KickStarter Pantheon - (Brad "EQ" McQuaid's new MMO)

[belowmecoldhands]

Here's another good example of the incrasing pace/ease of levelling in aging MMORPGs:
http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sh...move-lockout-timers-from-Pande-APF-and-12-man

This one might be more subtle, though. Its effect would translate as "My level 220 org mate(s) can more easily run me through pande to get me some obscure but nice gear." It's kind of like twinking in EQ. It's a sort of powerlevelling.

Xenich, you say these things happen because of mainstreamers. I say it happens probably for a variety of reasons. Firstly, aging games use mudflation to heal "stain development" which would otherwise kill the community (in varying ways and amounts). Mudflation usually takes the form of faster levelling and/or faster travel and/or simpler progression schemes (like we saw recently with the auto-aa granting in EQ). Second, companies with aging games get desperate and try to appeal to more players. This has the effect of their game(s) becoming more mainstream. Third, aging games typically have outdated graphics/sound/etc and they compromise by giving more handouts.

I am not sure how much of the effect comes from the mainstreamers.

I'm still 100% convinced Pantheon will mudflate and you'll mistake it for mainstreamers ruining the game.

I come to expect these things. When the map was introduced in Wurm ONline, for example, I was like "I got mad about that a year ago. So over that." I know it'll just keep going from here forward. They might not add a GPS, but something ackin to it.

Like you, I want to blame casuals/mainsteramers. But my knowledge won't let me blame exclusively. I know other things are going on which can cause these things to enter the game. My frustration is spread out. Sometimes it becomes so blury I feel I can't really blame anything. Maybe it's just the nature of things to happen this way. Maybe it can't be avoided. But I hope game designers do try other answers.

 

[Xenich]

Here's another good example of the incrasing pace/ease of levelling in aging MMORPGs:
http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sh...move-lockout-timers-from-Pande-APF-and-12-man

Xenich, you say these things happen because of mainstreamers. I say it happens probably for a variety of reasons. Firstly, aging games use mudflation to heal "stain development" which would otherwise kill the community (in varying ways and amounts). Mudflation usually takes the form of faster levelling and/or faster travel and/or simpler progression schemes (like we saw recently with the auto-aa granting in EQ). Second, companies with aging games get desperate and try to appeal to more players. This has the effect of their game(s) becoming more mainstream. Third, aging games typically have outdated graphics/sound/etc and they compromise by giving more handouts.

I am not sure how much of the effect comes from the mainstreamers.

I'm still 100% convinced Pantheon will mudflate and you'll mistake it for mainstreamers ruining the game.

I come to expect these things. When the map was introduced in Wurm ONline, for example, I was like "I got mad about that a year ago. So over that." I know it'll just keep going from here forward. They might not add a GPS, but something ackin to it.

Like you, I want to blame casuals/mainsteramers. But my knowledge won't let me blame exclusively. I know other things are going on which can cause these things to enter the game. My frustration is spread out. Sometimes it becomes so blury I feel I can't really blame anything, other than ature itself.

It took EQ years and several expansions before they started fast leveling people. Remember my discussion with you in PMs about mudflation and EQ? I explained why and what the solutions are to mitigate mudflation without gimmicking the game like mainstream games do.

The mainstream games today all start with fast leveling and it isn't to combat "mudflation" as WoW is a perfect example of mudflation overload even though they are extremely fast leveling.

Please go back and read that PM. Your suppositions about my position are ignoring what I have already explained to you.

Games today are mainstream, mainstream ruined and it is due to attending to mainstream mentality. Like I said, you keep acting like I am some kid making some vague claim about things. I know what I am talking about, I have had decades of game experince in both play and testing these game (I beta tested games when they were more like jobs rather than a quick chance for someone to play the game). This is not a discussion of flippant evaluation.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

You say EQ didn't start making people level faster until later? That's untrue. Xenich items were mudflating in Kunark and Velious and finally Luclin. Luclin was like the nail in the coffin for old classic zones. I recall when Luclin was released. EVERYBODY wanted to check it out. And once they discovered how lucrative Puladel Caverns was, they didn't want to go back, and besides, it's right nextdoor to the bazaar. Items were already heavily mudflated. YOu could get very good weapons at a much cheaper price than you could in 1999. This had the effect of levelling you faster because your armor/weapons were better. (Keep in mind it's only the very best items which had the extreme prices.... these items were used by high level players to twink their alts. The items which were the "best" in 1999 were now replaced by kunark/velious/luclin items.)

You say all games today start with fast levelling. But WoW started out with much slower levelling, even though tis levelling might have been faster than EQ at the time. Every game which ages increases the levelling pace. You're getting stuck on the fact newer games might tend to level a player faster. What you need to understand is they will all increase their levelling speed and some of the blame is squarely on mudflation.

YOu cannot deny virtually all MMORPGs increase their levelling pace as they age. You can't. The differnece between me and you is you're telling me the blame is solely on mainstreamers. I disagree. I think mudflation is to blame too.

