do is lieing. Back then it was no biggie, but gaming is much much different now.
I never ever did this. Ever. I set goals and befriended people, joined guilds and went out to achieve those goals every day from the second I logged on. I can't recall ever sitting on my hands for more than a few minutes, usually around a dungeon. Even then, I'd find a light blue mob and pull them near a zone line and attempt to kill them before I'd just "do nothing."
Dullahan said:Ashenor said:Anyone that says they did not just stand around EC tunnel or in town hours on end with nothing to do is lieing. Back then it was no biggie, but gaming is much much different now.
I never ever did this. Ever. I set goals and befriended people, joined guilds and went out to achieve those goals every day from the second I logged on. I can't recall ever sitting on my hands for more than a few minutes, usually around a dungeon. Even then, I'd find a light blue mob and pull them near a zone line and attempt to kill them before I'd just "do nothing."
110% agree Dullahan. I never ever sat around waiting for anyone else to help me be entertained. There were always at least 10 things on my plate that I wanted to get done, and fewer than half were group-oriented. If it wasnt tradeskills it was a quest stage. If it wasnt farming faction it was seeing if I could solo the Efreeti in SolB. If it wasnt trying to nab a particular ground spawn it was going to help someone else that wanted a hand with something. Hell even in the PoP era where you had to key thru the layers of zones, I would lay the foundation of all the requirements that led up to the group/raid content so that on the lucky night I logged in and some guild was looknig for a couple of fill-ins, I was prepped and ready for it. There was ALWAYS somethign you could do that would put you in a better position to take advantage of the groups you did get on other nights. Come to think of it, that's how I got my necro's epic. I assumed I would never be able to get that thing. But I did everything I possibly could solo so that if the oppurtunity presented itself I could hammer out a raid need. Being prepared allowed it to happen, even over people in major guilds that expected the guild to hand-hold them thru the entire process. So on the fateful night I was the only one that could benefit.
I'm not at all against thinking of ways to help players find people, set goals, provide some weaker (and much less rewarding) mobs to solo, or even mini-games to pass time while waiting to do what they really want to do. However, I feel like this problem could really be avoided by players getting used to making plans. Not only should it be unwise to not plan ahead, but it should be dangerous. Players shouldn't expect to be able to get to where they want to be by themselves. Just watch the latest stream again and consider what was required to even reach the dungeon they entered.
did you people not read the FAQ or anything? "Will you be able to solo in Pantheon?
Yes, while most content will be designed for groups, there will typically also be content that is soloable. Some classes may solo better than other classes." Is in the FAQ yes there will be solo ability.. obviously not as great as if you are in a group... even if they didn't design the game with it in mind.. people... find a way...
I think it will manifest itself as a player dynamic- More people will be cognizant of showing up on time or meeting where said to agree to meet from the night prior.
This is what will also make seperate on-line portals for those unguilded or guild portals important for communication: " sorry, can't make it tonight, boss is taking us out to dinner" or "sorry I am sick"
Because if you all log out at the same time and log in at roughly the same time in that somewhat quiet area- with the occisional wandered but nothing even one coud handle- its not an issue.
Been follwing this thread with some interest, while Im amongst those who dont want to see VR shift from their ultimate vision. If the game is anything like EQ I can see the ability to solo areas just happening naturaly without VR having to design specifically for it. Basically it comes down to levels, as you get higher mobs that were previouly hard will become easier. So its likely you'll see players venturning to lower areas where mobs cons are blue, light blue, green. With that said group content should still be difficult to near impossible to solo.
Nikademis said:Raive said:What people are wondering if they find a spontaneous 60 minutes to play and tey want to level, that they log in and don't spend 40 minutes looking for a group only to find one to have to leave it 5 minutes later.
I don't mean for this to sound rude or as an attack, but this is just a non-issue in my mind. If a person's life is as busy as you describe then perhaps they shouldn't be trying to fill their one free hour in a hardcore, group-centric MMORPG. There are countless games to fill this role, even MMOs if they insist. But please, I beg, let’s not campaign for Pantheon to be one of them.
