Xerion said:"But what is something the negative people seem to forget is that... both things came about due to the community needing and demanding to see more/some significant progress,"
But the community had already seen significant progress before with the Faerthale and DiViare videos. The art style change came completely out of the blue and was not what people had signed up for or agreed to. So instead of doing something like consulting with community, talking with them, changing the art style but showing them how the final end product would look like etc. They just changed it and released a 5 minute video explanation. So no, progress has always been seen, but it is massively changing direction on something without speaking with the community first.
"So complaining about VR prioritizing showing their progress resulting from those instead of talking about it... is dumb."
Please cool it with the toxic negativity and personal insults.
"the art style is not likely to be reverted like some may hope would result from their endless complaining. So get over it and move on."
But the underlying problem of communication was never addressed. THIS is the point that you and others are completely missing. They did a complete 180 and changed something massively for the art without proper communication. How are they not going to do it again to us? How are you going to trust them at this point? As I said before if they do it again to you and others in the future, any further grief is on you at this point."The 247 thing... you can still voice your feedback on, as far as not seeing VR decide to focus on monetizing it,"
Voicing feedback only matters if they listen and integrate it. And so far they have not shown that ability to do so. So yes you can voice your feedback, but if they don't listen, then it doesn't matter much does it?
"Fact is... at this point the negativity is becoming an attempt at sabotage. And that sucks. Whether I or others agree with all the changes, whats the most important is that we get a game like the original EQ again. And if the sabotage works,"
Fascinating logic! So asking a company to increase transparency, communication. Asking a company to show viable ways in which they integrate feedback and provide more forms of communication. You consider that "sabotage"? Wow, interesting!
"Man. At this rate, I may just have to go back to checking only the newsletter each month"
Don't worry when you check the newsletter it will provide you some very important updates and changes, whether you asked for them or not!
I would say they don't need transparency, they don't need feedback from the community. I believe that's a false solution.
They need to set out a clear scope and move towards that. Like the original outline, "We're making X type of game with X features, do you like this? Throw us some support". People did, that scope wasn't accurate to what they could do, they need to reassess and get it within capabilities.
No amount of transparency will change that, if anything it will only muddy the waters. "A camel is what a horse would look like if it were made by a committee." That's what taking community feedback largely is. People don't know what they want until they have it. Consumers are not R&D people. We weigh what we like based on what we have or have had, not what's possible or what doesn't exist yet. Like with the work of Howard Moskowitz there isn't one solution that works, there is a cluster of solutions. You choose your market and meet the needs as best you can. There will never be a "perfect MMO", there is no such thing. Pantheon is meant to cater to a cluster of ideas that are antithetical to the others out there that are equally popular.
Listening to the audience will only serve in the long run to create more clusters of what is "wanted" and drive development into a multitude of directions and slowing down the completion of everything.
"They need to set out a clear scope and move towards that. Like the original outline, "We're making X type of game with X features, do you like this? Throw us some support". People did, that scope wasn't accurate to what they could do, they need to reassess and get it within capabilities. "
But they already set out a scope and didn't follow it. So your solution is for them to redo another scope? And you will have some kind of assurance of that from ..... what? I like your logic, let them keep setting out scopes and eventually one day they will follow it, is that your line of reasoning?
" "A camel is what a horse would look like if it were made by a committee." That's what taking community feedback largely is."
I agree, strange to ask a community that donated to the game to get what they wanted out of the game. They definitely wouldn't know what an old school MMORPG looks like would they? Certainly shouldn't get their feedback or guidance. Brilliant! Is your trust that low in the community that has helped support and fund the game to be made?
" We weigh what we like based on what we have or have had, not what's possible or what doesn't exist yet. "
That is fundamentally the act of creation, even if you are referencing Bloom's Taxonomy, that is the highest order creation. Of course humans are able to imagine and create, that is what makes humans and humans. That is assuming that humans have no capability to invent or consider the future which is fundamentally not true. Humans have been imagining and creating things for a long time. That is how all this was created in the first place. In fact the game itself was a kickstarter based on the idea of a future possible game. We can weigh the future, humans are not stuck in the past. How do you think the airplane was invented?
