I love Mr. McQuaids enthusiasm, and love the idea of having to work together, but it is the Achilles heel that will keep the game small. No one will commit the time nowadays to assembling teams/groups for PvE, unless it's done with silly LFG tools. imho these tools defeat the purpose and immersion of role playing games. Not only that, a major portion of the population have drifted into solo playing mmorpgs, where time is better managed in real life. Gone are the days of "lets make a deal" with wives, husbands, girlfriends, etc, to score gameplay hours. If you want a hit in today's mmorpg world, design a title with some solo player dungeons that have rewards that matter, and while your at it, figure out how to make a single player raid.
A few quick comments in reaction to your points:
1. We know that not everyone wants a grouping game. But we also know how big the MMO gamespace is now. Because we are not a large publisher, and because we are not spending the big bucks (e.g. SWTOR), we don't need millions of subscribers to be a profitable and successful company. People do debate how many people want a game like this, and rightfully so. But also remember that calling such a group 'small' is really sort of relative. When EQ peaked at 500,000 players, that was considered an incredible number (and also, EQ was incredibly profitable, making around a half a billion dollars in profit for Sony). But since then, other games (most notably WoW) have blown open the doors and millions, perhaps even 10s of millions, of players have been exposed to the genre. Capturing a 'small' subset of that group for us would mean serious success. That number, especially today, could be called 'small', but for us would be 'huge'.
2. We do absolutely understand that many in our target audience, who want a grouping game, who want a community and social game, who want a home they'll play for months and even years, have grown up, gotten married, have kids, demanding jobs, etc. We are acutely aware of that. So while we will certainly have epic and challenging content, we are designing the game so that it doesn't require long, contiguous play sessions. I can't go into all of the details yet, but in general, you'll be able to play a couple of hours, log off, return perhaps the next night, and continue on.
3. But the target audience I'm talking about (the older player, who likely remembers the older style MMOs, the shared experiences, etc.) is not our only target audience. Our other important audience is a subset of younger gamers looking for a challenge, who enjoy co-op games (e.g. working in a group, as a team), but likely haven't experienced this in an MMO since this has been missing from MMOs for quite some time.
Lastly, some people argue that the 'old' days are over, and gamers today do not want what we're building. I really have do take issue with this. Yes, the gamespace has grown considerably. MMOs are no longer niche -- WoW, as a good example, grew the gamespace like crazy, primarily by making a more casual game (there's lots of other reasons too -- Blizzard make a lot of really smart decisions). Even more recent MMOs have targeted even more casual players -- you might even call them 'single player gamers who want to play in an online virtual world, but really don't want to group or socialize much, who want content they can take down themselves, and even content that can be quickly consumed). This is all fine. Fact: the number of people interested in MMOs has skyrocketed, and most of that growth has been casual and even single player gamers being drawn to MMOs (and some MMOs being designed with them in mind). When you grow an audience, the more people you get, the more different kinds of gamers you get. This has not only happened, but it makes sense. The bigger the group, the greater the variety of people within that group, and while they may in general all want an 'MMO', want to be part of that online experience, that they are looking for more specifically is going to vary considerably.
Where I draw the line though, and hold my ground, is when some people go beyond acknowledging that and also assert that the 'old school' gamer somehow no longer exists. Respectfully, I don't think this argument holds water. Growing a gamespace, making MMOs that appeal to more casual and even single player mindsets, does not also somehow magically remove and cause the audience that still wants a more social, group-oriented, challenging, community focused experience to literally vanish. They are still here. The group may be arguably a 'small' subset of the MMO gamespace because so many more people are now part of that gamespace. But 'small' when you're talking about millions of people is still a sizable group. And that group, for the most part, has felt orphaned. Just look at all of the debate, the long threads, where group/community gamers are debating constantly with the more single player oriented MMO player, arguing over what an MMO really is, what they want that the other group doesn't, etc. These debates have not only been raging for years, talked about on message boards, in blogs, etc., they also aren't going away.