 

[Xenich]

You say EQ didn't start making people level faster until later? That's untrue. Xenich items were mudflating in Kunark and Velious and finally Luclin. Luclin was like the nail in the coffin for old classic zones.

I didn't say that mudflation wasn't occuring, I said that fast leveling didn't occur till later (ie lowering exp requirements to level up in the game faster). Please try to keep the context of my discussion correct or I will start treating you like a fucking idiot. I told you in my PM that I don't think mudflation is as bad as you think it is. I see no problem with content and gear being of little or no value to higher level characters providing it isn't drastic in short time like it is in games like WoW. I think that you can use means to reduce this with the solutions I explained in the PM to you (how many times have I mentioned this to you now?).

I said "The mainstream games today". Seriously belowmecoldhands, learn to fucking read.

Next time you respond to me. Read my comments. Then read them again, then read them again. Then, when you go to post READ THEM FUCKING AGAIN. Now, if you can't get context right after that point. Go fuck yourself. /sheesh

 

[belowmecoldhands]

(...)
Next time you respond to me. Read my comments. Then read them again, then read them again. Then, when you go to post READ THEM FUCKING AGAIN. Now, if you can't get context right after that point. Go fuck yourself. /sheesh

I did read what you said. I reread the conversation. I don't think your answers are answering what's going on.

I agree mainstreamers or the mainstream is partly why all this is happening, but I don't blame it as much as you do. I think mudflation is tied into it. You don't. I've examined what you've said and I think you've more to learn about it still. I'm not trying to be a hot head about it.

About the "The mainstream games today all start with fast leveling" comment you made.....

Today's mainstream is also producing for larger audiences - which helps to explain why levelling is faster. 300,000 subscribers was a lot in 2000 for the mainstream, but now it goes virtually unnoticed. Modern games are shooting for millions of subscribers. Crucially, I think larger audiences generally have less time to devote to gaming. If they don't have a lot of time to commit then levelling to max is going to be faster by comparison. A hardcore gamer who plays 4-7 hours per day is going to max their character within a month or so in these "lite" games and enter farming or raid status. The more niche games will have fewer active players, so they can more easily ask a player to commit more time.

And many of these "lite" games are increasingly finding ways to give the hardcore gamers somehting to do. My personal opinion is they dump them into "farming" and "raiding" status at end game. Basically they give htem 24/7 cheap/grindy (by comparison to main game) content. Fortunately, the gamers who don't invest as much time usually are caught up in the solo/group/alt main game, so they could care less.

MY point is ALL progression MMO games, small audiences or large audiences, niche or mainstream, indie or not, ALL of these games increase their pace of levelling as they age. I repeat, some of the blame IS on mainstreamers, but some is also on mudflation.

I know you don't agree and you think I'm dumb, but regardless, this is what I think. Like yourself, I'm not just goingto automatically and freely change my mind. Like you, my thoughts have ben brewing for many years, so changing them is not easy.

EDIT: Where I say "larger audiences generally have less time to devote to gaming" I could just as well be saying "larger audiences generally have less attention to devote to gaming". So instead of a game just increasing the amount of experience you get for completing a mission or killing a monster, it'd make it easier to play. Rather than having to be aware of your positioning versus a monster, the game might make your position be inconsequential. Or rather than having items have lots of stats which're confusing to some, it might just solely give them a level and extra lore to "sell" it. The idea is to decrease the amount of alertness which is needed to progress. A "lazy" progression.

 

[Xenich]

I know you don't agree and you think I'm dumb, but regardless, this is what I think. Like yourself, I'm not just goingto automatically and freely change my mind. Like you, my thoughts have ben brewing for many years, so changing them is not easy.

Good, we are finished then. /shrug

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Mainstreamers or casual players can have problems with games progressing too fast (!):
http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2011/05/how-to-slow-down-leveling.html

My wife is a casual World of Warcraft player. She doesn't participate in any form of group content, neither dungeons, nor raids, nor PvP. In consequence there isn't much to do for her in the "endgame" besides daily quests, and thus she has tons of alts and spends most of her time leveling. And since Cataclysm, she isn't all that happy about her leveling speed: It goes too fast.

The problem is a design philosophy of Blizzard, who apparently decided to keep the overall leveling time up to the level cap more or less constant. So every time they add levels on top of the game, they need to make the lower levels faster by the same amount of time. Three expansions after vanilla this has led to downright silly leveling speed under 60. Thus if you are a casual player, and want to play through the quests of a zone, it is kind of annoying if you outlevel the quests before finishing them.

Aligning progression speed to your audience is just the start. They also need to get the balance right between a player's progression level and the content they're doing. For example, if I'm level 1 and in a starter zone and kill my first creature and ding immediately to level 100 then that's going to essentially break the bond between progression and content. For one, I don't even know how to play the game yet, so where do I go now that I'm 100? And what about this dumb quest which gives me a level 3 recommended weapon? What good will that do me at level 100? And what point is there for me to stay in that starting area if I'm level 100? For somebody who's making an alt and only wants to get to end game to take part in guild groups/raids, dinging 100 on the first kill might be a good deal. But for someone who wants A GAME TO PLAY and is new to it, the game hasn't even begun yet and they're just confused. If they stay in the starter area to immerse in it, there'll be 0 challenge.

