Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Pre-Alpha/Alpha period

    • 103 posts
    September 13, 2017 6:36 PM PDT

    First and foremost, don't get me wrong. This isn't one of those "WHENS PRE-ALPHA!" forums, I've given up on that. We'll find out when we do, I'm but I'm hoping we get word on it within the next few months about Pre-alpha. However, I'm more interested in how LONG the Pre-Alpha and Alpha will go on for. This might be a bit too much to ask for, but it'd be great to get a general idea, even if its only an estimate. Maybe a few months or so? If it's anything like a year them I'mma kms XD At least for Pre-alpha. I can enjoy the Alpha privlages <3 But do  you guys have a general idea on how long each will be? Or is it just however much progress is made?

    • VR Staff
    • 587 posts
    September 13, 2017 7:47 PM PDT

    All I can say is this right now:  I feel strongly that one of the reasons EQ was successful was that we had a nice, long beta.  With Pantheon we don't use the term 'beta' in the same way, however.  It's more specific.  With Pantheon I can say that Pre-alpha+Alpha+Beta will equal a nice, long period during which we will tune, take feedback, tweak, enhance what needs to be made better and yank anything that seemed like a great idea but when exposed to real players just doesn't pan out.


    This post was edited by Aradune at September 13, 2017 7:47 PM PDT
    • 323 posts
    September 13, 2017 8:28 PM PDT

    Aradune lives!  Thanks very much for the response.  Looking forward to the "nice, long" period of testing. 

    • 103 posts
    September 13, 2017 8:45 PM PDT

    I suppose that the wait continues then! Thanks for the update Aradune!

    • 189 posts
    September 15, 2017 6:06 AM PDT

    Yea, I'm okay if all phases take a year long TOTAL, but if it's a year long pre-alpha, I'm gonna die (of boredom).

    • 3016 posts
    September 15, 2017 6:19 AM PDT

    Boredom or no...whatever it takes Aradune,  I want this game to be the best it can be.   Onward!  :)

    • 1468 posts
    September 15, 2017 10:59 AM PDT

    CanadinaXegony said:

    Boredom or no...whatever it takes Aradune,  I want this game to be the best it can be.   Onward!  :)

    I agree with that. I want Pantheon to be a success so whatever is needed for that to happen I'm all for. Plus the longer the testing period the more time testers have to provide feedback that could make the game even better.

    • 1 posts
    September 15, 2017 2:33 PM PDT

    One thing not to do, and I beg you not to, is to follow Shroud of the Avatar's development schedule.

     

    Playing in an open 'pre-alpha' (or whatever they call it) for years with a small population and then have a 'technical release day'.  Nobody cares because the game has been in development for so long and the game peters out.  Players are looking at the shiny new game on the horizon.  A real release day, where lots of people flood in and community develops, is critical.


    This post was edited by Morreion at September 15, 2017 2:35 PM PDT
    • 184 posts
    September 15, 2017 2:41 PM PDT

    I'm not sure if it's in the FAQ, but I've seen Brad say more than once they want beta, specifically, to be a year long. Everything is obviously subject to change. It's going slowly right now, but late release is better than failed/early release; you only get one shot at first impressions in the MMO world. It was re-iterated (last stream) that enough testable content still needed to be created to make alpha of any use. Considering last stream was almost an entire 2 quarters ago, I would bet they are solely developing assets they know will net a return investment as per development costs (a lot money can get wasted devloping things that are often later scrapped) as opposed to mass spending just tostart alpha. Also keep in mind only series A funding has been completed. I'm not sure if MMOs follow the same protocol as the rest of the market does in business admin type stuff, but from a monetary perspective alone, development can only go so fast at this point. Being an independent game, I would assume more funding will still be needed (just trying to say they woudn't be in a hurry to start pre alpha if only series A is completed). No one can know any of this for sure though. Silver lining: more investment money and a litany of other possibilities are out there to catalyze development at any given time (aka things could potentially drastically speed up at any time. Brad and company have been around the block, so they're doing what they have to to make sure this game not only survives, but truly thrives and makes a statement in the MMO world for all players.

    • 287 posts
    September 16, 2017 8:58 AM PDT

    I believe i read somewhere on here the team wants 3 - 4 zones developed with adaquate content before rolling out pre alpha testing.  That makes sense. 

    • 11 posts
    September 16, 2017 10:48 AM PDT

    Morreion said:

    One thing not to do, and I beg you not to, is to follow Shroud of the Avatar's development schedule.

     

    Playing in an open 'pre-alpha' (or whatever they call it) for years with a small population and then have a 'technical release day'.  Nobody cares because the game has been in development for so long and the game peters out.  Players are looking at the shiny new game on the horizon.  A real release day, where lots of people flood in and community develops, is critical.