"Like with the work of Howard Moskowitz there isn't one solution that works, there is a cluster of solutions. You choose your market and meet the needs as best you can."
A cluster of solutions? Uh ok, how about we figure out a solution that works for the market. But now your logic is to reference the market, you mean the same market that doesn't know what it wants? That you were saying earlier had no idea of the difference between a horse and camel, but now you want to appeal that same market. Are you going to read the mind of the market? How about speaking with your market, think that might be a good idea? Oh no we can't do that because the market doesn't know what it wants, it is stuck in the past. But then how do you know the needs of the market? Do you read their mind? Or is the inventor so genius that they can know the future but the silly market can never understand it either. Nah. Please enlighten me on your pretzel logic, sounds fascinating!
"There will never be a "perfect MMO", there is no such thing. Pantheon is meant to cater to a cluster of ideas that are antithetical to the others out there that are equally popular."
Who is asking for a perfect MMO? Who are you responding to with that statement? Did I make a statement earlier asking for a perfect MMO? "Pantheon is meant to cater to a cluster of ideas that are antithetical to others that are equally popular" Does that statement have any reference to anything? Pantheon draws upon many different ideas, some popular nowadays. This was discussed early on regarding how corpse runs were handled. So no your statement is false.
"Listening to the audience will only serve in the long run to create more clusters of what is "wanted" and drive development into a multitude of directions and slowing down the completion of everything."
Uh no? How about asking them if they want to wait a long time for a game? Let me guess what the answer would be, probably no. Then you would ask how to speed up the game, and they would respond lets figure out ways to do so and brainstorm ideas for monetization. It would actually speed it up and help them focus. So no, community feedback would actually focus the game from ping ponging between different modes, graphics etc. etc. The feedback would help them speed up not slowdown.
Xerion said:"They need to set out a clear scope and move towards that. Like the original outline, "We're making X type of game with X features, do you like this? Throw us some support". People did, that scope wasn't accurate to what they could do, they need to reassess and get it within capabilities. "
But they already set out a scope and didn't follow it. So your solution is for them to redo another scope? And you will have some kind of assurance of that from ..... what? I like your logic, let them keep setting out scopes and eventually one day they will follow it, is that your line of reasoning?
Incorrect. They need to shut the project down if they can't meet the original scope. Or, 5 years ago correct the scope.
Xerion said:
" "A camel is what a horse would look like if it were made by a committee." That's what taking community feedback largely is."I agree, strange to ask a community that donated to the game to get what they wanted out of the game. They definitely wouldn't know what an old school MMORPG looks like would they? Certainly shouldn't get their feedback or guidance. Brilliant! Is your trust that low in the community that has helped support and fund the game to be made?
Funding something is different than creating. A community of knowledge doesn't mean it fits with the objective nor does it mean it's ubiquitous. Case in point, corpse runs. Some love them, some hate them. Who's correct? Well everyone has their experience and opinions but who's objectively accurate?
You can ask 10 people and get 10 different answers, but at the end of the day the developers have to make their own choice and at that point the discourse and feedback is moot.
Xerion said:
" We weigh what we like based on what we have or have had, not what's possible or what doesn't exist yet. "
That is fundamentally the act of creation, even if you are referencing Bloom's Taxonomy, that is the highest order creation. Of course humans are able to imagine and create, that is what makes humans and humans. That is assuming that humans have no capability to invent or consider the future which is fundamentally not true. Humans have been imagining and creating things for a long time. That is how all this was created in the first place. In fact the game itself was a kickstarter based on the idea of a future possible game. We can weigh the future, humans are not stuck in the past. How do you think the airplane was invented?