I've been there. I want to confess when I tried EQ2 I shut off experience gain because it was tooooo fast. There was so much to see. So many npcs and quests, but i levelled so fast they almost all became trivial faster than I got to them.

This is why I say mudflation as a cure to "stain development" eventually doesn't work for this reason. Even your intended audience, casuals and mainstreamers alike, will be turned off by your game, if it's too mudflated. The pacing is all wrong becaues there's no balance.

But anyway I already know how you feel about this. YOu feel no sympathy for people who asked for all this. They wanted fast levelling and everyting to be easy. Now that it's fast and easy they're complaining. You have lots of disdain for them.

 

[Norfleet]

And what about this dumb quest which gives me a level 3 recommended weapon? What good will that do me at level 100?

Nothing, and personally, I see this as a problem, since an item which exists for no other purpose than to be thrown away was a waste of development time. At least some of the newer games that let you keep the skin of the item give it SOME kind of purpose for existing, but traditionally, it has simply been a waste. Low-level itemization in games is frequently terrible: Small percentages on small numbers which thus work out to a big fat nothing, none of it having a clear reason to exist. It's nothing more than newfangled popamolism. In the GOOD OLD DAYS, we could equip any damn item we could find. Then they added stat requirements to items, and this felt reasonable, so we let it slide, and then when that failed to keep low-level characters from wielding actual items, they straight up added level limits to equipment.

There's really no good reason for this and it contributes to low-level content being meaningless. Everything you find in it is junk. If you were building up pieces of kit that you would actually ultimately use in some form piece by piece as you worked your way up, it wouldn't have been an utter waste of air. I pretty much indiscriminately vendor everything I find at low-level that isn't a unique piece that I might actually need, and sometimes even then when I already know I won't. I don't even bother comparing it to see if it's better than what I have, it doesn't matter. A low-percent boost on a small number is nothing. Low-level itemization is more frequently than not simply wasted development.

 

[Xenich]

As I stated in the PM.

Problem: The person at end level as you describe with nothing left. ( to do is a result of the fast leveling). Solution (extremely slow leveling combined with content release life cycle that matches "reasonable" progression speed, ala EQ 6 month to 1 year release cycle).

The benefit of this is that content is designed for the peak curve of the player base (ie in-between the normal player and hardcore, Note: Casuals, as in only play a couple ours a week, are not catered to for design synergy purposes). Latest End game is left for the "hardcore" player base as it was in EQ. The end game is made ridiculously difficult, zero error design, keeping the hardcore base busy between content releases. Beating a raid encounter for the latest content becomes a status symbol.

Problem: speed exp progression because the lower level is a ghost town. Solution (implement features that allow the higher level to play with the lower level, but does not unintentionally imbalance play such as EQ2 did, implement modest incentives that can be useful to the high level for doing so).

There are many ways to do this to allow for reasonable cooperation between high level players and low level to combat this problem. Changing content progression speed (ie speeding it up) is not the answer as it makes the assumption that every new player just wants to pop to end game as quickly as possible. This belief is false. This solution compromises in that it retains the integrity of lower progression, but allows a solution for play for a new player with their old player friends.

Now there are other solutions as well, which can be considered, but they have to be carefully implemented to avoid abuse and invalidation of the content. for instance, mercenaries (similar to EQ2) are a possible solution for old content. I don't have an exact solution to its implementation off the top of my head as there are a lot of faults to this method that would need to be dealt with.

The key here is to not change old content. Doing so ruins the game for those who can play the game as it was intended. The better solution is to attend to the individuals needs and supplement "reasonable" solutions for them to enjoy play as close as it was intended in the design. I really don't like speed leveling people, but if I had to accept a fast level option, I would say providing a pre-leveled character within range of the end game, but still at a distance that would allow them to learn content and progress at a similar pace that people did when the game was released. That is a vague mention, so keep in mind if you try to knock it down, you are doing so pointlessly as it is a passing idea, not an argument in itself.

Problem: Content locations are quickly out leveled. Solution (Layer multi-level content within a given area that spans the entire level range for a given content package release. Add more layers as more higher levels are released).

This will not eliminate the problem of content being out-leveled. In truth, you can not have a progression system and avoid mudflation without invalidating content for new players. This however will slow it down, even greatly if this is planned before implementation over the course of many future level progressions.

There are additional solutions to such as well. For instance, if you know this is going to be an issue in the future, you can design the content with a system that creates content that has high and low level content encounters where all player levels assist each other in such. For example, EQ had the Coldain ring war event in Velious. It was a zone wide event where players worked in teams across the zone similar to a massive raid. One thing that can be done is to implement content within such large encounters that mimics this layered design, where lower levels will have responsibilities to help the over all event. There are many ways to implement this. It can be done as one major event at a given time, or you can even implement stage progression features as such. Here is an idea that just came to me....