     

    What Morreion says here is 1000% true and very important.  So many games lately are made available in an "alpha" or "beta" state, stay in that state for YEARS, and then the game is completely off the radar because most people that were interested saw it or tried it and moved on because it wasn't a complete game and they judged it as one despite all the disclaimers, and it seemed like a real release was never on the horizon.

    I really want Pantheon to succeed, and as much as this would piss off a lot of people, I really think the alpha/beta periods need to be limited to only the number of players required to make the testing successful.  No open alpha for the masses, and no open beta until the very last period before release (for load testing/server capacity schemes etc.)

    I am so looking forward to this game, it's crazy, and I'm hoping for the best start possible.

     

    • 34 posts
    September 16, 2017 12:53 PM PDT

    I'm not one to grind through one average MMO after another in an endless cycle, I want something really good I can truly invest my time into. I expect to be playing Pantheon for many years, so even if it takes them until 2020 to get a proper release ready, I can live with that. It's worth the wait.

    brizlyn said:

    I really want Pantheon to succeed, and as much as this would piss off a lot of people, I really think the alpha/beta periods need to be limited to only the number of players required to make the testing successful.  No open alpha for the masses, and no open beta until the very last period before release (for load testing/server capacity schemes etc.)

    Unless something has changed it's always been my understanding that alpha and beta are going to be closed testing periods and limited primarily to people who have selected a pledge that includes that access. And they are meant for more serious testing and feedback, not just an "early access" thing.

     

    • 56 posts
    September 16, 2017 1:44 PM PDT

    OtakuMegane said:

    Unless something has changed it's always been my understanding that alpha and beta are going to be closed testing periods and limited primarily to people who have selected a pledge that includes that access. And they are meant for more serious testing and feedback, not just an "early access" thing.

    This is what I am worried about come Pre-Alpha and Alpha (not so much in Beta). There can be issues with letting people buy into a game for pre-release access because there are going to be people that are going to treat this like a completed game and they may go off when something doesn't go their way or if it doesn't work correctly, or there isn't enough content to explore. That being said, I believe there is an NDA for both Alpha tests (maybe the Beta) that should help keep communication internal. Based off what I have experienced from monitoring these forums for the past few years is that for the most part the people are mature. Additionally, it seems like the VR team is putting significant effort to make sure that the critical systems are in the game and that there is enough content for these players to experience. (Entire continent of King's Reach and 40 levels.) Overall I am happy with how VR is handling this games development and cannot wait until I can play / help come Alpha.

     


    This post was edited by Vaad at September 16, 2017 1:46 PM PDT
    • 133 posts
    September 16, 2017 8:34 PM PDT
    It is so damn refreshing to see a game not being rushed out. Thank you for this.
    • 34 posts
    September 16, 2017 8:44 PM PDT

    Vaad said:

    This is what I am worried about come Pre-Alpha and Alpha (not so much in Beta). There can be issues with letting people buy into a game for pre-release access because there are going to be people that are going to treat this like a completed game and they may go off when something doesn't go their way or if it doesn't work correctly, or there isn't enough content to explore. That being said, I believe there is an NDA for both Alpha tests (maybe the Beta) that should help keep communication internal. Based off what I have experienced from monitoring these forums for the past few years is that for the most part the people are mature.

    Getting into Pantheon's testing phases isn't the usual $10-$20 early access on Steam. The lowest tier pledge giving Alpha access for Pantheon is $250 which is a very high buy-in for a relatively small, closed testing phase of a game in early development. Beta is currently a $100 minimum pledge. Not that many will go for Beta much less Alpha unless they were serious about helping and want to see the game succeed.

    And I have little concern about the community thus far. Everyone tends to be on the mature side. Lots of passion and the many inevitable arguments of course but everyone is here because they see something promising and want it to turn out well.


    This post was edited by OtakuMegane at September 16, 2017 8:55 PM PDT
    • 56 posts
    September 16, 2017 9:45 PM PDT

    OtakuMegane said:

    Getting into Pantheon's testing phases isn't the usual $10-$20 early access on Steam. The lowest tier pledge giving Alpha access for Pantheon is $250 which is a very high buy-in for a relatively small, closed testing phase of a game in early development. Beta is currently a $100 minimum pledge.

    Great point!

