@1AD7 That's why I think Pantheon will be good for new people to consider that there can be so much more to an mmo than just 'EQ-Live or WoW' at the moment. At the very least, it will finally be something different to people regardless of their gaming background - some will like it, some won't. I think VR will be true to "You're in our world now."
oneADseven said:That seems like a pretty robust population to draw from. I always see people saying that VR is looking to make a super niche game for a small segment of the MMO population. It seems to me that the target audience is much broader than what most people think. VR isn't just looking for people who played hardcore MMO's back in the day. They want the new wave of gamers who will appreciate this kind of game just like we did 20 years ago. It's imperative that Pantheon is designed as a game that is challenging and heavily reliant on players working together to overcome those challenges. There needs to be high replay value (which means we shouldn't be wanting to bash our face into our keyboards) and compelling risk vs reward. An EQ redux isn't going to cut it if VR is trying to hit a grand slam.
Pantheon needs to be more difficult, more fun, and less tedious. This doesn't mean that the game needs to be super convenient. VR just needs to pick their poison and only follow through with systems/features/mechanics that adhere to their stated tenets and the grand vision that ties them all together. A lot of people seem to think that reskinning EQ is a part of that grand vision -- it is not. It can be used as a source for inspiration ... this is perfectly fine ... but the "EQ Way" should not be viewed as the default position every single time two parties disagree. FFXI was one hell of an MMO and I have been going out of my way for almost 2 years now to discuss some of the systems/features/mechanics that made that game special ... but every attempt is met with resilience because somehow that "magic" is foreign.
I cut out the Brad quote just for size, but here is the post that I was referring to:
The fact is that, the market is way bigger than it was in 2000. So even a niche game can have a robust player base, but it's not going to appeal to everyone. Look at a game like EVE Online. It's a very, very niche game and has celebrated many, many years of success.
I've also spent more time than I care to admit trying to convey why some people want certain features, because I did play EQ and a lot of the things that people seem to really fear were not really that big of a deal in terms of timesink, but still had great advantages. I understand this from direct experience playing the game from 99-2004. It's not to make them feel alienated, invalidated, excluded or bad, or even that I want them to go play WoW. I would love for them to play Pantheon, because I bet they will have a blast regardless of what kind of balance VR decides on in the end. Although, for the few that come in and just start making demands without even entertaining other ideas, I end up feeling much more compelled to just tell them the game won't be for them. For some, it seems they already made up their mind anyway (on both sides of the debate). The old school players need to be more open to a bit more convenience, and the new school players need to be more open to a little less convenience. Who knows what that balance will look like in the end product, but I would venture to guess it will be harder, and more time consuming, than most of the MMO's currently on the market. I would also venture to guess it will be a heck of a lot of fun.
This post, which I only recently found, was what inspired me to finally decide to pledge.
Syrif said:You mentioned that 'many here aren't willing to listen to Brad,' do you have an example of that? I haven't seen that as of yet.
Sure do. For instance, the FAQ makes it pretty clear that losing your gear on your corpse ain't gonna happen, and yet certain people on here continue to promote how awesome it is to have a game where you can lose all your stuff from corpse rot.
dorotea said:VR seems to be aiming for an EQ/Vanguard-inspired game with many things intentionally thrown in to appeal to the nostalgia of EQ players but where they think they can do things better in 2018 than could be done in 1999 they will.
I agree and have mentioned several times that I expect this game to be more of a Vanguard successor than an Everquest successor.
For example, I fully expect to see raid zones that have multiple copies running so that many guilds can all be raiding the same zone at the same time. Just like Vanguard. People can call it whatever they want, but to me it's just a form of instancing. And I'm perfectly ok with it. I have zero problems with Vanguard raid instance and lockout mechanics.
Searril said:Syrif said:You mentioned that 'many here aren't willing to listen to Brad,' do you have an example of that? I haven't seen that as of yet.
Sure do. For instance, the FAQ makes it pretty clear that losing your gear on your corpse ain't gonna happen, and yet certain people on here continue to promote how awesome it is to have a game where you can lose all your stuff from corpse rot.
