If Pantheon is a success as I believe it will be I imagine an influx of younger new players to the game who have only ever experienced the fast moving linear MMORPGs.
The younger players bring money. However, when they are the majority demanding, fast ports, easy death penalties, quick rewards, pay to win and flying mounts etc will VR hold fast to their commitment to the ideals of this game?
I mean, if the new guys bring in millions and not giving in to their demands means losing money and critically letting VR staff go, will VR be able to resist their demands?
I'd hate to invest money, time and Spirit into Pantheon to see it give in to the masses.
Nephele said:Or, perhaps they will see that they're getting a far richer experience, and (with the help of the community) realize that Pantheon is fine the way it is.
It's easy for us to look at "younger" players with an us against them mentality. It's also wrong to do so.
This
I'm not in PA so I don't know everything that's going on atm, but what systems has VR become more lenient on? I kind of feel like it's been the opposite, that they've stood up to those wanting in-game maps, instances, no corpse runs, fast travel instead of boats (or gnome airships maybe), connected AH through the whole world, etc.
I don't want to derail the thread by bringing up specifics about systems that people have strong feelings about. I'm not going there.
I am not afraid that VR will bend over backwards to make Pantheon more and more mainstream. Not at all.
I am afraid that they will be *too* restrictive and purist and will make a game that only the hardcore will want, and not even all of us.
I see signs on a number of issues that they have hardened their position that way. But I will follow Philo's lead and not mention any issues.
Do I think they will fall into that trap? Actually no I do not. But I see it as *more* likely than them going too far towards "leniency".
@Dorotea Yet mainstream already widely exists. We need something in the other direction that doesn’t exist as of right now. So that‘s where I honestly disagree with you (albeit respectfully).
@Syrif. I think it is more that I wasn't clear than that we disagree. Though maybe we do.
There are far too many mainstream games out there now - agreed. Pantheon needs to be a game that is quite removed from mainstream - agreed again.
Hypothetically - suppose there is a scale between mainstream and old school. Going from 1 to 100. Call WoW and LOTRO and SWTOR and Rift and EQ2 and similar games that I don't know as well 100 on the MM (mainstream meter). Oversimplification of course, no two games are identical, and every game has at least some old school elements.
Now suppose all of us here agree on just what "old school" means (we do not, of course, but I did say "hypothetical".) And give the Pantheon of our dreams, that shining city on a hill serving as a beacon of hope to the game playing world, a MM score of 0.
Good - the stage is set.
My view is and always has been that Pantheon has not one but two absolutely mandatory non-negotiable things that it *must* do. It must be that shining city - I wouldn't pledge a penny in the hope of getting another game with a MM score of 80 or 90 or 100. Neither would you unless I misread what you say. But equally it *must* be a success. Niche perhaps but enough of a success that VR can keep the servers up and the staff employed. And this is *just* as important as the MM score for it is a sine qua non. Without success we have nothing - just a fading memory of the brief glory that was Pantheon. I wouldn't knowingly pledge a penny knowing that failure was assured either.
There is a point where the MM score gets so high that we might as well see the game die. You and I agree in all respects on this obvious point. This is your fear as mentioned earlier on this thread.
Equally there is a point where the game is so old school, where it is so slow and difficult, that it will be unable to sustain a viable subscription base. Where most of *us* won't have the stomach to play it. Where there were 100 design issues and VR went the most old school, slow, cumbersome amd difficult way (from the player's perspective) on every single one of them. Just as your main fear is that Pantheon will get too high a score on the MM meter, mine is that in an effort to avoid this horrible fate VR will go too far in the other direction and make a game that you and I might enjoy playing but that will fail. You and I agree here too - neither of us wants failure.
You quite properly look for signs that the MM is getting too high. I look for signs that the market of people that will actually subscribe is getting too small. Thus the difference between your post and mine.
Looking at Philo seeing worrying signs of leniency and my seeing worrying signs of hardening position - we do not necessarily disagree at all. Philo may see a few issues where VR is easing up and I may see a few different issues where they are not and we may *each* be completely correct on the specific issues we have in mind.
@Dorotea Your response is appreciated. Though the further from mainstream the better I think - just is how I see it.
The further from the mainstream the better, within reason. Of course, these forums have hosted many debates among we old school supporters of the game as to what *is* within reason but how could it be otherwise?
Mordecai - *none* of us wants a WoW type game. The arguments on the forums - heated as they sometimes get - tend to be of two types.
1. How far from WoW do we want to get. Using my somewhat tongue-in-cheek Mainstream Meter some of us consider 0 (old school purity) a perfect score. Some of us think 20 (some modern features thrown in) is better. So we heatedly debate it, occasionally losing sight of the clear fact that we agree far more than we disagree.
2. How much are we willing to compromise in order to see the game have a broader base of subscribers. None of us would accept a 100 MM score and blessedly few a MM score above 50. But some of us feel that anything over 0 ...well maybe 5-10 if pushed to the wall .... would leave us with a game not enough better than WoW to be worth playing. Others believe that even if we have to retreat as far as 30 or 40 that would still give us a game *enough* better than the crap out there now that it would be worth playing.
I think we all (and I include myself in this) have a bad habit at times of talking about Pantheon in terms of other games, and what we liked or didn't like about those games. That leads us to an imperfect understanding and a false description of what we actually are hoping to see in this game when it launches.
It's a very easy rut to fall into, of course, because I don't think there are any of us here who haven't played at least one other MMORPG in our lifetimes. So, it's very hard not to view Pantheon in light of those past experiences. But we still need to try.
Pantheon is a new MMORPG. One that will have its own soul and tell its own story. We should stop worrying so much about whether it will be like some other game - whether that would be good or bad. We should stop worrying so much about the past and start thinking about the future. Pantheon has the chance to not only bring back some of the magic that we *all* are missing, but to help define the next generation of MMORPGs. Pantheon has the opportunity to be the NEXT mainstream, or influence that to a great degree.