As an edition to deal with lower level content being invalidated by higher level play, how about things like staged releases, content that triggers by lower levels doing objectives, quests, etc... that cause a chain of higher level content to happen within a zone, there by bringing high level players back to older content. Add this with the layering of content and use this method as a means to trigger latest expansion content and you can provide long term interaction and development to older content and new players.

Another solution to this is not to put in linear progression releases. Content doesn't have to have a level increase each expansion. Velious, known for being one of the greatest expansions in EQ history had no level increase, but was a MASSIVE amount of new content. That is, Kunark and Velious were the same level cap and why there were problems of item mudflation , Kunark still had any items of value (I used the staff of the 100 fists from Kunark up until POP because to be honest, nothing that was reasonably obtainable even touched its usefulness). More expansions like this with attention to careful itemization (side grades and ability use items) will slow down mudflation greatly.

Problem: Gear becomes invalidated just as content does. Solution: implement a system (crafting, buffing, etc...) that puts old content items as useful progression to latest content creation and progression.

This solution can be anything from using rares/uncommon weapons/armor/jewelry as staged components in crafting. You want to make that new 100 awesome sword? Well, it takes several lower level item rares to combine with a current high level sword rare.

Maybe another system can use it? For instance, maybe with the diplomacy system there is a means that older items could be useful? Maybe to gain favor or the like?

You could also implement buffing systems similar to EQ2 where an item is sacrificed and the result is a blessing of strength, agility, etc... that lasts days.

Also, EQ had epic quests that were extremely long and they required the completion and collection of old quests and items as a linear progression to the end goal of eventually gaining the weapons.

The idea would be to layer these solutions upon each other.


Will this stop mudflation? No... but you don't need to stop it, as much as you need to make it fit within a long term development system.

 

[Xenich]

And what about this dumb quest which gives me a level 3 recommended weapon? What good will that do me at level 100?

Nothing, and personally, I see this as a problem, since an item which exists for no other purpose than to be thrown away was a waste of development time. At least some of the newer games that let you keep the skin of the item give it SOME kind of purpose for existing, but traditionally, it has simply been a waste. Low-level itemization in games is frequently terrible: Small percentages on small numbers which thus work out to a big fat nothing, none of it having a clear reason to exist. It's nothing more than newfangled popamolism. In the GOOD OLD DAYS, we could equip any damn item we could find. Then they added stat requirements to items, and this felt reasonable, so we let it slide, and then when that failed to keep low-level characters from wielding actual items, they straight up added level limits to equipment.

There's really no good reason for this and it contributes to low-level content being meaningless. Everything you find in it is junk. If you were building up pieces of kit that you would actually ultimately use in some form piece by piece as you worked your way up, it wouldn't have been an utter waste of air. I pretty much indiscriminately vendor everything I find at low-level that isn't a unique piece that I might actually need, and sometimes even then when I already know I won't. I don't even bother comparing it to see if it's better than what I have, it doesn't matter. A low-percent boost on a small number is nothing. Low-level itemization is more frequently than not simply wasted development.

Items with linear increases (basic attributes) are a problem. One thing that EQ did was to have items with effects on them. See invisible, Ultravision, infravision, various illusion forms, summon bandage, summon ammo, food, etc... This resulted in people holding on to many of their items over the levels. I had several items from my teens when I was in my 60's. One was haddens earring. It was a ring that bestowed underwater breathing and was obtained at level 10. Another was Journeyman boots which provided a run speed increase of a certain percent. Even when my first epic was not as powerful as a new weapon, I still used it as a swapping weapon to gain the clicky effect that provided increased attack and speed.

there are new solutions, but I think for a really in-depth system, layering the old aspects of EQ with new implementations can create a rich system where the meaningless discarding of items can be minimized.

 

[Norfleet]

Yeah, there are a few utility items like that which retain their value, but they seem more like aberrations within the system than a goal that the system tries to uphold as general principle.

 

[Xenich]

Yeah, there are a few utility items like that which retain their value, but they seem more like aberrations within the system than a goal that the system tries to uphold as general principle.

That is why I would like to see more attention to items that have secondary elements, not just a linear simplistic progression such as attributes. Proc and clicky items can really retain their value if implemented correctly. Problem is, most systems these days focus on simplification and allowing such diversified gear as I mentioned doesn't fall in line with their development focus.

Even passive based effects can have real practical use and provide depth of play. That is, with race differences, factions, etc... the ability to change your race was huge. It was really nice having an item that provided an illusion form so you could enter into an enemy city and buy goods when you were far away from friendly areas.

 

[Aenra]

Help me believe you bastard;
( because outside of SotA, which has too many wedding gowns for my nerves to handle, i have absolutely nothing to look forward to..)

- I remember that during its KickStarter, basic aspects such as the crafting sphere were not even included in the "main" phase of the game, but were instead listed as stretch goals. Of a sufficiently higher tier at that. Considering recent history, is it safe to assume this is still the case? That unless a magic fairy pops up to invest, game will ship "bare" ?