That's news to me Searril. I haven't seen anyone who wants a character to lose all of their gear if they die. What a lot have people have advocated for is the necessity in recovering your corpse to reloot gear and gain some experience back via rez.
Searril said:Syrif said:You mentioned that 'many here aren't willing to listen to Brad,' do you have an example of that? I haven't seen that as of yet.
Sure do. For instance, the FAQ makes it pretty clear that losing your gear on your corpse ain't gonna happen, and yet certain people on here continue to promote how awesome it is to have a game where you can lose all your stuff from corpse rot.
Just to play devils advocate a bit, the FAQ is not entirely accurate as it has not been updated in quite awhile. I wouldn't consider it set in stone by any means.
For example, the FAQ says there will be an in-game voice chat but in recent discussions they have talked about going away from that. Brad recently posted that they hope to update the FAQ in the next couple months. Hopefully after that happens it will be more reliable but until then take it with a grain of salt.
philo said:Searril said:Syrif said:You mentioned that 'many here aren't willing to listen to Brad,' do you have an example of that? I haven't seen that as of yet.
Sure do. For instance, the FAQ makes it pretty clear that losing your gear on your corpse ain't gonna happen, and yet certain people on here continue to promote how awesome it is to have a game where you can lose all your stuff from corpse rot.
Just to play devils advocate a bit, the FAQ is not entirely accurate as it has not been updated in quite awhile. I wouldn't consider it set in stone by any means.
For example, the FAQ says there will be an in-game voice chat but in recent discussions they have talked about going away from that. Brad recently posted that they hope to update the FAQ in the next couple months. Hopefully after that happens it will be more reliable but until then take it with a grain of salt.
Yea true Philo. Anyway, I haven't seen people wanting their gear lost when they die. What a lot of people have been advocating for though is recovering your corpse to regain your gear and recovering some exp on it via rez.
Syrif said:right.. but I'm not comparing amount of players 'now vs then' as you are. Computers are a dime a dozen. I am only stating the trend where subs steadily increased during EQ Classic and where subs have been significantly declining with EQ-Live and WoW. That's a fact as far as I know.
There are tons more MMOs on the market nowadays. Also, while WoW's subs have been declining, they're declining from an absolutely ridiculous number (12 million!), starting with the beginning of Cataclysm. Given the age of the game and the ever-expanding MMO market, I think it's inaccurate at best to try and draw a parallel between EQ Classic/EQ-Live/WoW subscription trends and what these forums perceive as "old-school gameplay".
oneADseven said:Pantheon needs to be more difficult, more fun, and less tedious. This doesn't mean that the game needs to be super convenient ... but there are tools that can be put into place to help ensure that the desired experience is more widely achieved. VR just needs to pick their poison and only follow through with systems/features/mechanics that adhere to their stated tenets and the grand vision that ties them all together. A lot of people seem to think that reskinning EQ is a part of that grand vision -- it is not. It can be used as a source for inspiration ... this is perfectly fine ... but the "EQ Way" should not be viewed as the default position every single time two parties disagree. FFXI was one hell of an MMO and I have been going out of my way for almost 2 years now to discuss some of the systems/features/mechanics that made that game special ... but every attempt is met with resilience because somehow that "magic" is foreign or unproven.
Great post!
@Naunet I guess I don't see how a trend is inaccurate if it is based on fact. A trend either goes up or down, or it can stagnate I suppose. Anyway, there are indeed more MMO's now and what has monopolized the market doesn't really interest me at the moment. This game is looking really good though.
edit: oh, and this downward trend hasn’t just happened with WoW. It’s happened to EQ-Live and others with much less sub numbers than the 12 million with WoW you mention. Downward trends.
Syrif said:Porygon said:Syrif said:Just a thought - an interesting trend is subscriptions of WoW and EQ-Live have been declining condiserably, yet subscriptions during EQ Classic steadily increased. No clone, but improving what worked is ideal :)
Wow. Ok so I assume by eqc you mean like classic to SoV... by which you would also need to break WoW into a wow classic model... because subscriptions during wow classic - wrath of the lich king make every other mmo ever look like a miserable failure.
