How many years after live launch does Pantheon have to be alive and kicking with a thriving community for it to be considered a success in your view ?
For me a good ten years would be nice, or at least until Brad and friends make a follow up game. With the way things have been going the past 15 years, only games he has had a hand in are the games I enjoy playing. Right now I am gameless. Sad I know.
Kazingathi said:
Imma pick the 3-5 years cause if it dies by then it wasn't meant to be but hoping for indefinately and Brad and Team can just work on this forever.
That would be ideal in my world too, if every so many years they could update the graphics while still adding new content and continually raising the level cap and adding aas while taking steps to assure old content doesn't become totally irrelevant .
Tricky question, I don't think success is necessarily determined by longevity but rather its success would determine its longevity. What I mean by that is you could consider it a success merely by launching, and proving that niche MMO's are the way of the future. Also if another game were to come along and take the focus off pantheon, it doesn't make it any less successful. Vanguard would be a prime example of that, I myself left to checkout other games, but came back for another large stint.
I think what determines success, and in turn longevity is content. Challenging, engaging, regularly added content to a great game with good mechanics. Definitely this is what's missing in modern MMO's, either the game has good content updates, but the mechanics are just not engaging and it doesn't feel challenging or the game just suffers from any new content and people get bored.
I think of games like Rift, nice concept with reasonable content updates, but mechanics were not that interesting or overly challenging and in turn engagement faded
AoC on the other hand is a great concept, great combat mechanics with challenging content, but let down by the lack of regular new content which in turn makes the world feel to confined and engagement fades. TSW is another great concept but fails largely with engagement due to combat and that confined feeling. Funcom could do with a more seamless world approach and more and diverse content, crafting sux :)
Vanguard too was a great concept with great mechanics was engaging and challenging, sure it had its problems but suffered the most from lack of content updates.
I think they were all successes in their own right and made us notice what it was we did like about MMO's. To me if the world feels large enough to be believable/ explorable (Vanguard) has interesting and challenging mechanics (AoC/ Vanguard) has diversity and complexity (Vanguard crafting/ diplo) and has regular content updates (can include seasonal quests/ world events), then it will be a success to me. I would hope to play it for 5-10 years, although technology updates/ refreshing the game engine etc would like help there
I think 5 - 10. Even the MMO's that are deemed "failures" to some extent seem to be lasting that long.
I think though - that this MMO will have certain cards stacked against it. Specifically, all of those folks who showed up pre-Vanguard... the same folks who showed up in the Pantheon Kickstarter - folks who want to be able to say (all too self importantly): "SEE, IT'S A FAILURE - JUST LIKE I SAID IT WOULD BE!" - Those folks will show up at some point pre-launch, and their voices will be heard... and their voices will amount to negative press for the game. They will naysay on every non-official forum out there, and perhaps on public (or even paid) sections of these forums... and we, as a community will react - and the whole thing will get ugly.
They'll talk about their viewpoint on Brad's history, on old school games not being viable any more, etc...
Or at least I think this will happen (based on past occurrences) - I hope I'm wrong.
But if I'm right, that WILL artificially raise the bar for Pantheon. It won't just have to last - it will have to last longer, with a large enough play base to drown out those folks who want to do their grandstanding.
I think longevity also determined by how involved the developer is. Take EVE for example. Not a huge game, but very successful, maybe because the players feel that CCP is really supportive of the game and continuing to develop it. Other games you feel like the company creates the game, then turns its focus immediately to the next project, leaving the last game at the side. I guess many players don't like that feeling. They want the developer to stand behind the project.
Well, EVE does something a bit different too, right? I don't follow EVE too closely - but I believe they fly some representation of players in every year to discuss the game, etc...
On top of that, there is a player driven government in EVE.
Players (I suspect) feel that EVE is "theirs" - where in most MMO's there often seems to be a general sense of conflict between players and developers. Classic example:
1) Dev announces change to a class
2) Group of posters proclaim the change a game destroying, stupid nerf
3) Players declare they are going to quit
4) Change goes in
5) Silence ensues
6) Loop back to #1, Rinse, repeat.. note that the people in #3 are often the EXACT same people "quitting" every game change they don't like
So it's not that devs vanish from MMO's - it's that some segment of players declare the devs incompetent idiots (and I won't go into what it must say about a person who will play a game - and be devoted enough to it to forum post - that they believe was designed and developed by stupid people) - and that naysaying ALWAYS gets followed by mindless pile on. If 10 people post that the dev is an idiot, at least a couple more will buy into it and agree for example.
