SoWplz said: A revamp, or face lift may be a bit extreme.. Would be strange to just see what we always know vanish and change. Like what they did to Freeport. Over night the whole city moved?? Think I recall Chris talking about there will be areas oc the map that will not be accessible, and may be used for future expac. That's the best way to do it. I do not want to see a prymid pop up in the middle of South To over night... But a sand storm blew through and reveled access to underground tomb. Travlers, tomb robbers, historians all showed up, you could re make the whole zone with many factions, new dungeon, quest, etc etc.
I agree that having a major change overnight could be bad. One way to make it more interesting would be to make it part of a world event. In EQ2 when they added the wizard spires in you didn't just log in one day and there they were. It was a server wide quest that had many people crafting and adding materials to a group project. Each server got their spires at different timers depending on participation.
That won't work for everything but in some cases maybe doing something along those lines would at least make the current community feel like they are invested in or at least particiapting in the change being done.
Sabot said:SoWplz said: A revamp, or face lift may be a bit extreme.. Would be strange to just see what we always know vanish and change. Like what they did to Freeport. Over night the whole city moved?? Think I recall Chris talking about there will be areas oc the map that will not be accessible, and may be used for future expac. That's the best way to do it. I do not want to see a prymid pop up in the middle of South To over night... But a sand storm blew through and reveled access to underground tomb. Travlers, tomb robbers, historians all showed up, you could re make the whole zone with many factions, new dungeon, quest, etc etc.
I agree that having a major change overnight could be bad. One way to make it more interesting would be to make it part of a world event. In EQ2 when they added the wizard spires in you didn't just log in one day and there they were. It was a server wide quest that had many people crafting and adding materials to a group project. Each server got their spires at different timers depending on participation.
That won't work for everything but in some cases maybe doing something along those lines would at least make the current community feel like they are invested in or at least particiapting in the change being done.
I remember building the griffon towers. This was one of the best times/events I've played in a game.
I think 1yr to15mos is a good cycle for expansions or added content.
I would prefer if there was little discounting or packaging of the expansions as the years go by; by that I mean if Pantheon has been out for 3 years and there is the core game plus 2 expansions and I decide to play (having heard some feedback form friends or on-line) I would be ok with paying a cost slightly discounted to 10-15% for all three, if I buy them all at once.
This also answers the length of time for expansions since if I get the game 3 years in, there will still be people around hopefully my level or at levels I can get to, to group with. Likewise if I was in from day 1 of Pantheon release, the length of time between expansions allows me to do made-up/sandbox-y fun stuff like go after that silly clicky, or take up craftiing, or work on faction with a strange NPC race just because.
I also really like the +5 levels and expanded stuff one year, and then new land/continent next year idea that Nephele had.
Creating new content is an important part of maintaining a game and keeping it fresh for the player base. While I do not want to see an expansion every other month, it is important to give the players new challenges, areas to explore, balancing, and a gear reset. All of these things require time and money by the designers. Having expansions at least every year ensures that the player base is happy with fresh concepts and the company will survive with the revenue required to maintain a top-notch staff.
So, I will throw my opinion into the mix...
I think that there should be two kinds of expansions. Expansion type one is for re-vamping and/or re-imagining existing areas, which I don't consider a true expansion. Maybe opening up some "mini-content". Like a new encounter here aand there. This makes the existing world feel a bit more alive and dynamic. Expansion type two is for adding large new areas, such as a new continent or what have you. This, I consider to be a true expansion.
I have no problem seing "expansion typee one" more than once a year. Maybe, depending on the size, one to four a year. Again, please keep in mind that this is NOT a true expansion, but more changes to the existing world to make it feel more dynamic and alive.
"Expansion type two", the actual expansions, I would like to see one come out every one to two years.
Before people complain about "splitting resources", at some point in the past VR discussed the fact that they plan on having two dev teams. One dev teeam is for existing content, which would work well with "expnasion type one" and one dev team for "expansions", which I envision as the "expansion type two" team. Their "two-team" approach may change over time however, just like any team based approach does.
Thoughts?
I'm fine with expansions on two spectrum in alternation, however to answer to Lonexile, while I agree (and VR team will too) that content is King, I am against gear reset solutions. I found EQ1's gear was the best and only done right with gear from every expansion beeing relevant as some easier pieces appeared later, but not for every slot and while recommanded level appeared making some pieces relatively average at low levels.
I found that it was brillant that all the previous pop content still had many uses for gearing young characters and help them progress further, and any gear reset is just a way to make older content completely wasted.
Kiera said: 12-18 months Wow always does every 2 years and players always leave 6 months before the next expansion. Warlords taught gaming companies that waiting too long between updates really cost millions of players.
People quit during WoD because it was a terrible expansion. Not because it took to long to finish.
shaolinmaster said:Hey everyone,
I would like to get some feedback on what you guys think an appropriate amount of time between expansion releases is.
I played Everquest from 2000-2004. During that time 7 expansions released for the game. I think that this rate is much too high. I admit I am ignorant to if this was a result of the engine/builds at the time to not be able to implement content patches or if it was just to make more money.
I played WoW from 2004-2012. During that time 3 expansions were released. I think that this is more of the way to go with expansions. Instead of continuing to release expansions at a cyclic rate (2 a year) like Everquest was doing I find it much more reasonable to do an expansion every 2ish years with multiple content patches that release new dungeons to explore, new raid bosses to take down, and balance changes along the way. Despite what you think of WoW's solo-esque style of play and instancing (which I don't want in pantheon) I do believe they released expansions/content through patches a much better way than Everquest did.
Leveling in Pantheon is going to be slow. More about the adventure and the journey than the destination. I do want time to get to the destination before there is another expansion/destination. Lets say it takes 6 months to get max level for the more casual players who want to enjoy the game, if content is patched and expansions are 2 years that means they have a year and a half to enjoy all the content that it has to offer (minus hardcore raiding) maybe make an alt, level up professions, ect.
This idea of content through patches, progressively releasing harder raid content/dungeons throughout the 2 year expansion window free's up the older raid content/dungeons for more casual players to get to experience without having to compete in the 24/7 poopsocking that is going to be happening (which is fine I enjoy batphone raiding).
I would really like to know what you guys think about this. Am I way off base? Do you guys enjoy spending the price of an expansion twice or even once a year when content could be easily patched in to give players more meaningful content to explore without the added price/level/aa cap increase?
-Shaolin
Well if you look at EQ expansions classic was 1-50, Kunark was 50-60, velious was 60, and luclin was 60. So fore 3 exansions no level increase, just a ton more content. However, I will agree with you that WoW did their expansions much better than EQ did, but instead of two years, I would do 2 years until the second expansion and then 1 year after every other expansion. 2 years in the beginning because it is a new game and you really want to ride that first expansion out, but 1 year after each expansion because exeryone would be use to the game by now.