Devs should get an in-game hat that's a pair of pants. Because why not on the head?
Edit: I approve of the term and hope it catches on.
/agree Fey
Personally, I think its important that Pantheon move back in the direction of EQ. A) because that is what this game was originally proposed as and B) because we don't need another middle of the road game.
If Pantheon wants to stand out and be successful, it needs to move away from the center. That doesn't mean I don't want plenty of stuff piled on top, but at the base there needs to be more realism, greater challenge and high risk versus reward. Challenging even moreso than EQ. Its fun to glory in how hard it was way back when, but today even your average gamer will scoff at what we once struggled with.
There should be no compromising the things that made EQ super addictive. That means a game where death matters and where it takes a lot of time to see and achieve everything. Beyond that, I think they should go nuts. I'm excited about the next gen stuff they've proposed and hope they continue to stack the features.
As long as they stick to the game tenants we will be fine. There are always going to be features that some don't agree with and the game cannot be perfect for everyone.
From reading these forums everyone generally seems to be on the same page and I can't imagine that when it is finally released it will be anything but what they have set out to make which is essentially what we all want...
I think I know what the OP (perhaps) meant... and what I hope he *didn't* mean. And that is worrying! Some of us have studied the games market for years. Many have followed the trends and shifts in it for years ... perthaps even worked in this field or a related one. Having this depth of knowledge does not mean we are 'stuck' in a single idea... it means we can look at proposed ideas and compromises with the ability to judge if this truly is a worthwhile change or compromise, or merely a concession towards the middle-ground that is neither needed or good for the game.
I HATE the idea in this industry (and others) that the 'middle ground' is the place to occupy since it (purportedly):
1. Gives the best/least ammount of people angry and hence will attract 'all' or at least 'more' mainstream people.
2. attracts more middle-ground/mainstream people who will 'carry' the more 'niche' aspects.
However, this analysis is sloppy at best and downright misleading in this (and nearly all similar) case(s).
Consider a ruler marked from 001 - 100. Here:
001 = the harshest most extreme ruleset.. permadeath, item loss etc
100 = instant gratification... cats walks over your keyboard and you gain 3 levels!
On this scale, EQ1 would likely be 15-20. EQ2 = 55-66 and WoW and most modern clones would be 90+ (YMMV)
In these terms, I say to the Original Poster ....
Compromising within the vision of the Tenets (10-30) would be acceptile to most, if not all, people here.
BUT asking for the inclusion of an idea rated (say) 55-70 (YOUR middle-ground) does NOT constitute 'compromise'.
It is not the fault of those who enjoyed the challenge of EQ1 that the MMO market has moved SO far away from this original position. Some changes were made for what was seen as the 'right' reason, but so many were not. Irrespective of this, the current generation of players have had their outlook tained by the games they are currently playing. (PLEASE go and google Richard Bartle's pieces on 'Player types' and 'players perspectives being coloured by the flaws of the last game they played'.) They WILL need to be re-educated. They DO NOT need 'just a little bit of the current crack they currently partake of', even if they do whine about its lack.
PS The game market is FULL to overflowing of games built upon the altar of mediocrity where the intent is to appease the masses, with just a 'flavour' of some implied USP to differentiate them from all the other clones. When even WoW is seen as 'hardcore' by modern MOBA and PSP/XBOX users, *where* is the middle ground? The middle has shifted way over to one side.
PPS I am often told I know nothing. This is false... I know *almost* nothing.
I think what's lost in this discussion is many (most) of EQ vets have no problem with innovation, it's when innovation changes the foundation of a social MMO experience (like EQ). For example, Dullahan and I have had many discussions here and on MMORPG on how to better implement twinking so items like the Fungi tunic would not be gamebreaking. So, even us, who I would consider some of the greatest supporters of EQ on this board realize it wasn't perfect and don't want a carbon copy. There was plenty of room for improvement, but, where it shined was the social experience, and, as Dullahan stated, that is what Pantheon was originally proposed as - a return to those roots.