What can this orphaned group do (other than rant and complain, wanting their voices heard)? They can either keep playing the old games, or even the emulators that are popping up, or they can keep trying some of the newer MMOs that simply aren't designed for them, hopping from one to the other. Or they can wait for a new MMO, a modern MMO with new features and ideas, but that is still built on the foundation that appeals to them.
Bottom line: if you are going to call this group 'small', then you also would have to call the players of EQ, UO, DAoC, the Final Fantasy MMOs, etc. a small group. Some of these 'old' games with, relative to the size of the gamespace now, a small playerbase, were extremely successful (and by that I mean both great games, and also that they made a ton of money). So the key here is that 'small' by today's standards is still at least hundreds of thousands of players. And it makes no sense, financially or creatively, to ignore them.
Post edited by Aradune on
--
-------------------------------------------------------------- Brad McQuaid CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc. www.pantheonmmo.com --------------------------------------------------------------
1. We know that not everyone wants a grouping game. But we also know how big the MMO gamespace is now. Because we are not a large publisher, and because we are not spending the big bucks (e.g. SWTOR), we don't need millions of subscribers to be a profitable and successful company. People do debate how many people want a game like this, and rightfully so. But also remember that calling such a group 'small' is really sort of relative. When EQ peaked at 500,000 players, that was considered an incredible number (and also, EQ was incredibly profitable, making around a half a billion dollars in profit for Sony). But since then, other games (most notably WoW) have blown open the doors and millions, perhaps even 10s of millions, of players have been exposed to the genre. Capturing a 'small' subset of that group for us would mean serious success. That number, especially today, could be called 'small', but for us would be 'huge'.
2. We do absolutely understand that many in our target audience, who want a grouping game, who want a community and social game, who want a home they'll play for months and even years, have grown up, gotten married, have kids, demanding jobs, etc. We are acutely aware of that. So while we will certainly have epic and challenging content, we are designing the game so that it doesn't require long, contiguous play sessions. I can't go into all of the details yet, but in general, you'll be able to play a couple of hours, log off, return perhaps the next night, and continue on.
3. But the target audience I'm talking about (the older player, who likely remembers the older style MMOs, the shared experiences, etc.) is not our only target audience. Our other important audience is a subset of younger gamers looking for a challenge, who enjoy co-op games (e.g. working in a group, as a team), but likely haven't experienced this in an MMO since this has been missing from MMOs for quite some time.
Lastly, some people argue that the 'old' days are over, and gamers today do not want what we're building. I really have do take issue with this. Yes, the gamespace has grown considerably. MMOs are no longer niche -- WoW, as a good example, grew the gamespace like crazy, primarily by making a more casual game (there's lots of other reasons too -- Blizzard make a lot of really smart decisions). Even more recent MMOs have targeted even more casual players -- you might even call them 'single player gamers who want to play in an online virtual world, but really don't want to group or socialize much, who want content they can take down themselves, and even content that can be quickly consumed). This is all fine. But they key point is this: the number of people interested in MMOs has skyrocketed, and most of that growth has been casual and even single player gamers being drawn to MMOs (and some MMOs being designed with them in mind). When you grow an audience, the more people you get, the more different kinds of gamers you get. This has not only happened, but it makes sense. Where I draw the line though, and hold my ground, is when some people go beyond acknowledging that and also assert that the 'old school' gamer somehow no longer exists. Respectfully, I don't think this argument holds water. Growing a gamespace, making MMOs that appeal to more casual and even single player mindsets, does not also somehow magically remove and cause the audience that still wants a more social, group-oriented, challenging, community focused experience. They are still there. The group may be arguably a 'small' subset of the MMO gamespace because so many more people are now part of that gamespace. But 'small' when you're talking about millions of people is still a sizable group. And that group, for the most part, has felt orphaned. They can either keep playing the old games, or even the emulators that are popping up, or they can be waiting for a new MMO, a modern MMO with new features and ideas, but that is still built on the foundation that appeals to them.
Bottom line: if you are going to call this group 'small', then you also would have to call the players of EQ, UO, DAoC, the Final Fantasy MMOs, etc. a small group. And while that's fine, the key here is 'small' is still hundreds of thousands of players. And it makes no sense, financially or creatively, to ignore them.