And also, even now the subs that wow live gets make eq1 look like a joke.
right.. but I'm not comparing amount of players 'now vs then' as you are. Computers are a dime a dozen. I am only stating the trend where subs steadily increased during EQ Classic and where subs have been significantly declining with EQ-Live and WoW. That's a fact as far as I know.
Yea... I guess I dont understand what you're saying. Because subs for wow classic steadily increased until wrath of the lich king....
So you're trying to imply eq classic did something right because they had increasing subs... but so did wow classic.
You can't just look at wow as a whole but only take the sample of EQ that fits your argument lol. That's the only point I was trying to make. Both games had increasing subs until a certain point.
@Porygon Ah, I assumed it would have been realized I was referring to the live version of WoW given that it monopolizes the market at the moment. But yes - the current declines refer to the live versions of those games of course. I’m used to saying Classic EQ or EQ-Live since they are/were very different games. I don't know much about WoW other than it being in a downward spiral. I wasn’t looking at sheer numbers either, just the up and down trend.
@Iksar I’m assuming what people mean by the ‘significance‘ of EQ-Live and WoW subs declining is that these declines occurred after the management, designers, and vision took a different direction on these games that dramatically changed them. That’s my take anyway.
Naunet said:Syrif said:right.. but I'm not comparing amount of players 'now vs then' as you are. Computers are a dime a dozen. I am only stating the trend where subs steadily increased during EQ Classic and where subs have been significantly declining with EQ-Live and WoW. That's a fact as far as I know.
There are tons more MMOs on the market nowadays. Also, while WoW's subs have been declining, they're declining from an absolutely ridiculous number (12 million!), starting with the beginning of Cataclysm. Given the age of the game and the ever-expanding MMO market, I think it's inaccurate at best to try and draw a parallel between EQ Classic/EQ-Live/WoW subscription trends and what these forums perceive as "old-school gameplay".
oneADseven said:Pantheon needs to be more difficult, more fun, and less tedious. This doesn't mean that the game needs to be super convenient ... but there are tools that can be put into place to help ensure that the desired experience is more widely achieved. VR just needs to pick their poison and only follow through with systems/features/mechanics that adhere to their stated tenets and the grand vision that ties them all together. A lot of people seem to think that reskinning EQ is a part of that grand vision -- it is not. It can be used as a source for inspiration ... this is perfectly fine ... but the "EQ Way" should not be viewed as the default position every single time two parties disagree. FFXI was one hell of an MMO and I have been going out of my way for almost 2 years now to discuss some of the systems/features/mechanics that made that game special ... but every attempt is met with resilience because somehow that "magic" is foreign or unproven.Great post!
Now just a moment. WoW has declined severely from it's peak of 12 million. Subs fell to 5 million and then they ceased reporting the numbers...that was years ago. I highly doubt they have stopped the decline since then, I am not going to throw out random numbers since we don't have any to go on but they introduced several features such as cross-realm to keep the illusion of a high playerbase. Dungeon/Raid finder was not server wide but across all servers for the same reason. I consider this a very important point to make because WoW was a very different game compared to what it is today, same story as what happened to EQ. Both games declined significantly over the years and I don't think it was only due to people getting tired of those games, they changed radically from what they once were. The real challenge is figuring out what worked and what didn't. More importantly VR has a different vision than what Blizzard was trying to do. But there are lessons to be learned from WoW's rise and fall just as there are lessons from EQ's rise and fall.
Ziegfried said: Now just a moment. WoW has declined severely from it's peak of 12 million. Subs fell to 5 million and then they ceased reporting the numbers...that was years ago. I highly doubt they have stopped the decline since then, I am not going to throw out random numbers since we don't have any to go on but they introduced several features such as cross-realm to keep the illusion of a high playerbase. Dungeon/Raid finder was not server wide but across all servers for the same reason. I consider this a very important point to make because WoW was a very different game compared to what it is today, same story as what happened to EQ. Both games declined significantly over the years and I don't think it was only due to people getting tired of those games, they changed radically from what they once were. The real challenge is figuring out what worked and what didn't. More importantly VR has a different vision than what Blizzard was trying to do. But there are lessons to be learned from WoW's rise and fall just as there are lessons from EQ's rise and fall.