That's usually what plagues MMO's - not apathetic devs.
every gaming company has their own goals as to how much they hope to achieve profit wise over the cost of making the actual game, so its hard to say every game is different, but in the business world if something lasts 3 - 5 years then usually it makes a profit by then so it is basically a success, maybe not as big of a success as the company wanted but it still a success
Jason said:
How many years after live launch does Pantheon have to be alive and kicking with a thriving community for it to be considered a success in your view ?
For me a good ten years would be nice, or at least until Brad and friends make a follow up game. With the way things have been going the past 15 years, only games he has had a hand in are the games I enjoy playing. Right now I am gameless. Sad I know.
It still blows my mind that EQ has been running (and successful and profitable) since 1999. VG ran from 2007 until last year? It was far less successful commercially, but that's still a long time for a game to remain up and running.
How do I feel about Pantheon? Well, of course, we want it to run a long time. I think the key is releasing expansions with both new content and new features. Would I want it to shut down at some point, and then make another MMO to replace it as a sequel or something different? Actually, no, not if by continuing to expand the game we were able to refresh old content, add new content and features, and keep the game fresh. Easier said than done, but I'd rather evolve Pantheon into Pantheon 2 over time than have the first game shut down and then launch a sequel.
I have an odd analogy (most of you know I'm a motocross fan), but here goes:
The bike a pro racer starts out riding at the beginning of the season... not everybody knows, but over the entire season, just about every part, if not *every* part, is replaced. That means, the bike the pro is riding his last race of the season isn't at all the same bike he started with, yet he always rode the same bike.
I guess that's how my dream of an MMO would go down... the game wouldn't just expand with content and features, but older zones would be revamped, features updated or replaced, new content added... such that, eventually, the game would technically be Pantheon 2.
Easier said than done? Absolutely, but I'm pretty idealistic and a sucker for taking on difficult goals :)
I am not sure that time is good metrics of success. Surely not the single one.
MMOs like every product have a life curve measuring how many consumers were buying/using the product in time.
This curve looks like an inverted asymmetrical U.
First phase is the growth which, in the case of MMOs, is extremely fast and steep.
Second phase is the maturity. There is no growth anymore but a more or less wide maximum.
Third phase is the decline, the numbers decrease and tend to 0.
No product can escape this law and MMOs not more than any other product.
So what measures the "success" ?
The overall length of the cycle from birth to death (that's what your question is based on) ?
The value of the maximum achieved (LoL champion here) ?
The length of the maturity plateau (here WoW shines) ?
The integral of the curve which measures how many people used the product during its life cycle ?
The total consumer satisfaction during the time they used the product (here is probably EQ quite high) ?
All 5 or some weighted average of them ?
I tend to think it is mainly the fourth point because it is also correlated to the Financial results.
But for Pantheon, I would consider that it will be a success if it demonstrates during the first year that there exists a significant "niche" player basis that really WANTS to play an MMO which is demanding, relatively difficult and privileges team play to immediate individual satisfaction.
To put a number on it, if 50 000 play it after 1 year, it is a success. If 100 000 play then it is an unexpected success.
If this should not happen then it would mean that we all here belong to a dinosaur dying out race which has no more its place in the "modern" MMO world.
Btw one shouldn't neglect the technological revolutions - I believe that the future of MMOs belongs to AI and dynamical worlds (e.g worlds where the environment itself is dynamically changing - trees grow, towns fall to ruins, a real history unforeseen by the developpers gradually takes place, NPCs age and die, quests are no more rigidely scripted etc.).
There doesn't exist the hardware and software to do that yet but it will surely happen some day. Even if we are all 6 feet under by then :)
Aradune said:
I guess that's how my dream of an MMO would go down... the game wouldn't just expand with content and features, but older zones would be revamped, features updated or replaced, new content added... such that, eventually, the game would technically be Pantheon 2.
Easier said than done? Absolutely, but I'm pretty idealistic and a sucker for taking on difficult goals :)
I like that analogy and to me that would be perfect if you guys can pull it off, a game that never dies, only evolves but never forgets its roots.
Jason said:
How many years after live launch does Pantheon have to be alive and kicking with a thriving community for it to be considered a success in your view ?
For me a good ten years would be nice, or at least until Brad and friends make a follow up game. With the way things have been going the past 15 years, only games he has had a hand in are the games I enjoy playing. Right now I am gameless. Sad I know.
That depends on your community as well as other things. Some games I have played in the recent past, have too much trolling in general chat, bad behaviours (stalking...kill stealing, rudeness) and nobody around monitoring those that just can't play nice.