First off it's not "grouping" that is missing from MMO's.. I do it every time I play as do many or even possibly most others...,it's having a true overarching community, providing content on their own for each other that is. Something more than meeting up for groups to tackle a challenge designed for it, that's every where. That's all MMO"s have truly become. Once the boss is down or dungeon completed everyone goes off on their merry way.. that's the problem. Simply offering more of this isn't facing the problem, it's adding to it.. You need reasons outside of combat for people to come together for a real change to happen here.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
1. We know that not everyone wants a grouping game. But we also know how big the MMO gamespace is now. Because we are not a large publisher, and because we are not spending the big bucks (e.g. SWTOR), we don't need millions of subscribers to be a profitable and successful company. People do debate how many people want a game like this, and rightfully so. But also remember that calling such a group 'small' is really sort of relative. When EQ peaked at 500,000 players, that was considered an incredible number (and also, EQ was incredibly profitable, making around a half a billion dollars in profit for Sony). But since then, other games (most notably WoW) have blown open the doors and millions, perhaps even 10s of millions, of players have been exposed to the genre. Capturing a 'small' subset of that group for us would mean serious success. That number, especially today, could be called 'small', but for us would be 'huge'.
2. We do absolutely understand that many in our target audience, who want a grouping game, who want a community and social game, who want a home they'll play for months and even years, have grown up, gotten married, have kids, demanding jobs, etc. We are acutely aware of that. So while we will certainly have epic and challenging content, we are designing the game so that it doesn't require long, contiguous play sessions. I can't go into all of the details yet, but in general, you'll be able to play a couple of hours, log off, return perhaps the next night, and continue on.
3. But the target audience I'm talking about (the older player, who likely remembers the older style MMOs, the shared experiences, etc.) is not our only target audience. Our other important audience is a subset of younger gamers looking for a challenge, who enjoy co-op games (e.g. working in a group, as a team), but likely haven't experienced this in an MMO since this has been missing from MMOs for quite some time.
Lastly, some people argue that the 'old' days are over, and gamers today do not want what we're building. I really have do take issue with this. Yes, the gamespace has grown considerably. MMOs are no longer niche -- WoW, as a good example, grew the gamespace like crazy, primarily by making a more casual game (there's lots of other reasons too -- Blizzard make a lot of really smart decisions). Even more recent MMOs have targeted even more casual players -- you might even call them 'single player gamers who want to play in an online virtual world, but really don't want to group or socialize much, who want content they can take down themselves, and even content that can be quickly consumed). This is all fine. But they key point is this: the number of people interested in MMOs has skyrocketed, and most of that growth has been casual and even single player gamers being drawn to MMOs (and some MMOs being designed with them in mind). When you grow an audience, the more people you get, the more different kinds of gamers you get. This has not only happened, but it makes sense. Where I draw the line though, and hold my ground, is when some people go beyond acknowledging that and also assert that the 'old school' gamer somehow no longer exists. Respectfully, I don't think this argument holds water. Growing a gamespace, making MMOs that appeal to more casual and even single player mindsets, does not also somehow magically remove and cause the audience that still wants a more social, group-oriented, challenging, community focused experience. They are still there. The group may be arguably a 'small' subset of the MMO gamespace because so many more people are now part of that gamespace. But 'small' when you're talking about millions of people is still a sizable group. And that group, for the most part, has felt orphaned. They can either keep playing the old games, or even the emulators that are popping up, or they can be waiting for a new MMO, a modern MMO with new features and ideas, but that is still built on the foundation that appeals to them.
Bottom line: if you are going to call this group 'small', then you also would have to call the players of EQ, UO, DAoC, the Final Fantasy MMOs, etc. a small group. And while that's fine, the key here is 'small' is still hundreds of thousands of players. And it makes no sense, financially or creatively, to ignore them.
First off
Where did "Secondly, Second of all, etc go?" #engrish.