I see this question/argument a lot on these forums, the idea that the game should somehow cater to people with less time for gaming. This is completely counterintuitive to the very same tenants that we have all clamored for and found in the development of this game. You can't have it both ways. At some point we’re all going to have to just accept the fact that we aren't the young people with loads of free time to play a game like Pantheon and applaud the fact that someone had the stones to make the game in the first place, even if that means we aren't the ones leading the charge by logging massive hours. We all need to stop pretending that just because we’re all older and can't play as long means that there isn't a new generation of gamers to fill that role. News flash: we weren't the last group of 18-35 year-olds born to the human race.
We all loved EQ because it DIDN’T compromise or make apologies for what it was. Is that not why we’re all here, because we want that experience again (or at least to know that game exists)? We do ourselves and this game a great injustice when we start trying to make it everything for everyone – the very antithesis to the foundations which Pantheon was conceived.
I think everyone working for Visionary Realms in a design capacity should print, frame and hang this over their workstation.
Valadin said:Been follwing this thread with some interest, while Im amongst those who dont want to see VR shift from their ultimate vision. If the game is anything like EQ I can see the ability to solo areas just happening naturaly without VR having to design specifically for it. Basically it comes down to levels, as you get higher mobs that were previouly hard will become easier. So its likely you'll see players venturning to lower areas where mobs cons are blue, light blue, green. With that said group content should still be difficult to near impossible to solo.
And that is all there is to it. I do believe maybe some of what I said was misinterpreted as there should be sanctioned off content specifically for means of being just solo content. When in fact that is not correct. As I was making references to that gameplay does exist and it is something that can be handled easily if mob populations and density are done correctly. I threw out examples of what I was speaking of using old EQ zones and my VG example was simply stating that how empty the overworld was. It is a situation that solves itself not only through players figuring it out, but just having overland content. During EQ, you normally saw overland content as the solo/small group content and the dungeon stuff as the group content. This does not compromise the game's integrity at all, all it does is states the content is there and its up to the player on how to handle it.
Dullahan said:Nikademis said:Raive said:What people are wondering if they find a spontaneous 60 minutes to play and tey want to level, that they log in and don't spend 40 minutes looking for a group only to find one to have to leave it 5 minutes later.
I don't mean for this to sound rude or as an attack, but this is just a non-issue in my mind. If a person's life is as busy as you describe then perhaps they shouldn't be trying to fill their one free hour in a hardcore, group-centric MMORPG. There are countless games to fill this role, even MMOs if they insist. But please, I beg, let’s not campaign for Pantheon to be one of them.
I see this question/argument a lot on these forums, the idea that the game should somehow cater to people with less time for gaming. This is completely counterintuitive to the very same tenants that we have all clamored for and found in the development of this game. You can't have it both ways. At some point we’re all going to have to just accept the fact that we aren't the young people with loads of free time to play a game like Pantheon and applaud the fact that someone had the stones to make the game in the first place, even if that means we aren't the ones leading the charge by logging massive hours. We all need to stop pretending that just because we’re all older and can't play as long means that there isn't a new generation of gamers to fill that role. News flash: we weren't the last group of 18-35 year-olds born to the human race.
We all loved EQ because it DIDN’T compromise or make apologies for what it was. Is that not why we’re all here, because we want that experience again (or at least to know that game exists)? We do ourselves and this game a great injustice when we start trying to make it everything for everyone – the very antithesis to the foundations which Pantheon was conceived.
I think everyone working for Visionary Realms in a design capacity should print, frame and hang this over their workstation.
Ha, <3 @Dullahan.
I would copy/paste it in the "How will Pantheon include people with little time to play" thread too if it didn't feel quite so much like trolling, heh.
Raive said:Kayd said:Raive said:And again we're talking about a game that may release in 2018, today's market is a bit more of an unforgivable beast than what it was back during our heydays
Agreed, the market is less forgiving. But the lesson people can't get through their thick heads is that the most obvious lesson of history is you absolutely cannot survive releasing a game that is just like the others. No matter how much you argue that Pantheon needs to be just like all the rest, doing so will only doom it.
Eve proved that a game that is its own game, and not just another Wow clone can succeed. Regardless of how you choose to characterize it's niche it still a niche and still proves targeting a niche is an effective strategy.