It shouldn't have to be that we are babysat, but on the other hand, it shouldn't have to be that we HAVE to put up with someone's boorish behaviour, just because he can.
Ignore is my favorite tool used in cases like that. I tend to be unforgiving. If you were so obnoxious you landed on my ignore list...you can stay there. Don't care to know you. :) I play online games for fun, I pay for that. That's what I want.
Also, for longevity, of course you're going to need content upgrades (expansions) hopefully the mistake won't be made that ...all that hard earned armor that you worked for the month previous, is made entirely obsolete and a wasted effort, a disappointment, by the new expansion. I hear all the time about expansions that do that, and its a way to turn your loyal community off.
CanadinaXegony said:
Also, for longevity, of course you're going to need content upgrades (expansions) hopefully the mistake won't be made that ...all that hard earned armor that you worked for the month previous, is made entirely obsolete and a wasted effort, a disappointment, by the new expansion. I hear all the time about expansions that do that, and its a way to turn your loyal community off.
I agree 100% there. So often I have spent forever getting the best raid or quested armor only to have an expansion come out and offer *better* armor that can be gotten EASILY but only if you purchase the new expansion.
Without bashing WoW - because I think that WoW is actually an amazingly good game for the people it is aimed at (people more casual than me) - One of the things I truly HATED about WoW was the "Gear reset" every expansion. Drove me NUTS - and actually had what I think is a negative impact for an MMO...
It made me NOT want to try for that "little bit better" item - if I was already succeeding with the "little bit worse" item I was using. What was the point? ESPECIALLY when you were looking at that item at the same time they were beginning to announce an expansion... because then you knew that before you topped the new max level, you'd be wearing a green / blue combination that was better than your very best purple.
SO I one-billion-percent agree... Do NOT "gear reset" with expansions. It's horrid. (and that's doing a disservice to the word horrid).
Wandidar said:
Without bashing WoW - because I think that WoW is actually an amazingly good game for the people it is aimed at (people more casual than me) - One of the things I truly HATED about WoW was the "Gear reset" every expansion. Drove me NUTS - and actually had what I think is a negative impact for an MMO...
It made me NOT want to try for that "little bit better" item - if I was already succeeding with the "little bit worse" item I was using. What was the point? ESPECIALLY when you were looking at that item at the same time they were beginning to announce an expansion... because then you knew that before you topped the new max level, you'd be wearing a green / blue combination that was better than your very best purple.
SO I one-billion-percent agree... Do NOT "gear reset" with expansions. It's horrid. (and that's doing a disservice to the word horrid).
It also cheapens the items value and the effort put into getting it in the first place, I think Pantheon will bring back that feeling of value in it's items and gear, it's something that has been missing for a long time in my opinion.
one of the things your all losing sight of and I cant be positive of this but there are people better suited to answer this, I believe that SOE has a legal contract to continue pumping out expansions for everquest 1 with the orginal people that SOE bought the Everquest Franchise from, I may be incorrect on this matter but I am sure there are people who can answer this, but in all honestly I really think thats the main reason Everquest is still alive at this point
SOE never bought the EQ franchise from anyone
Verant / 989 studios were all owned by Sony
Everquest started out as a Sony property and has remained so since
In fact one of the cities the game launched with was Qeynos...SONY EQ backwards
Brad McQuaid...the owner of VRI and developer of Pantheon was one of the original creators of Everquest (along with others such as Bill Trost)
everquest is still alive because even after what 16 years its still financially profitable, if it wasnt I dont think old man Smed would hesitate to pull the switch.
Initial box sales recoup development + generate initial profit AND more than 50% of the initial box sales are still subscribed one year later.
No games outside of Lineage and WoW can make that boast since 2004.
That's how spectacularly most MMOs fail anymore. The game loses money out of the gate and is a ghost town less than 6 months after release.
I think the reason most games these days are ghost towns (or at least have mass subscription drops) after 6 months is more or less something I've experienced with a few of the new MMO's.
They typically follow (to a greater or lesser extent) the same design pattern as WoW. It's a safe bet that a lot of people trying "NEW MMO X" are people who want something new - and so they leave WoW to try it... then they play it through and think "Hmm... it's a lot like WoW. I might as well go back and play WoW - where I'm already established."
That happened to me a couple times after I originally left EQ for EQII and WoW.
I think that this MMO being "NOT WoW" along with very modest player expectations (stated 30k) - will make this venture successful. I would expect, as in any new MMO - more than 30k will try it out. I certainly hope more than 30k stay - but even if they don't... I like that the devs are thinking modest, rather than shooting for a next failed WoW killer.