The airplane was invented because a small group of people were doing something that others would laugh at them for. Ergo, the market knows planes aren't possible, man wasn't meant to fly so we don't. Until someone figures it out. Someone has to have the ambition and drive to do it, the market won't tell you how to invent a plane. Only whether or not they'll purchase one you've invented.
Xerion said:"Like with the work of Howard Moskowitz there isn't one solution that works, there is a cluster of solutions. You choose your market and meet the needs as best you can."
A cluster of solutions? Uh ok, how about we figure out a solution that works for the market. But now your logic is to reference the market, you mean the same market that doesn't know what it wants? That you were saying earlier had no idea of the difference between a horse and camel, but now you want to appeal that same market. Are you going to read the mind of the market? How about speaking with your market, think that might be a good idea? Oh no we can't do that because the market doesn't know what it wants, it is stuck in the past. But then how do you know the needs of the market? Do you read their mind? Or is the inventor so genius that they can know the future but the silly market can never understand it either. Nah. Please enlighten me on your pretzel logic, sounds fascinating!
You're not understanding what you're reading.
Howard Moskowitz found out that 30 percent of the people that eat jarred sauces like Prego wanted a chunky sauce that didn't exist. The people creating Prego, Campbell's Soup Company THOUGHT that there would be a clear winner. That there was a specific sauce out there that could be made and please everyone or nearly everyone and take the market by storm. What Howard found was that people like a variety of sauces not one in particular, a plurality of great sauces. Coupled with the fact that no chunky sauce existed, the company was missing almost half the market with a product they could be selling for massive amounts of money.
The thing is, the market, the customers didn't know they wanted chunky because they were never offered it.
The community is making suggestions on what thin sauces Prego should make. Giving feedback for the game that's being made is the same in this result. The market doesn't know what it hasn't been offered. Offer something new and the market will tell you but you have to offer it in the first place. This is why people are worried about the art change, it looks more like Fortnite and WoW. It looks more like the traditional thin sauce that we've all had the last 15 years, instead of a bold new chunky sauce that would serve 30 percent of the market that is being ignored / forgotten about.
Xerion said:
"There will never be a "perfect MMO", there is no such thing. Pantheon is meant to cater to a cluster of ideas that are antithetical to the others out there that are equally popular."
Who is asking for a perfect MMO? Who are you responding to with that statement? Did I make a statement earlier asking for a perfect MMO? "Pantheon is meant to cater to a cluster of ideas that are antithetical to others that are equally popular" Does that statement have any reference to anything? Pantheon draws upon many different ideas, some popular nowadays. This was discussed early on regarding how corpse runs were handled. So no your statement is false.
Please read more carefully. The comment is an illustration of my point. Their current testing and production is about giving people the best experience they can right? With me so far? Good, there will never be zero bugs, zero problems, zero issues. They cannot create a game that encompasses all the sweet ideas that are thrown their way and the ones they come up with themselves. They have to settle on something and make that be the end all be all and make that come to reality. Otherwise they will be forever chasing graphics, systems, mechanics, classes, zone design etc. that works better, more pleasing, makes more people happier reaches a "Wider Audience".
Xerion said:
"Listening to the audience will only serve in the long run to create more clusters of what is "wanted" and drive development into a multitude of directions and slowing down the completion of everything."
Uh no? How about asking them if they want to wait a long time for a game? Let me guess what the answer would be, probably no. Then you would ask how to speed up the game, and they would respond lets figure out ways to do so and brainstorm ideas for monetization. It would actually speed it up and help them focus. So no, community feedback would actually focus the game from ping ponging between different modes, graphics etc. etc. The feedback would help them speed up not slowdown.
uhh yes? There's a reason why people who create don't want you seeing early creation. You don't want to see how the sausage is made just like you don't want to see early drafts of a great book or painting etc. My point is that the critiques are not as helpful as people like you may think. Just like more time and money isn't going to ultimately save the project when there is the lacking fundamental of a vision for said project. You can't paint based on someone's ongoing suggestions as you go. You have to have an idea and go for it and let the chips fall where they may.