     


    This post was edited by Vaad at September 16, 2017 9:46 PM PDT
    • 220 posts
    September 17, 2017 12:05 AM PDT

    Aradune said:

    All I can say is this right now:  I feel strongly that one of the reasons EQ was successful was that we had a nice, long beta.  With Pantheon we don't use the term 'beta' in the same way, however.  It's more specific.  With Pantheon I can say that Pre-alpha+Alpha+Beta will equal a nice, long period during which we will tune, take feedback, tweak, enhance what needs to be made better and yank anything that seemed like a great idea but when exposed to real players just doesn't pan out.

    I wonder how you feel about what makes a real player that paid for the privilege to give feedback, more important than other real players, that don't.  And I wonder what your views are on the echo chamber of "the privileged" that has risen up to engulf the crowd-sourced development process on so many other projects that have managed to go absolutely nowhere, even when those funding campaigns are fruitful.

    I'm still on the fence myself.  On one hand you might expect a higher level of care and thought to go into the process of investing in a game in order to offer constructive and meaningful feedback.  On the other, you might expect a sense of ownership and a compulsion to control the conversation moving forward, effectively blocking feedback from anyone not paying a premium rate.  Which is more often what can be found when exploring the development forums of many of these projects.

    I try to be mindful of the defense mechanisms that naturally arise when a single person or small group of people perceives they have gained power over others, but I wonder how mindful you are about defeating echo chambers as they develop and drawing on valuable feedback that maybe those who have paid more, feel they have the right to silence and block out?  It seems to me the most powerful and creative minds rarely come with a strong enough sense of purpose, to be expected to compete in a contest of volume.

     


    This post was edited by ZennExile at September 17, 2017 12:10 AM PDT
    • 1095 posts
    September 17, 2017 1:24 PM PDT

    Aradune said:

    All I can say is this right now:  I feel strongly that one of the reasons EQ was successful was that we had a nice, long beta.  With Pantheon we don't use the term 'beta' in the same way, however.  It's more specific.  With Pantheon I can say that Pre-alpha+Alpha+Beta will equal a nice, long period during which we will tune, take feedback, tweak, enhance what needs to be made better and yank anything that seemed like a great idea but when exposed to real players just doesn't pan out.

    2018 the year of testing :)

    • 159 posts
    September 18, 2017 6:32 PM PDT
    Just so long as pre-alpha/alpha don't end up being taken as three to ten vocal loudmouths spewing their specific wants (or personal demands because their own mind is made upon what the game has to be) over and over drowning out most other opinions, much like this forum devolves into quite often on topics, then all is good. Forum attendance doesn't mean a more valid opinion, nor does the level you could afford to dump into your pledge.
    • 220 posts
    September 18, 2017 6:42 PM PDT

    Xilshale said: Just so long as pre-alpha/alpha don't end up being taken as three to ten vocal loudmouths spewing their specific wants (or personal demands because their own mind is made upon what the game has to be) over and over drowning out most other opinions, much like this forum devolves into quite often on topics, then all is good. Forum attendance doesn't mean a more valid opinion, nor does the level you could afford to dump into your pledge.

    This is not an uncommon consern.  Not in this community, or any other surrounding similar projects over the last 5 years.  Hopefully we can have an open conversation about this soon.  The defense mechanisms and echo chambers that we create never go away.  So it is an ongoing issue that always needs to be revisited, from all angles.  We are all guilty of this from time to time.

    It is also an extremely hard issue to talk about constructively.  However, defense mechanisms can be defeated by dialogue.  And I am sure they will be.  Ben does his best to stay on top of it here, but the whole community has a responsibility to do their own part, filter their own bias, and attempt to understand the perspective of others.


    This post was edited by ZennExile at September 18, 2017 6:45 PM PDT
    • 34 posts
    September 18, 2017 6:56 PM PDT

    ZennExile said:

    I wonder how you feel about what makes a real player that paid for the privilege to give feedback, more important than other real players, that don't.   

    I'm pretty sure he was referring to real players, as in players playing to enjoy the game post-launch, as opposed to testers 'playing' the game specifically to test. They can be very different mindsets, and sometimes 'real players' will find themselves in scenarios that the 'test players' didn't consider or encounter. Sometimes this is just due to volume of people approaching things differently, sometimes it's time-based or pure coincidence.

    • 220 posts
    September 18, 2017 7:29 PM PDT

    Khabarakh said:

    ZennExile said:

    I wonder how you feel about what makes a real player that paid for the privilege to give feedback, more important than other real players, that don't.   

    I'm pretty sure he was referring to real players, as in players playing to enjoy the game post-launch, as opposed to testers 'playing' the game specifically to test. They can be very different mindsets, and sometimes 'real players' will find themselves in scenarios that the 'test players' didn't consider or encounter. Sometimes this is just due to volume of people approaching things differently, sometimes it's time-based or pure coincidence.