Sevens said:
everquest is still alive because even after what 16 years its still financially profitable, if it wasnt I dont think old man Smed would hesitate to pull the switch.
EQ1 still has 18 non-test servers, half of which are medium population right now, during the US workday.
Standard population in PoK on my low population server on any given night is about 75-100. Maybe not the 2000-2001 EC tunnel glory days, but EQ1 is still hosting more players and higher populations than any other game in SOE's stable.
16 years later.
Jason said:
How many years after live launch does Pantheon have to be alive and kicking with a thriving community for it to be considered a success in your view ?
For me a good ten years would be nice, or at least until Brad and friends make a follow up game. With the way things have been going the past 15 years, only games he has had a hand in are the games I enjoy playing. Right now I am gameless. Sad I know.
I have a different idea how Pantheon's direction might go. That since games are becoming modular, and technology is moving fast. That the cycle of said game doesn't matter, if Project 2 allows for transfer of characters. A better, more learned world than previous, but ongoing saga from the previous. Just as long as the support and dedication to your character is there from the developer's, your character's life is endless.
Hieromonk said:
I have a different idea how Pantheon's direction might go. That since games are becoming modular, and technology is moving fast. That the cycle of said game doesn't matter, if Project 2 allows for transfer of characters. A better, more learned world than previous, but ongoing saga from the previous. Just as long as the support and dedication to your character is there from the developer's, your character's life is endless.
I would say most players try to manual accommodate the continuance anyway by playing the same class/ race and name etc, but having your original character be able to carry over with gear and stats would be long overdue :) It would be like a mega expansion with new engine possibilities, possibly just letting you re tweak appearance on import.
Aradune said:I guess that's how my dream of an MMO would go down... the game wouldn't just expand with content and features, but older zones would be revamped, features updated or replaced, new content added... such that, eventually, the game would technically be Pantheon 2.
Easier said than done? Absolutely, but I'm pretty idealistic and a sucker for taking on difficult goals :)
I would love to see this happen and I am a sucker for a challenge as well, but one of the reasons I finally left EQ outside of being gifted characters was the out of hand itemization. Once I was at 100k+ hps and 10k+ AC, stats/items etc. had no meaning to me anymore.
"If" a successor were to be pulled off as an extension of the original game, especially with Pantheon's lore, I would think it would have to be a second collision which caused everything to timewarp or return to zero instead of increasing itemization. However, with the reward to previous Pantheon 1 players of innate (meaningful) character bonuses contigent on previous player character's achievements/experience etc.. Although, another difficult task would be how to make those bonuses meaningful without making them dealbreaking for new players who tried "Pantheon 2" but never played Pantheon.
Wandidar said:
I think the reason most games these days are ghost towns (or at least have mass subscription drops) after 6 months is more or less something I've experienced with a few of the new MMO's.
They typically follow (to a greater or lesser extent) the same design pattern as WoW. It's a safe bet that a lot of people trying "NEW MMO X" are people who want something new - and so they leave WoW to try it... then they play it through and think "Hmm... it's a lot like WoW. I might as well go back and play WoW - where I'm already established."
That happened to me a couple times after I originally left EQ for EQII and WoW.
I think that this MMO being "NOT WoW" along with very modest player expectations (stated 30k) - will make this venture successful. I would expect, as in any new MMO - more than 30k will try it out. I certainly hope more than 30k stay - but even if they don't... I like that the devs are thinking modest, rather than shooting for a next failed WoW killer.
I've been watching all these "so-called" Wow killers come out and fade away...EA I think...still tries, SOE tried with EQII...
What I've been saying for some years now, is: we need to have a developer brave enough to toss that aside...YOU KNOW you aren't going to beat the behemoth that is Wow. Only Wow will beat Wow, they fluked out with their particular brand, and have remained a best seller even in their supposed "waning years". (still millions being served, nevertheless)
Be unique, be different..be your own brand.
I think there are enough of us gamers out there, that are fed up with the "walk two steps, reach the next quest giver, get a pat on the head and a cookie, ya done good!" scenario. Games like that LITERALLY put me to sleep.
Join the game and get a fully capped character?? Really now....and what part of that was fun or challenging for me?? Why would I want to play your game when all that fun was taken away?
Reminds me of paying power levellers to level you to cap. Here's that scenario: Buy boxed or digital download version of game, pay monthly subscription, pay power leveller to play your game for you.
Why did I do this? Where did I participate? This does not compute.
Anyways, I am here and I have donated to the cause and the project, because I believe that McQuaid will give us the game we want. There's been a drought... and we are very thirsty.
The ball is in your court Aradune. :)