I have no problem when innovation could lead to a more social experience, or, when a virtual world could be magnified (See perception system). It's when innovation is in direct conflict with the core foundation of a social MMO experience. And, that's where you see the heated discussion, as many here don't care about that original EQ experience, many have never experienced EQ, and many don't want to ever put in the time that was required in EQ again to accomplish meaningful goals - and that's ok. However, those are the topics I'm not willing to compromise on until it is set in stone that Mechanic A is in, B is out, C is in, D is out, etc. At that point, I would be willing to test the system and it's implementation to the best of my abilities. Until that point, it's still all wish list type items. It is healthy to have differing opinions, even if no middle ground is ever met.
And, I use EQ often as a reference point as I've played no other game like it. If there had been a game in the past 18 years, I would reference those as well. I could replace EQ with "generic social MMO name" and I would still want the same game created. And no, it's not nostalgia, I had played plenty of games before EQ and plenty afterward, that didn't provide the same experience.
And, I'll even admit that creating an MMO akin to EQ again would be a risk as there's no proof that it be successful; however, there are plenty of failures on the market currently that demonstrate that compromising on convenience definitely leads to a lack of success even if brief immediate gains are seen.
Dullahan said:/agree Fey
Personally, I think its important that Pantheon move back in the direction of EQ. A) because that is what this game was originally proposed as and B) because we don't need another middle of the road game.
If Pantheon wants to stand out and be successful, it needs to move away from the center. That doesn't mean I don't want plenty of stuff piled on top, but at the base there needs to be more realism, greater challenge and high risk versus reward. Challenging even moreso than EQ. Its fun to glory in how hard it was way back when, but today even your average gamer will scoff at what we once struggled with.
There should be no compromising the things that made EQ super addictive. That means a game where death matters and where it takes a lot of time to see and achieve everything. Beyond that, I think they should go nuts. I'm excited about the next gen stuff they've proposed and hope they continue to stack the features.
Just to be clear, in the beginning, Pantheon was described as being the "spiritual successor" to EQ and VG, not a carbon copy of either and not a sequel to either, Pantheon is it's own game with many of our own ideas, features, and mechanics and although many like to compare us to EQ and VG and other games, it is important to remember that we are not those games and we are instead evolving on from them.
Bottomline, take influences from old school MMOs into the core fundamentals of Pantheon. However, do not make a game that is a flat-out carbon copy of what was done in the past "just because". Develop a game that "makes sense" and will be "successful" in 2018. A game that can stand on its two feet and be innovative in its own way. It can take a bit of new and mix it with the old, it may not. This is not about "compromise", but more of making a game that will warrant more than 2 servers a year after launch because it made some suspect decision-making.
Kalgore said:When I first read about Pantheon I was so exicted to have a real MMO something along the lines I played years ago. hard core raiding and grouping with updated grapics going to and fro slaying everything that stood in my way. I couldnt wait for them to take the best of the MMO franchise and invent something new for the bad that those MMO introduced.
Reading the forums made me more excited I even went to Newegg to build my Pantheon machine. (Pure baddassery btw)
Now.
The forums are made up of the same crap every day people argue for this or that soloey because EQ had it or Vanguard had it. Or they didnt want something because WOW had it etc etc etc. People are refusing to even listen to what could be a better version of an old idea and with that comes a lack of thoughtfulness the Devs need to make this game great.
This game CAN NOT survive witha handful or "hardcore MMO players" Nor can it survive with the newest version of MMO players looking for instant gratification. The game needs a healthy mix. It needs those hardcore players to open there eyes and realize certain things just cant be in the game. It also means the newest player needs to learn the joys of dedicating your time to one game and only one game not 30 different ones a year. Without this type of thinking Pantheon will be doomed and all the work Brad and CO has put into it will be wasted as bad as Daybreak games wastes an amazing IP.
Very rarely should someone reply to a thought or an Idea with NO, NEVER, ILL QUIT, etc etc Because that idea if tweaked could be an amazing feature. I notice people that used to post daily haven’t posted in months due to the frustration they feel in reading some forum posts Everyone needs to step back for a minute breath and come back to every thread with an open mind no matter what the issue is. Everyone should input and tweak but rarely should the words NO or Never grace the forums when ideas are around.
Please keep an open mind just becauser it was in Ultima EQ EQ or VG doesnt mean the idea was amazing. It doesnt neccesarly make the game Easymode because of a modification its just a change that could allow more players to enjoy what we grew up with.