    Yeah that was meant to be a striking question to start a dialogue, not really the whole focus.  I usually would just use a Pie analogy...

    • 15 posts
    September 18, 2017 8:58 PM PDT

    ZennExile said:

    Aradune said:

    With Pantheon I can say that Pre-alpha+Alpha+Beta will equal a nice, long period during which we will tune, take feedback, tweak, enhance what needs to be made better and yank anything that seemed like a great idea but when exposed to real players just doesn't pan out.

    I wonder how you feel about what makes a real player that paid for the privilege to give feedback, more important than other real players, that don't. 

     

     

    I could be wrong, but it seems to me the term "real players" from Aradune just meant people in general. There didn't seem to be any intent there to suggest that people whom didn't pay for early access are any less important. The fact is that feedback has to start somewhere and the first people in get to give the first feedback.

    Other replies in this thread seem to think that just because people have earlier access or that they are that more vocal will have more sway in what gets decided. I suppose that may be true but I would like to think that this experienced development team has a good feel for what is meaningful feedback.

    Also, others have pointed out how expensive the pledges are currently to have this vaunted priviledge to express yourself in a timely manner. The pledge that I bought awhile ago now costs quite a bit more. That means a lot of the people currently with early access didn't have to pay a fortune for this priviledge when they purchased it. So the average player will be quite well represented during the "Pre-alpha+Alpha+Beta" stage I'm sure.


    This post was edited by Syrenol at September 18, 2017 9:01 PM PDT
    • 201 posts
    September 19, 2017 6:01 AM PDT

    Vaad said:

    OtakuMegane said:

    Unless something has changed it's always been my understanding that alpha and beta are going to be closed testing periods and limited primarily to people who have selected a pledge that includes that access. And they are meant for more serious testing and feedback, not just an "early access" thing.

    This is what I am worried about come Pre-Alpha and Alpha (not so much in Beta). There can be issues with letting people buy into a game for pre-release access because there are going to be people that are going to treat this like a completed game and they may go off when something doesn't go their way or if it doesn't work correctly, or there isn't enough content to explore. That being said, I believe there is an NDA for both Alpha tests (maybe the Beta) that should help keep communication internal. Based off what I have experienced from monitoring these forums for the past few years is that for the most part the people are mature. Additionally, it seems like the VR team is putting significant effort to make sure that the critical systems are in the game and that there is enough content for these players to experience. (Entire continent of King's Reach and 40 levels.) Overall I am happy with how VR is handling this games development and cannot wait until I can play / help come Alpha.

     

     

    I think the situation here is quite the opposite.  Normally if this was a traditional alpha/beta,  you'd get random people playing with no real goal due to it just being a free game they can play.  With the pledges, you weed out all the players who are just in it for a free game or hype.  Instead you have people who are generally interested in playing and show that they are interested in the game by donating money to Pantheon's development.

    • 220 posts
    September 19, 2017 7:12 AM PDT

    Rivacom said:

    Vaad said:

    OtakuMegane said:

    Unless something has changed it's always been my understanding that alpha and beta are going to be closed testing periods and limited primarily to people who have selected a pledge that includes that access. And they are meant for more serious testing and feedback, not just an "early access" thing.

    This is what I am worried about come Pre-Alpha and Alpha (not so much in Beta). There can be issues with letting people buy into a game for pre-release access because there are going to be people that are going to treat this like a completed game and they may go off when something doesn't go their way or if it doesn't work correctly, or there isn't enough content to explore. That being said, I believe there is an NDA for both Alpha tests (maybe the Beta) that should help keep communication internal. Based off what I have experienced from monitoring these forums for the past few years is that for the most part the people are mature. Additionally, it seems like the VR team is putting significant effort to make sure that the critical systems are in the game and that there is enough content for these players to experience. (Entire continent of King's Reach and 40 levels.) Overall I am happy with how VR is handling this games development and cannot wait until I can play / help come Alpha.

     

     

    I think the situation here is quite the opposite.  Normally if this was a traditional alpha/beta,  you'd get random people playing with no real goal due to it just being a free game they can play.  With the pledges, you weed out all the players who are just in it for a free game or hype.  Instead you have people who are generally interested in playing and show that they are interested in the game by donating money to Pantheon's development.

    You also, however, invite the attention of those who are attempting to purchase inside information, and access, which they can use later as a means of advancing personal gains.  Like financial gains.  Which is something I have seen brought up everywhere from obscure live streams, to mainstream discussion boards.  People talk quite a bit about the financial benefits of being part of the early development process in an upcoming project.  Enough to suspect there is more to it than simply, conjecture.