- My one (among many) issue with heavy group-forced games is the developers' inability, utter, complete fucking inability, to formulate some sort of failsafe scenario wherein even on a low population, remaining players can still play the game and not wait for two and three days just to go on an instance. Which is precisely how they too eventually get to quit and the game gets to suffer even more. The never-ending population decline spiral. Have there been any hints/pointers towards 'a' line of thinking from Brad that would remove or ameliorate this issue? Or are we back to the fifteen years old typical "we haz community, always people willing to helpzorz" approach?

 

[belowmecoldhands]

On the topic of convenience over world or immersion, I found a gmae where all the NPCs are outside the buildings. Ya, the makers of the game don't even care about putting them inside. In fact, the buildings are empty.

Moral of the story? Some people care about the world and the immersion and some don't.

I predict some games are going to do away completely with stat gear and just have "beauty" gear. This way players don't have to go through the "pain" of buying anything or searching for something. Because we all know that's just toooooo tedious. Of course some players will want "beauty" but it's aesthetic. Complaints can be solved with insta-merchants with auto-filters for items. Or, better yet, just type "/trade" and a trade window pops up which teleports what you buy to you or your bank.

There's nothing I love more than exploring an area to see what I can find. Unfortunately it seems a lot of games are trying to kill this off. Why? Because if it has any value then it infringes on the "fun" of others who think it's tedious.

Sorry. I need to vent. P****** me off. I don't understand people who think this is fun.

/sigh Maybe there's a middle gorund. And maybe playing in PvP games skews my perspective since they tend to value PvP over PvE. What rats ass do they care about immersion or world? All they wnat to do is kill each other.

 

[Xenich]

Help me believe you bastard;
( because outside of SotA, which has too many wedding gowns for my nerves to handle, i have absolutely nothing to look forward to..)

- I remember that during its KickStarter, basic aspects such as the crafting sphere were not even included in the "main" phase of the game, but were instead listed as stretch goals. Of a sufficiently higher tier at that. Considering recent history, is it safe to assume this is still the case? That unless a magic fairy pops up to invest, game will ship "bare" ?

That was then, they will have crafting at release, though to be honest I haven't read much about it so I don't how extensive it will be.

H
- My one (among many) issue with heavy group-forced games is the developers' inability, utter, complete fucking inability, to formulate some sort of failsafe scenario wherein even on a low population, remaining players can still play the game and not wait for two and three days just to go on an instance. Which is precisely how they too eventually get to quit and the game gets to suffer even more. The never-ending population decline spiral. Have there been any hints/pointers towards 'a' line of thinking from Brad that would remove or ameliorate this issue? Or are we back to the fifteen years old typical "we haz community, always people willing to helpzorz" approach?

Not that I know. I am sure they have discussed the issue, I just haven't heard any specific discussion on it.

 

[Xenich]

On the topic of convenience over world or immersion, I found a gmae where all the NPCs are outside the buildings. Ya, the makers of the game don't even care about putting them inside. In fact, the buildings are empty.

Moral of the story? Some people care about the world and the immersion and some don't.

I predict some games are going to do away completely with stat gear and just have "beauty" gear. This way players don't have to go through the "pain" of buying anything or searching for something. Because we all know that's just toooooo tedious. Of course some players will want "beauty" but it's aesthetic. Complaints can be solved with insta-merchants with auto-filters for items. Or, better yet, just type "/trade" and a trade window pops up which teleports what you buy to you or your bank.

There's nothing I love more than exploring an area to see what I can find. Unfortunately it seems a lot of games are trying to kill this off. Why? Because if it has any value then it infringes on the "fun" of others who think it's tedious.

Sorry. I need to vent. P****** me off. I don't understand people who think this is fun.

/sigh Maybe there's a middle gorund. And maybe playing in PvP games skews my perspective since they tend to value PvP over PvE. What rats ass do they care about immersion or world? All they wnat to do is kill each other.

I kind of bulk group these types into the mainstreamers as well. That is, most who go on and on about this stuff (ie not wanting game play aspects such as gear stats, etc...) aren't really gamers. They don't enjoy the "Game", they enjoy the "escape" of playing some games. As a developer, these people are counter productive to your games design. That is, they will suck all the "game" out of game play leaving you with some pointless chat room role play simulator.