People constantly come here and make argument after argument that boils down to this game needs main stream feature X because players today won't put up with anything else. But they only make themselves look foolish. First by asserting all players are the same, with the same tastes, when that is patently absurd. And second by insisting Pantheon be just like all the other failed games out there, unable to see they are advocating failure, not success.
Correct, Pantheon does need to be its own game. No one wants this game to be like WoW, or its clones. Pantheon needs to have its own identity, but an identity that makes sense at keeping itself upright. What is being argued is folks want an all or nothing kind of a game where its either you group or you don't do the pve content. Saying we want this game to be like others is far from true, what we are saying is that as much as we loved EQ/VG, we want more than just that. Those games had the concepts which is great, we want to improve upon those concepts, not just make this a copy/paste with updated graphics. That simply won't cut it.
Fair enough. Honestly, I don't think any game will ever make it if it doesn't allow some avenue for soloing. For the reason given: you need something to do while looking for a group. Killing yard trash is a viable way. While I don't have enough of a crystal ball to know what the devs intend exactly, I do have faith that they will figure out they need some solo play. However, having done solo dungeons in EQ I can say with near certainty it was an extremely stupid idea for leveling, though it might be a viable way to get a coveted item you had hugely outleveled. I think that's a reasonable model. The overwhelming majority of the best content wasn't available to soloers at any reasonable level.
Elrandir said:I couldn't agree more. People bring up dailies, which I think no one even proposed. They are afraid there will be all group content, which I think no one proposed. The differences in most everyones proposals are quite small. From what I read, it appears there is a group that is afraid of making a game 'for everyone', and a group that is concerned about keeping casual players. However, there is no reason whatsoever that we can't keep the game the way we want it, but allow some avenues for casuals to play.I don't see anyone making this argument. The more I read this thread, the more it sounds like people are arguing over two slightly different shades of grey and attempting to characterize them as black and white.
Besides, I don't think the biggest challence for a modern day group centric MMO is that noone has anything to do for an hour. Pretty much every game I have played can keep me busy for an hour. And no, I don't just sit around gabbing with people.
The biggest challenge in my mind is... making a game that is immersive and makes sense. All of the components must make sense and be quite fantastic at the same time. Difficult task to do. However, if elves hate orcs, and the lore talks about the war they had, do not put them near each other in a zone without having them fight. Or if dragons are supposed to be amazingly powerful, mystic creatures, it makes sense that being able to speak their language would open many doors for a mage, that otherwise would not be opened. Thats right, would NOT be opened. And so on... All of the fantastic elements have to mesh and MAKE SENSE.
I have quit way to many MMOs because the lore/mechanics/progression made no sense what so ever. I will kill boars in one zone to make a stew, and then later I was working with a boar like species to bring about peace between them and the dwarves?!?!?! (example, not real, but you get the idea!)
Oh, and have good graphics and a great UI. They always help too. :)
Ashenor said:I think the game will need some sort of daily activity to do while you are running to a dungeon, looking for a group, or waiting for your buddies to get on. Something to keep you in game and occupied while you wait. If not people log in for 5 mins get nothing and log out. But a few mins later there are more people looking and the cycle repeats.
People brought up dailies because of what I bolded in the OP's post. After reading through the thread, I don't think that was his/her intent, but, it was similar thought processes to that which led to the creation of them.
Raidan said:Ashenor said:I think the game will need some sort of daily activity to do while you are running to a dungeon, looking for a group, or waiting for your buddies to get on. Something to keep you in game and occupied while you wait. If not people log in for 5 mins get nothing and log out. But a few mins later there are more people looking and the cycle repeats.
People brought up dailies because of what I bolded in the OP's post. After reading through the thread, I don't think that was his/her intent, but, it was similar thought processes to that which led to the creation of them.
Fair enough. But I read that as meaning just activities you could do daily. Not 'Dailys' as in what WoW uses. To me, going out and taking out a few mobs, or collecting some tradeskill materials would qualify as an activity I might do daily. These things should not have to be 'put' into the game. I am kinda hoping they will already be there.