Funniest thing I took away from this post is this: "Reading the forums made me more excited I even went to Newegg to build my Pantheon machine. (Pure baddassery btw)".
Because back in the days when we were actually playing those games. New Egg was a chain of stores where you would buy your software and accessories. I actually hesitated a moment thinking this guy had actually gone to a new egg store to buy his computer. Then I laughed. Of course he hadn't, he has no idea New Egg was a chain of actual store fronts.
...
People arguing in the forums? Well thats human nature now, isn't it. People argue about everything. Sports, religeon, politics, art, philosophy, etc. If there's a subject, there are a million opinions about it.
...
I like the idea of creating a game/MMO with the functionality of EQ/VG, I played the hell out of those games, at an average cost of $15/month. But to expect the people playing these days to be similiar to 10+ years ago is obviously a pure fantasy.
Can Pantheon survive in the current cesspool of glossy eastern p2w/grind2win RNG RMT so-called litterbox style MMO's? Maybe? Can it flourish? Probably not.
The current crop of glossy P2W Eastern games turn over millions of dollars in a month simply by pushing out new cashshop outfits, some new P2W rng boxes and other gambling hooks. With RMT these games keep the economy flush with cash from hardworking stiffs opening their wallets trying to keep up with the thundering herds of 14-25 year olds with no job, no responsibilities and nothing but time to play 20 hours a day at a FTP gambling MMO pit.
For Pantheon to survive purely on a subscription basis is truly a challenge. I hope it can, but I don't see how the numbers will work.
Yes EQ came first, and yes WoW is mostly a copy of EQ with some very dumbed down penalties and carebear modifications. You cannot change history, WoW came after and copied just about everything. WoW's dumbed down, penalty free play and cartoony characters appealed to the millions of kids that grew up watching their parents play games, and now they wanted their own. Blizzard chose carefully. The non-threatening cartoony characters in WoW applied the same marketing logic that Camel cigarettes used to attract young children to smoking.
But as someone that grew up playing D&D with pen and paper in the early 80's, I see a lot of that in EQ, so maybe Gary Gygax is the true progenitor of all modern sword and sorcery MMOs, and D&D is the first true sandbox MMO.
correction: I guess I have to correct myself, I just looked it up and apparently NewEgg is not related to the Egghead stores that existed into 2001. And here I have been thinking for the last 15 years Egghead became Newegg.com. Just goes to show you how easy it is to have false assumptions. :)
Kilsin said:Just to be clear, in the beginning, Pantheon was described as being the "spiritual successor" to EQ and VG, not a carbon copy of either and not a sequel to either, Pantheon is it's own game with many of our own ideas, features, and mechanics and although many like to compare us to EQ and VG and other games, it is important to remember that we are not those games and we are instead evolving on from them.
@Zewtastic
I agree with pretty much all you posted above (particularly about the toxic influence of the modern cess-pit MMOs). I am, however, more optimistic.
Can Pantheon survive with just the 'hardcore' playerbase? Yes and No.
1. with over 1000-ish actives oin EQ99 and 5k+ forum members here (aggregate to 4k real) it can certainly START.
2. with growth and education (much like EVE online) of new players, it can sustain itself SHORT-TERM to MID-TERM.
3. with a solid USP and EVE-like-growth it should last at least as long (10 years = MID-LONG TERM)
So, is it possible for Pantheon to hold fast to it's core tenets and not water them down at every turn? YES.
Will the next generation of gamers have to be re-educated? YES.
If anything, tell the kids 'No, this game is way too tough for you. It takes tactics and co-operation.'
.... Then watch them flood in to try to prove you wrong! (cross fingers)
I don't think forum activity or p99 are particularly accurate benchmarks for Pantheon's potential audience. Five years ago, maybe, but over the last few years there have been so many bland, unremarkable mmos as well as kickstarters, paid alpha/betas and early access games cropping up, I think people are basically over it. Most people don't want to get involved in games anymore until there is something substantive. They want to try games for themselves or read reviews on a finished product.
I think its a pretty simple concept. Make Pantheon different. If it offers a completely unique experience, people will play it. That is one of the reasons I felt like Vanguard suffered, even after the game was stabilized. Regardless of how great the world was and its unique features, overall it was a "more of the same" experience with heavy quest progression, high soloability, lite death penalties > low risk/low reward gameplay with the same color coded loot pinata progression that was already available in half a dozen other games. It just wasn't different enough.