 

[Aenra]

Thanks for the info Xen. Still got to brave their forums, just .. not quite there yet. Immense quantities of unfounded optimism make me shiver

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Brad MacQuaid talks with Boogie in a Jan 30 2014 interview (during the kickstarter i think):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45XrbsBt34c

I decided to listen to all of it and keep a recored:
<6:19: Talk about how EQ was very social game
~6:19: Wants to recreate some sort of death penalty or something like it but less harsh
~6:28: Targetting people who enjoy EQ and Vanguard
~6:33: "Maybe they're playing project 1999 now. They want that old school."
* hopes there're newer people who want some of that challenge
~7:20: Boogie talks about WoW and how it was non-stop action and this got in the way of the social aspects
~7:45: They talk about how downtime helped facilitate the social environment. Brad says "A certain amount of downtime I think is needed." Brad also says downtime encourages bathroom/snack breaks.
~8:22: Brad acknowleges they know a lot of those EQ playres grew up and have less time to play.
~8:28: They want to recreate the downtime but in smaller increments
~8:50: It's a class-based system. Group needs to pause and formulate strategy.
~9:07: "It can't be non-stop fight fight fight because you don't get the social component."
~9:44: Boogie was raiding with 72 (!) people.
~9:54: How large are raids going to be in Pantheon?
~10:40: Maybe 20 or 30 people. But it's going to vary.
~12:08: Economy. Brad liked the tunnel. Says it was emergent content.
~12:42: Brad doesn't want the auction houses to be global. Tries to explain.
~13:15: Brad ays "player driven" to describe what he wants economy to be.
~14:00: Boogie starts bringing up hand holding.
~14:13: Boogie says Everquest was an exploratory game.
~15:40: Boogie goes on a long talk about Qeynos to Freeport trip. Says there was no hand holding.
~16:37: Brad says first levels are a tutorial with hand holding.
~17:37: Brad says it was kind of fun to make the trip even knowing where everything was.
~18:30: Brad admits he got lost in the elf village and had to find a map.
~19:43: Brad says the elf village was functionally too much of the same stuff.
~20:00: Boogie talks about immersion and somethihng on reddit.
(continued) It wasn't just the graphics which made it immersive.
~21:00: Boogie asks the tough question.
~21:30: Brad says a lot of things went wrong towards the end.
~27:15: Brad wants to do a better job this time.
~27:55: Boogie doesn't like kickstarter.
~29:00: Brad talks about who is on the kickstarter team.
~32:10: Brad tries to explain what Pantheon is to someone who's considering backing it
(cont) 1) open world 2) sandbox > themepark 3) community 4) team-play and interdependance 5) challenging fights
~34:10 Brad says most MMO's are trying to be all things to all people; Pantheon won't
~35:00: Boogie asks Brad about classes; extending his support for unique classes
~45:00: Boogie sums up what Brad is saying and says many MMORPGs are games but fail to be (social) worlds
~46:00: Boogie asks Brad to convince someone to back Pantheon again

 

[Xenich]

Things have changed some, but the "general" theme is correct. The pod casts on the Pantheon site are more up to date and cover in better detail many aspects of the game and direction they are taking. That is, the KS info is severely outdated.

 

[Xenich]

Here is something they seemed to have changed on. Initially Brad said he didn't care for "camps" (ie people sitting in a specific area, farming a group of mobs for exp with mob place holders and rare spawns) and that Pantheon would likely not follow that model.

Well, recently Joppa (pantheon creative director) on MMORPG.com stated:

We are going to address this question in more detail in an upcoming Round Table, but I want to officially set the record straight:



Pantheon will primarily be a camp-based game, both overland and dungeon, very similar to what you remember from EverQuest 1.



There will be a handful of meaningful exceptions, but overall we are choosing to embrace camping for all the right reasons. That being said, you can expect us to spice things up a bit - you never know what we might have up our sleeves to keep you on your toes

Personally I like this. I always enjoyed camping, breaking the camps and trying to hold them if it was a rough spawn area with tricky pathers. The nice thing about this as well is that having place holders, then rare mobs, then rare loot, well... it goes a long way to reducing the "sword of fire #5089234" problem that many MMOs have today.

 

[Aenra]

Funny..my recollections must be flawed, as what i seem to remember is the big guilds on camp 24/7, and your consequently standing no chance, ever, merely continuing along.. elsewhere..
Can also recall how, human nature being just that, said practices lead to plenty of vitriol, ingame and outside it, along with some pretty seriously motivated cheating efforts from the more IT savvy of the lot. Last but not least, i can distinctly recall the few times where my own puny group did happen to stumble upon uncamped mobs, only to be later on trainwrecked from 'x' guild rushing past us, taking the fight and simultaneously "gracing us" with the aggro trains they purposefully made. Because fuck them.

But i suppose that is fun too. If you are a lifeless person in no ways limited to the standard 3,4,5 hours of game time..or if your standards can be lowered enough to join said guilds while pretending it says nothing bad about you, it's -just- a game after all. Right?

While what you say is as usual correct in theory Xen, i fear practice will differ. Got a good number of empirical years of evidence to allow me to say so. Personally, this is rather disappointing to hear. Not entirely unexpected and not necessarily a game-breaker, time will tell how they will go about implementing it. But definitely disappointing. And because you will switch back to your "that's the game i want/not everything should become mainstream" mode, what i mean is that the more ""hardcorez"" they make it, the more they simply reproduce without iterating any further, the slimmer the chances i see of this title ever becoming successful enough. Which, especially in an EQ1 clone, really is important. Because you really need the people. A very lot of them.
So far i see (aside its actual development, ie the extent visible to outsiders) a very careful, deliberately paced use of all the right buzzwords. For the relevant crowd.