I never said WoW didn't decline in sub count - in fact, I explicitely said that it has (from 12 million peak, which I said, and which you have now also said). My point was you'd have a really hard time proving that the slow decline in population since the end of Wrath was due to WoW not being old-school enough. In fact, Cataclysm brought a significant increase in difficulty and yet it actually triggered a decline in subscriptions. There are MANY other variables at play here, including the game simply having been around for a really, really long time.
Riahuf22 said: Look guys Pantheon Rise of the Fallen, is going to be Pantheon Rise of the Fallen period, they might grab at ideas from EQ Classic, EQ Live, WoW, VG, and Final Fantasy, but it is going to be it own game, there will be things we don't like about it, there are going to be things that we love about it, but bickering back and forth about who's idea is better in nonsense at this point, VR more than likely alrdy have it in their mind what they want these things to be, until tested, and until we can test them there isn't much of a reason to keep going at each other just to see who can put in the most post on a single topic. Let VR show us their idea of how they want it done and once we can test it, than give our opinion on it, bht until than we can all agree a lot of people have a lot of ideas and to a point none of them are wrong, and all have pros and cons.
I'm not so sure about that. Brad is already welcoming feedback on combat and how it's going to play out so it's "not boring" etc. However; listening to the crowd isn't really going to help because all they're going to do for the most part is highlight mechanics they already know.. and the majority of players out there they're casually based (take the path of least resistance for convience sake). For a game that wants to be a "WoW break-away" listening to the majority of players (mainly will be modern generation; there will be a fair few oldschoolers no doubt) doesn't really seem like a good idea. Because all they're going to end up getting is .... WoW/FFXIV/more casual mmo features. I mean I don't really understand this game; it's got tenets; it's got "the difference" yet is asking for feedback from everyone on everything. Surely by now they should have solid design on everything if not most? if they haven't; why are they continuing? I just don't get it. I mean even the Wizard gameplay seems like the blackmage from FFXIV which was chewed up in another post and used by the devs as a reference to make "wizard" interesting from someone who clearly didn't play/understand wizard very well; aleast from reading his post. I'm not trying to rain on anyones parade here but doesn't anyone else see the oxymoron here? "Pantheon Rise of the Fallen, is going to be Pantheon Rise of the Fallen period"... but will be a mixture of everything else on the market... just like everything else on the market. :S
Sorry to sound like abit harsh but I'm just stating the truth. I thought this was a breaker-awayer? what's going on... ;s
--- wheres the solid vision? am I missing something here?
Nimryl said:Riahuf22 said: Look guys Pantheon Rise of the Fallen, is going to be Pantheon Rise of the Fallen period, they might grab at ideas from EQ Classic, EQ Live, WoW, VG, and Final Fantasy, but it is going to be it own game, there will be things we don't like about it, there are going to be things that we love about it, but bickering back and forth about who's idea is better in nonsense at this point, VR more than likely alrdy have it in their mind what they want these things to be, until tested, and until we can test them there isn't much of a reason to keep going at each other just to see who can put in the most post on a single topic. Let VR show us their idea of how they want it done and once we can test it, than give our opinion on it, bht until than we can all agree a lot of people have a lot of ideas and to a point none of them are wrong, and all have pros and cons.
I'm not so sure about that. Brad is already welcoming feedback on combat and how it's going to play out so it's "not boring" etc. However; listening to the crowd isn't really going to help because all they're going to do for the most part is highlight mechanics they already know.. and the majority of players out there they're casually based (take the path of least resistance for convience sake). For a game that wants to be a "WoW break-away" listening to the majority of players (mainly will be modern generation; there will be a fair few oldschoolers no doubt) doesn't really seem like a good idea. Because all they're going to end up getting is .... WoW/FFXIV/more casual mmo features. I mean I don't really understand this game; it's got tenets; it's got "the difference" yet is asking for feedback from everyone on everything. Surely by now they should have solid design on everything if not most? if they haven't; why are they continuing? I just don't get it. I mean even the Wizard gameplay seems like the blackmage from FFXIV which was chewed up in another post and used by the devs as a reference to make "wizard" interesting from someone who clearly didn't play/understand wizard very well; aleast from reading his post. I'm not trying to rain on anyones parade here but doesn't anyone else see the oxymoron here? "Pantheon Rise of the Fallen, is going to be Pantheon Rise of the Fallen period"... but will be a mixture of everything else on the market... just like everything else on the market. :S
Sorry to sound like abit harsh but I'm just stating the truth. I thought this was a breaker-awayer? what's going on... ;s
--- wheres the solid vision? am I missing something here?