If Pantheon is unique, driven by challenging cooperative play and social interaction, that puts it apart from the other offerings currently in the genre.
Dullahan said:Kilsin said:Just to be clear, in the beginning, Pantheon was described as being the "spiritual successor" to EQ and VG, not a carbon copy of either and not a sequel to either, Pantheon is it's own game with many of our own ideas, features, and mechanics and although many like to compare us to EQ and VG and other games, it is important to remember that we are not those games and we are instead evolving on from them.
You just proved my point man, look at the post date.
I said: "Just to be clear, in the beginning (early 2014 when Pantheon was announced and we launched a KS), Pantheon was described as being the "spiritual successor" to EQ and VG".
Much has changed since then and it is in everyone's best interest to understand that. It is not EQ or VG or any other game. Pantheon is a unique blend of classically spirited MMO gaming while exploring new features and mechanics that we believe will make it a unique MMO experience.
I am not having a go at you or picking on you either man, anyone who posted something similar would have had the same reply from me (and this is not the first time I have replied to these types of comments across multiple platforms) as it is important that people manage their expectations, we don't want to be roasted when people get into testing and go "hey this isn't EQ or VG", of course, it isn't, it is Pantheon! If you see similar things that you liked in EQ or VG or any other game in Pantheon, then that's great, we hope you enjoy them again but most things will be different and based on our own creativity and experiences :)
zewtastic said:Heh, in all reality I doubt Brad could be involved, creatively anyway, with a game that did not turn out like EQ/VG.
Yeah, there will obviously be similarities, but think how different VG was from EQ, there were many things that VG did well that was an evolution from EQ, so that is kind of like what we are doing with Pantheon, evolving again but keeping what we know works well within those types of games. :)
When people come to this forum and see EQ vets vociferously resisting and quashing discussion of change to the various mechanics they believe made EQ great and insisting Brad and the Pants People rigidly stick to those mechanics, they will not expect a completely unique experience or anything other than more of the same old-school stuff but with upgraded graphics.
Sure, I'm happy with the fact that Pantheon will be based in the kind of game EQ (and VG) were, but I'm very open to (and hoping for many) improvements.
What the OP has suggested is that some are not open and are very vocal in being closed and this will stop potential players who visit the forum even trying the game.
Down the line if the 'hardcore' get their way, the game itself will put off people who might otherwise have been willing to put more effort into their gaming for a greater experience.
It's a balancing act, sure and it's clearly accepted here that the genre has gone too far to the mainstream, but there can be compromise and most are confident that compromise will result in a better game, not mediocrity.
And I would argue that the same is true of the people who have every fluffy idea. There's an appreciable portion of the MMO fanbase that are sick and tired of gimmicks. That's not to say that new mechanics and ideas should be outright rejected. But over complicating a game with a bunch of pet-battle stupidity will turn off just as many as a bland MMO with nothing new.
How many games have successfully gone to market over the last decade and been embraced by the consumers as finished? How many have been truely polished? Where would you prefer the dev time be spent? Finishing the core mechanics and principles and putting in solid content? Or building silly ****, or even things that are "wouldnt it be cool if" concepts, that dont really add to the core gameplay in a significant way? Do you want the very open nature of what Pantheon beta is shaping up to be filled with semi-complete side-content that is torn to shreds in reviews? Or do you want people to repor that the game is rock solid at its base with lots of promise for future development?
@Kilsin - Evolution in gaming is good. But we (many old vets of EQ/muds/table-top D&D) do not want an evolution from Pit Bulls to Poodles. We want a badass game. We dont want cross breeding to some unrecognizable Chihuahua/Dachshund/Shih Tzu thing that acts tough but pisses itself every time someone sneezes.
I literally just want a game that is hard and requires time to both experience and master.
Thats it. I don't even need to compare it to the game that shall not be named (because its becoming so offensive).
Such a hard game will bring back the mystery in the game world - that thing that raises your heart rate upon entering a new area. Such a game will bring back players working together - when all the best things are achieved cooperatively. It will bring back the social aspect - when game "systems" don't replace interaction.