Nothing at all in terms of "why these failed us before", or even more importantly, how "we have gone about improving them"... not good...

edit: Are you US, EU, Oceanic..? If you don't mind saying that is

 

[Xenich]

Big guild "cock blocking" was a problem at end game. That I agree, I hated. Camp checks were a little annoying, but the nice thing about EQ was that there were always places to exp due to the way content was (ie lots of content in a given level range as opposed to games today where content is a linear zone designed for themepark leveling). As for cheating? Not entirely sure what you mean about that? Exploits in game, maybe with the raid wars going on and like. As for trains, I loved them. That is part of the risk. We got good at avoiding them, working the group in a manner to be able to not catch agro on the train and in some cases, down right taking the train on (now that was a lot of fun). I remember a guy tried to grief us with trains. He died so many times he dropped a few levels. It was funny too, we had a crack group at the time and we started teasing him, taunting him to pull more (we were mezzing, rooting, etc... and killing them down as fast as he could pull). It was fun.

Now, as for some things... the end game guild blocking of content, well... that is only a problem if you are playing cutting end game (and if you are doing that, chances are time isn't something you find to be an issue). I am not remembering EQ through rose colored glasses. I played EQ as an adult, with a job that I worked 40-60 hours, had major responsibilities, was on call, etc... I couldn't raid mobs at end game until I moved to Storm hammer where they had protected raid schedules. Before that, we did raid, but it was was content that most were already past.The beauty of EQ was that many didn't get into the rat race and so we were always tagging along an expansion or two behind in terms of raid content. We played at our pace, according to our needs, our time available. Now we certainly had issues in terms of pickings as it concerned raid targets, but we got by and there were still many raids we did and many bosses we downed. So, I don't remember EQ being this massive frustration where we had no lives, no means to enjoy the game unless we were unemployed. My entire guild we professionals, not kids in high school/college.

Now I am not saying there aren't problems with contested content, with camping, etc... I think some aspects of their style should be tweaked knowing the pitfalls of the past, but I also know instanced content is not the answer. Instanced content has a long history as well in games and we have seen it kill off the social environment in MMOs. Also, if you think that by instancing you are escaping the ass hats? Not unless you only play with your friends and hope to never interact with others and if that is the case, then this style of MMO may not be to your liking.

See, there are so many things I disliked back in those days, then after years of experiencing mainstream MMOs, I came to the conclusion that I would rather deal with the headaches of the past than the result of today. Call it a "taste" thing, a "style" of play that I prefer. I mean, for all the bad that existed in EQ, it is the only game to which holds strong memories of enjoyment. No other game to date has done that, so that has to account for something.

As for what time zone? I am US, and I am well aware of the pain in the asses we had with EU guilds coming to the US servers and snaking all the content because they didn't want to compete with their own time zones guilds. We don't have to go back to exactly that, there can be solutions, remember... Brad dislikes camps for many of the reasons you do and I am sure that this will be kept in mind with how they implement it.

Did you expect it to be instanced? Do you not see all the problems with instances and what they produced? Hard to make a "social" game by implementing anti-social features don't you think?

edit:

And because you will switch back to your "that's the game i want/not everything should become mainstream" mode, what i mean is that the more ""hardcorez"" they make it, the more they simply reproduce without iterating any further, the slimmer the chances i see of this title ever becoming successful enough.

Let me just comment on this.

Why shouldn't there be a game out there that fits this style? Lets be honest here, why? Why should the developer of EQ/Vanguard make a game to be like EQ/Vanguard that isn't EQ/Vanguard like? Both Vanguard and EQ had camping? There are many people out there that like camping. Go to the boards both on their site and MMORPG. They want camping, it is the general consensus from the players there.

They have already stated this game is a niche crowd game. They have accounted for it in everything from their development goals, methods, budgets and markets. So they know this will be for a select group of people and they believe it will be successful enough to be profitable for that goal.

In the end, it is those dedicated niche players who will keep a game a float if it is possible, not the rest, they are fleeting and unreliable.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Things have changed some, but the "general" theme is correct. The pod casts on the Pantheon site are more up to date and cover in better detail many aspects of the game and direction they are taking. That is, the KS info is severely outdated.

Would you say Brad's summing up of Pantheon in Jan 30 2014 is still correct:
1) open world 2) sandbox > themepark 3) community 4) team-play and interdependance 5) challenging fights

(his reference to sandbox in the intrview was tied to open world and player-driven things likeeconomy)

Boogie was big on emphasizing the social aspect of the old everquest all throughout the interview. I got this feeling during the interview that both were agreeing the downtime and harshness of the world somehow fed into the social aspect, but Brad was trying to say "Not as harsh this time around. Not as much downtime, bro."

At the end of the interview Boogie said something whichstood out to me. He said something like "Star Wars Old Republic was a great game. But it was a game game game. EQ was more than that. I hope you can do the same with Pantheon."

Do you aree downtime and harshnes can feed the social aspect?