So, God-willing, the Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen team and I will be able to make or allow that magic to happen a third time, and it too will be not just a great game, but also that catalyst again that brings people together, sometimes out of their comfort zone, learning how to work together not just tactically in a virtual world but also socially in the real world. Its why we're not afraid to make a game with a target audience who enjoys grouping and being part of a team, even if that turns other potential players off. It's really the only kind of MMO I want to be involved in and it's why we're going to stick to our guns and try to re-capture that magic again. Honestly, nothing else appeals to me -- I want to always be part of creating 'more than a game' and then, after release, to personally be part of that community as well
- catalyst again that brings people together
- sometimes out of their comfort zone
- learning how to work together
- target audience who enjoys grouping and being a part of a team
- It's really the only kind of MMO
This reaches into the minds and heart's of the true mmo player. A virtual World.
For this to happen, the game world MUST NOT BE DISJOINTED with modern social tools that give a false sense of community. With modern social tools, its just another game on a long list. No matter how well the game is made graphically, coded, advertised, large, enjoyable the game will turn out the same as all others made since the classics.
Modern social tools sound nice on paper. They work very well for a month or two. Then again any style works for a month or two. However the final out come is always the same. What's left are the few that decide to call the game home no matter what !
You may ask yourself why would anyone " call a game home no matter what " ? The answer is simple, they have an allegiance to there inner social Guilds. 99.999% of players don't have this allegiance. Because of modern social tools they will never attain this allegiance in a game with a Dungeon Finder, or Cross Realm Technology.
The above quote from Brad McQuaid is strong. Let's all hope he is using insight and not just nice words.
I agree with everything except the "magic for a 3rd time" part. Vanguard was awful, there was nothing magical about it. The sooner the team comes to terms with this the better Pantheon will be. That doesn't mean there isn't some good ideas to take from VG but for the most part they should distance themselves as much as possible.
The idiots raving about how good VG was are the definition of "vocal minority." The servers were bled down to one shortly after launch then had to go F2P due to lack of players again. I played VG at launch and shortly before it's end and it was equally bad both times, just for different reasons.
Have to say, sorry you didn't play Vanguard at launch. If you could play it (and thats a big IF), you know the game, even in its state, was amazing. The music, the scenery, the classes, the sheer size of the world, the level of challenge... what did work was great. Unfortunately, so much of it didn't and the tech issues, exploits and hacks really made it unappealing in the end.
The other issue I found (and that you may be referring to) is that by the time the game was stabilized, many things were changed (read: made easier) that, in my opinion, took away from the magic.
Where did "Secondly, Second of all, etc go?" #engrish.
It was basically the statement that grouping isn't what's missing. I honestly meant to erase that part as I figured someone would say this, then figured WTH, lets see who does.. #stickler I take it you had nothing to add to the actual point I made?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I love Mr. McQuaids enthusiasm, and love the idea of having to work together, but it is the Achilles heel that will keep the game small. No one will commit the time nowadays to assembling teams/groups for PvE, unless it's done with silly LFG tools. imho these tools defeat the purpose and immersion of role playing games. Not only that, a major portion of the population have drifted into solo playing mmorpgs, where time is better managed in real life. Gone are the days of "lets make a deal" with wives, husbands, girlfriends, etc, to score gameplay hours. If you want a hit in today's mmorpg world, design a title with some solo player dungeons that have rewards that matter, and while your at it, figure out how to make a single player raid.
What can this orphaned group do (other than rant and complain, wanting their voices heard)? They can either keep playing the old games, or even the emulators that are popping up, or they can keep trying some of the newer MMOs that simply aren't designed for them, hopping from one to the other. Or they can wait for a new MMO, a modern MMO with new features and ideas, but that is still built on the foundation that appeals to them.
Bottom line: if you are going to call this group 'small', then you also would have to call the players of EQ, UO, DAoC, the Final Fantasy MMOs, etc. a small group. Some of these 'old' games with, relative to the size of the gamespace now, a small playerbase, were extremely successful (and by that I mean both great games, and also that they made a ton of money). So the key here is that 'small' by today's standards is still at least hundreds of thousands of players. And it makes no sense, financially or creatively, to ignore them.
The old vs new MMO topic reoccurs more than any other on this forum and EQ is always the most cited game. I am not sure how people are missing this Perhaps someones bias causes them to overlook or forget about them. Some of the longest threads in recent years were about classic Everquest and the need for a "true" EQ remake.