I could care less what is built upon that foundation. That is just how open I am to something different than (((EverQuest))). The game could be entirely sci-fi as far as I'm concerned. It could have 100% custom classes. The races could be a variety of flying fish and porpoises wearing armor comprised of high density magic woven rainbows.
... just as long as you don't mess up the whole challenge factor, the time requirement and the social and cooperative aspect of the game. Thats all I ask, so pretending we simply want an (((EQ))) clone is nothing but an attempt to paint us into a corner.
Kilsin said:Just to be clear, in the beginning, Pantheon was described as being the "spiritual successor" to EQ and VG, not a carbon copy of either and not a sequel to either, Pantheon is it's own game with many of our own ideas, features, and mechanics and although many like to compare us to EQ and VG and other games, it is important to remember that we are not those games and we are instead evolving on from them.
A love child would be nice.
As someone that started gaming with MUDs, UO and EQ, I want something like them that is tough and gritty and that takes time and effort to master. Evolution is great, as long as the basics are right.
Part of the problem IMO with the whole MMO genre, is that we have moved from the original table top game foundation, into a more video game foundation.
For many of us, EQ brought alive those long nights of rolling dice and checking off boxes on paper, and imagining the encounters and environments. It was able to give us the visual representation of what we had been playing, and handling allo the mundane tasks of the table top games. Ove rthe years, much of those initial attributes have faded, making many of the current set of MMoRPGs nothing more than simple video games.
I am assuming, many on here are like me, and recall the early days of coin operated video games, Pac-man, asteroids, galaga. Those of us recall when 25 cents got you 1 play of the game. When you died or time was up, you put in another quarter and started from the beginning. Then later on, maybe late 80's early 90's, games started coming out that, when you died or time ran out, you could put another quarter(or 2 or 4) in to continue right where you were (Essentially pay-to-win). MMOs have gone this route as well, adding features that seemed like they were benefits to the games, but later realizing they took away some of the challenge and satisfaction when you actually beat the game, or obtained the high score.
I've pretty much backed away from these boards because of this very reason. You can not post a single thing against change and innovation without certain people going up in arms. And to those people, you really need to remove the rose tinted googles.
I was an incredibly hardcore EQ nerd for over 7 years. I raided in one of the best guilds in the world. I played 10+ hours a day and 14+ on weekends. You don't get more hardcore than I was. So to sit here and listen to people say complete bs like "EQ was a hard game" in any way, shape, or form is complete and utter bs. If you at any point thought there was any difficulty to EQ you are sadly mistaken. The hardest part to it was finding a group. Raids were plain tank and spanks. Groups consisted of the same old things time and again. UI was god aweful. Graphics were just as bad. Tedious, meaningless, and insignificant time sinks around every turn. I could go on and on. The fact that some of you can't open your eyes and see that a lot of what was EQ was only EQ until something better came along and then there was the mass exodus.
Change is not a bad thing. Change can be exactly what we need. We just have to make sure that change doesn't impact the core values. We have to make sure that the game remains to be group oriented and meaningful. We need to make sure that the game continues to make us want to be out in the world being social, making friends, and getting things done. What I don't need or want to see is a remake. A remake of EQ right now would hold possibly enough people to fill 1 server. And the content output would be so low that you would be lucky to see an expansion every 3 years. I don't want that. I want so much content that I have to make a decision on what to do that day because I can't do it all. Most of all, I want this game to be financially successful. If it's not then this is the last time we will EVER see an attempt at this type of MMO. If you don't believe any of what I said thus far you can believe this. No one will attempt this in the current market except for Brad. If this fails, so do all of our hopes and dreams. So if that means that I have to compromise on little things to open the audience a little broader, I'm all for it. I still want the core principals but the minor irrelevant things make no difference and will not affect my enjoyment of the game in the least bit. Pick your battles people because you can't win em all.
/endrant ... Now back to quietly stalking until Alpha when I can actually see the direction they are taking things.
Guess I'm one of the oddman-out EQ vets where EQ was my first love but there's a few things from its foundation that I wouldn't mind being "refined/refreshed" on. Gotta take off the rose-covered glasses.
Couldn't find a good image from Top Gun :(