This link I think is relevant:
http://www.gameskinny.com/9ltw7/mmos-are-not-games-where-mmo-s-go-wrong

Survival is the Key

Those early games, in all their brutal punishment and so-called 'abuse' of the players actually gave the players something that instinctively motivated them to form the foundation of a strong societal framework within the confines of the game world. In layman's terms: those rats handing you your ass just outside the Freeport city gates actually made you actively seek out other players for protection. You would form groups for adventuring because the world was just to tough without them, and the cost of death was too high.

(...)

Leaving Modern Players High and Dry

So why is it that I say more modern MMO's have gotten it wrong? Because for the most part, they do not meet any of these basic needs for forming strong communities. It is not that they lack players, but rather in their rush to please everyone they have eliminated the one thing guaranteed to create a strong community. They have eliminated the challenge of survival. They have eliminated the need to band together in order to conquer the environment. Sure, you have raids and other such end game events that have 'mandatory' participation levels, but that no more means you have a community than having 1500 Facebook friends means you are well liked.

While I agree with all of that, I don't think it has a widespread market. The problem is people already get a lot of this community from real life. Real ife is already challenging and creating community. People play games to unwind and solve some virtual problems. I don't think they're looking for painful or frustrating circumstances even if that can create strong virtual society. The cost is too high. It might fuel a small niche gaming population, but it's a huge risk to base a game on this.

If I'm an investor and see a game like that, I don't invest, unless it's shown these kinds of games actually can attract large audiences. But I doubt that. Wher in "brutal punishment" and "abuse" is the large audience?

 

[Aenra]

there are so many things I disliked back in those days, then after years of experiencing mainstream MMOs, I came to the conclusion that I would rather deal with the headaches of the past than the result of today. Call it a "taste" thing, a "style" of play that I prefer. I mean, for all the bad that existed in EQ, it is the only game to which holds strong memories of enjoyment. No other game to date has done that, so that has to account for something

Agreed. Definitely. And it is why i am keeping tabs open, despite my overall pessimism

As to the rest, i would differ in two points alone:
- you used the exact opposite example to drive your point through, in terms of camps and anti or social endorsement. No one, me most of all, would EVER ask for instanced scenarios. That does not mean however that 2000-esque camping was done O.K., hence my stating my worries over lack of details. Implementation i can understand, it's too soon; but design philosophy is something i find no excuse for them not having out in the open.
In the sense that IF they have could have thought out a solution that would improve some of these issues while -still- sticking to it .. we'd have already known about it if it .. Hence my worries. This of course goes beyond camping and attaches itself to progressing in general

- you activated your "mode" despite my explaining
What i meant was that niche or not, it has to have 'a' crowd, or vanilla EQ (or equivalent) mechanics will be hard to implement properly. Guild monopoly, trading monopoly, the social factor inevitably influenced by these and so on. It is a different niche when you can excuse the dead social aspect and still be able to focus on the "game", and a different niche alltogether when it is impossible to excuse it, as its lack signifies your needing to leave game.
On top of that, do keep in mind that niche has its novelty factor. They will come. Will they stay though? When unlike you and me, some of them will have their "rose-tinted glasses" still on? When they experience anew the same issues they faced back then, except now they are 15 years older, what will they do? That's why i linked this to 'iterating' and 'improving' above. Nothing to do with switching design model or anything

 

[Xenich]

- you activated your "mode" despite my explaining
What i meant was that niche or not, it has to have 'a' crowd, or vanilla EQ (or equivalent) mechanics will be hard to implement properly. Guild monopoly, trading monopoly, the social factor inevitably influenced by these and so on. It is a different niche when you can excuse the dead social aspect and still be able to focus on the "game", and a different niche alltogether when it is impossible to excuse it, as its lack signifies your needing to leave game.
On top of that, do keep in mind that niche has its novelty factor. They will come. Will they stay though? When unlike you and me, some of them will have their "rose-tinted glasses" still on? When they experience anew the same issues they faced back then, except now they are 15 years older, what will they do? That's why i linked this to 'iterating' and 'improving' above. Nothing to do with switching design model or anything

Sorry, it felt as if you were making that old argument of "but if you don't go mainstream, the game will fail!". My point is, I think the game can survive and do well on the crowd who would not be seeing things from a nostalgia view, but an actual love for this style of game play. Brad has already said they don't care about being rich, they just want to be able to pay everyone well and make a profit to be able to continue making content for the game. If you really get down to the numbers, that can be done on a very small crowd of subs.

One thing I think would be an interesting approach to the subscription model for niche games is a variable pricing model based on the number of subs. I know that if the game is really what I am looking for, I would pay up to 40-50 bucks a month for it. So, if they got a ton of people early on, the pricing model might be as low as 10 a month (don't want to cap them on profit, you need to have incentive), but as high as 50 a month based on their target requirement for keeping the game going (profitable). This is a VERY rough thought though, but it might be able to work for niche games. Read the pricing sub thread on MMORPG/Pantheon, you would be surprised at how many would pay more money to get a game they love.