It can't do that if we shackle it to the games of yesteryear - again, good or bad.
For me, there's only really one deal breaker for Pantheon - and that's if it ends up feeling like a game with an end, rather than a world that I can live and adventure in. Sure, I have preferences beyond that - but they are just preferences. What really matters though is the total experience. If some parts of that line up with what systems and mechanics I prefer, awesome. If not, I'll still enjoy it, as long as things make sense and fit together. The whole should be greater than the sum of the parts.
Maybe it's just my ego talking, but I think if everyone just took a step back from the things they are afraid of, and instead talked about what they hope for in Pantheon, we might find that we're all on the same side.
I think I have been fair and consistent in my points concerning game play and design. I will not compromise with mainstream in this area as to do so is to lessen game play.
The mainstream arguments are consistent to the basis of an individual wanting an easier time. This is reasoned through many means ranging from "I have a job/life" to that of "that ain't fun!".
The basis of RMT was designed around those arguments. I understand "quality of life" concepts, but these arguments made today are often centered not around the concept of a limitation of previous design to which modern design remedies (ie certain interface functions having limitations due to the times such as how you click, organize, or access your inventories), but rather on an individuals desire to find advantageous means in an interface implementation (Hit counter, heal counter, dps counters, raid timers, etc...).
In fact, I have often heard some people lay claim that "turn based" games of the past were a "technological limitation" and that having the game "action" focused is modern and advanced. This obviously is an ignorant claim that ignores the differences in concept and play that separate a turn based game from that of an action one and has no understanding of the history of games in general.
It is also the same problem with objections to tab targeting and auto attack systems as being "inferior" to that of the games today which often promote "action" play over that of statistical RNG round based systems.
My point is, mainstream wants a very specific goal and focus and to attend to them is to diminish game play that was beloved in games like EQ (and that of older game systems to which it was modeled after).
I think Brad is of the mindset that, if people just give this a chance, they will understand, they will see the power of enjoyment in these older systems of play, that while different, while less focused on the twitch, instant gratification concept of play that many games today attempt to provide, that a person might find the journey of failure, and more failure to reach moments of success to be quite satisfying, even intoxicating.
That if given the chance to chase that carrot, and to finally have that reward be balanced not on a companies desire to keep you paying, but that of trying to provide you a satisfaction to the effort you put in, that the newer players may be "won over" and understand what makes so many of us fans of EQ (or older game systems) in its early days.
I agree with Brad, though I disagree with him compromising. I think NOTHING good will come from compromising game play to appeal to the convenience of mainstream demands. I think each compromise kills any chance of getting people to understand the beauty of such game play.
Compromise is death to game play as it will run off its core supporters, the ONLY people who can bring longevity to the game.
If longevity isn't an interest, well... they can always sell out to mainstream, pick up a few million subs for a month or two, ride it into the 100's of thousands subs for a year or so, then run it into the ground (and sell it off to a 3rd party). Fact is, this is FAR more profitable than appealing to a core niche group.
Time will tell, but make no mistake, VR will make out on this one regardless. The real test to their character will be how they choose, but to be honest, it won't surprise me if they go the mainstream route. Am I being negative? Sure, but keep in mind that the market has "to date" failed in this sense and if VR shocks the industry by taking the route of game integrity, they will not only have gained a permanent sub, but a fan boy for life.
Time will tell, but this isn’t my first rodeo and I am not a cheap date.
Tanix said:
Time will tell, but this isn’t my first rodeo and I am not a cheap date.
I'm definately stealing that.
Ill be very honest, i cant see Brad or anyone else from VR throwing the game out to a huge number of kids to experience. I am sure they would rather setup lots of servers to handle the influx then bunching them all together. Even when EQ first came out, it was a more mature game due to the monthly costs, and expansions. You needed a full time job to really pay for it all, even if you had family accounts. I know my bills stacked up.
I can not see the Fortnite age group fly into Pantheon, maybe the 20+ age group might try it for a longer term game, because ill be very frank, those Steam games on EA suck.
If they do flood the servers for whatever reason, i am sure Brad will add lots more influx servers to handle them, then to bunch all the younger gen players into one area.
Sorry i havent been back to the forums to often, so just catching up on some topics.
I think the industry needs to get away form listening to "them" and create their own game, if no one likes it, so be it. Let the business chips fall where they may.
The game is made for the love of it, and not for the business of it, EQ did well because it was just that, everything since has been a polish of that.
(tldr)
I think Devs in this industry need to get away form thinking they can be rich off this and buy a home in SF, but instead, look to the movie "ready, player one" and realize, that that game developer so characterized is future, but without such influence.The extremely introvertish designer, huddling in their one room no window basement apartment with a gerbil, spending countless hours awake and eating poorly for the love of their "project" only to discovered 4 months later by the landlord for lack of rent, oddly not smelling and strangely dehydrated to a kind of mumification "not uncomon to go for a while without rent because of that "project" they spoke about, but they always paid" the landlord would say. "Nice guy, kept to himself" the neighbors and late night 24hour gast station junk food attendants would say. To have as the only reminder a stone marker with a name and chiseled dash between the dates....
That is strangely revered for decades by fans- more than the tombstone of Jim morrison in France. Annual pilgrimages made and the booth at the cons now becomes more of a sign pointing to the meet- sells out the banquet hall every time and the hotel manager complains because impromptu gatherings are held in every open space from the overflow to the point of becoming another RV city thats created during the FLA-GA game and evolves to a burning man/woodstock type annual event. Even children re-discover it every 10 years or so causing sociologists to marvel at this new "more"(mor-ay) in society 80 years later.