It's basically impossible to make a game where every feature is unique to the game, like
no AH is EQ, world wide AH is WoW, regional AH, WoW had one of these as well,
no instancing old eq, Instancing WoW, lockout timers, basically every game but EQ til LoY I believe
, slow pace combat, EQ, fast pace combat a lot of games,
These are some of the basics mechanics of games in a mmorpg and as you can see you basically have to have one of them, there's no way around it, there no such thing as medium pace really becuase medium pace is basically playing on a slow pace game but your group has out leveled the area or on a fast pace game and too low. So like I said before they will have some mechanic stat other games will use or at least get the idea from other games and put a twist to it, which would be great to see.
Riahuf22 said:
It's basically impossible to make a game where every feature is unique to the game, likeno AH is EQ, world wide AH is WoW, regional AH, WoW had one of these as well,
no instancing old eq, Instancing WoW, lockout timers, basically every game but EQ til LoY I believe
, slow pace combat, EQ, fast pace combat a lot of games,
These are some of the basics mechanics of games in a mmorpg and as you can see you basically have to have one of them, there's no way around it, there no such thing as medium pace really becuase medium pace is basically playing on a slow pace game but your group has out leveled the area or on a fast pace game and too low. So like I said before they will have some mechanic stat other games will use or at least get the idea from other games and put a twist to it, which would be great to see.
Syrif said:Searril said:Syrif said:You mentioned that 'many here aren't willing to listen to Brad,' do you have an example of that? I haven't seen that as of yet.
Sure do. For instance, the FAQ makes it pretty clear that losing your gear on your corpse ain't gonna happen, and yet certain people on here continue to promote how awesome it is to have a game where you can lose all your stuff from corpse rot.
That's news to me Searril. I haven't seen anyone who wants a character to lose all of their gear if they die. What a lot have people have advocated for is the necessity in recovering your corpse to reloot gear and gain some experience back via rez.
Then I humbly submit that you aren't seeing a lot of stuff posted here. But I'm not wasting my time arguing on it. These types of "arguments" have been going on here for years, and yet one side always claims "hey I haven't seen that" when the other side points out what some people are saying.
It's old, and tiring, and I'm sick of the forum games.
philo said:Searril said:Syrif said:You mentioned that 'many here aren't willing to listen to Brad,' do you have an example of that? I haven't seen that as of yet.
Sure do. For instance, the FAQ makes it pretty clear that losing your gear on your corpse ain't gonna happen, and yet certain people on here continue to promote how awesome it is to have a game where you can lose all your stuff from corpse rot.
Just to play devils advocate a bit, the FAQ is not entirely accurate as it has not been updated in quite awhile. I wouldn't consider it set in stone by any means.
For example, the FAQ says there will be an in-game voice chat but in recent discussions they have talked about going away from that. Brad recently posted that they hope to update the FAQ in the next couple months. Hopefully after that happens it will be more reliable but until then take it with a grain of salt.
Ok. So now the FAQ is meaningless.
Gotcha.
The thing to remember is Pantheon is clearly going to look to old-school Everquest and Vanguard for inspiration, because that is the last time a lot of us saw a game with the core values that we want, but modern games aren't all 100% bad. Some more than others and some seemingly 'good' features were/are to the detriment of the old-school feel, but we have to trust VR to know the difference.
Brad and the team have a massive amount of MMORPG development (and playing) experience. They *can* read everyone's comments, get a feel for what 'the community' wants and fold it into their vision, or indeed, know which bits that shouldn't be done, even if they seem popular, for the good of the game.
It *is* worth discussing and commenting on aspects that concern or interest us, but it is pointless getting heated and bickering and arguing. Trust in VR.
Riahuf22 said:Nimryl said:Riahuf22 said: Look guys Pantheon Rise of the Fallen, is going to be Pantheon Rise of the Fallen period, they might grab at ideas from EQ Classic, EQ Live, WoW, VG, and Final Fantasy, but it is going to be it own game, there will be things we don't like about it, there are going to be things that we love about it, but bickering back and forth about who's idea is better in nonsense at this point, VR more than likely alrdy have it in their mind what they want these things to be, until tested, and until we can test them there isn't much of a reason to keep going at each other just to see who can put in the most post on a single topic. Let VR show us their idea of how they want it done and once we can test it, than give our opinion on it, bht until than we can all agree a lot of people have a lot of ideas and to a point none of them are wrong, and all have pros and cons.
I'm not so sure about that. Brad is already welcoming feedback on combat and how it's going to play out so it's "not boring" etc. However; listening to the crowd isn't really going to help because all they're going to do for the most part is highlight mechanics they already know.. and the majority of players out there they're casually based (take the path of least resistance for convience sake). For a game that wants to be a "WoW break-away" listening to the majority of players (mainly will be modern generation; there will be a fair few oldschoolers no doubt) doesn't really seem like a good idea. Because all they're going to end up getting is .... WoW/FFXIV/more casual mmo features. I mean I don't really understand this game; it's got tenets; it's got "the difference" yet is asking for feedback from everyone on everything. Surely by now they should have solid design on everything if not most? if they haven't; why are they continuing? I just don't get it. I mean even the Wizard gameplay seems like the blackmage from FFXIV which was chewed up in another post and used by the devs as a reference to make "wizard" interesting from someone who clearly didn't play/understand wizard very well; aleast from reading his post. I'm not trying to rain on anyones parade here but doesn't anyone else see the oxymoron here? "Pantheon Rise of the Fallen, is going to be Pantheon Rise of the Fallen period"... but will be a mixture of everything else on the market... just like everything else on the market. :S
Sorry to sound like abit harsh but I'm just stating the truth. I thought this was a breaker-awayer? what's going on... ;s
--- wheres the solid vision? am I missing something here?It's basically impossible to make a game where every feature is unique to the game, like
no AH is EQ, world wide AH is WoW, regional AH, WoW had one of these as well,
no instancing old eq, Instancing WoW, lockout timers, basically every game but EQ til LoY I believe
, slow pace combat, EQ, fast pace combat a lot of games,
These are some of the basics mechanics of games in a mmorpg and as you can see you basically have to have one of them, there's no way around it, there no such thing as medium pace really becuase medium pace is basically playing on a slow pace game but your group has out leveled the area or on a fast pace game and too low. So like I said before they will have some mechanic stat other games will use or at least get the idea from other games and put a twist to it, which would be great to see.
I didn't take Brads comments as asking the player base for ideas for design, but for ideas to see if there is something they may be overlooking or ideas that spark something else within the team.
They have their core tenets, and will stick to them, but that doesn't mean you should never listen to outside ideas that could be an improvement on your own.
When we stop listening, we stop learning.
Fulton said:
I didn't take Brads comments as asking the player base for ideas for design, but for ideas to see if there is something they may be overlooking or ideas that spark something else within the team.They have their core tenets, and will stick to them, but that doesn't mean you should never listen to outside ideas that could be an improvement on your own.
When we stop listening, we stop learning.
The biggest thing that I was trying to get at is a lot of people on this topic and simply flat out saying someone's idea is wrong, or that they should go to another mmorpg altogether, and that is so toxic that it's mind blowing that this thread hadn't been blocked from the beginning. You simply create a wedge between the community itself when you state comments like that. So I wasn't saying that we shouldn't be stating our ideas, for as long we aren't saying someone's else's is wrong, and of course people are not going to like your ideas simply becuase it isn't theirs even though I e seen people say they didn't l I'm e someone else's idea but than again later basically use the same idea with a twist but I guess that what you get from people who don't really know what they want I dunno