Just keep on trucking Brad, we both know there's a subset of people waiting for this game... and it certainly isn't as small as some would like you to believe.
So, God-willing, the Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen team and I will be able to make or allow that magic to happen a third time, and it too will be not just a great game, but also that catalyst again that brings people together, sometimes out of their comfort zone, learning how to work together not just tactically in a virtual world but also socially in the real world. Its why we're not afraid to make a game with a target audience who enjoys grouping and being part of a team, even if that turns other potential players off. It's really the only kind of MMO I want to be involved in and it's why we're going to stick to our guns and try to re-capture that magic again. Honestly, nothing else appeals to me -- I want to always be part of creating 'more than a game' and then, after release, to personally be part of that community as well
- catalyst again that brings people together
- sometimes out of their comfort zone
- learning how to work together
- target audience who enjoys grouping and being a part of a team
This reaches into the minds and heart's of the true mmo player. A Virtual World.
For this to happen, the game world MUST NOT BE DISJOINTED with modern social tools that give a false sense of community. With modern social tools, its just another game on a long list. No matter how well the game is made graphically, coded, advertised, large, enjoyable the game will turn out the same as all others made since the classics.
Modern social tools sound nice on paper. They work very well for a month or two. Then again any style works for a month or two. However the final out come is always the same. What's left are the few that decide to call the game home no matter what !
You may ask yourself why would anyone " call a game home no matter what " ? The answer is simple, they have an allegiance to there inner social Guilds. 99.999% of players don't have this allegiance. Because of modern social tools they will never attain this allegiance in a game with a Dungeon Finder, or Cross Realm Technology.
The above quote from Brad McQuaid is strong. Let's all hope he is using insight and not just nice words.
If Vanguard was a small example of what he and the team can create, imagine what they can create with it being their own game and time instead of some investment company who pushes the product out just to make a buck?
With all the issues Vanguard had and it had many, you could see what Vanguard could have become. It had all the right pieces, the right characteristics to make a fantastic mmo, the pieces for form communities, the incredibly large world with incredibly large continents(A lot bigger then most if not all MMO's in our current iteration of mmos) I could go on and on about what it had going for it. Unfortunately and we will probably never know was what happened behind the scenes to cause such a crash and burn but thats neither here nor there. Whats important is that Vanguard was another McQuaid project that was phenomenal but lacked polish, and most important, the time required to make it what it could have been. Vanguard was incredible even with its problems. It blew everything away in terms of scope, size, flavor of classes, land mass, openness. I sure hope they make it similar with no zones and it being all open how Vanguard was. I miss it.
If Vanguard was a small example of what he and the team can create, imagine what they can create with it being their own game and time instead of some investment company who pushes the product out just to make a buck?
With all the issues Vanguard had and it had many, you could see what Vanguard could have become. It had all the right pieces, the right characteristics to make a fantastic mmo, the pieces for form communities, the incredibly large world with incredibly large continents(A lot bigger then most if not all MMO's in our current iteration of mmos) I could go on and on about what it had going for it. Unfortunately and we will probably never know was what happened behind the scenes to cause such a crash and burn but thats neither here nor there. Whats important is that Vanguard was another McQuaid project that was phenomenal but lacked polish, and most important, the time required to make it what it could have been. Vanguard was incredible even with its problems. It blew everything away in terms of scope, size, flavor of classes, land mass, openness. I sure hope they make it similar with no zones and it being all open how Vanguard was. I miss it.
Well, yeah. If Vanguards engine wouldn't have sucked so much and the game hadn't had more bugs than the temple of doom it would have been a great game.
Nothing wrong catering to guilds - its a niche approach and it has worked for other guild centric games on the market where actively working with your guild is a key end game mechanic.
But it is a small niche, still the game has to be good first even for a niche crowd.
I don't see not having group finder as catering to guilds if anything it's the opposite.
I find people socialize just as much with people within their own guild as they did in the pre-FR/LFD days the difference is those tool killed a good chunk of the incentive to socialize with people outside of your guild.
I remember a few years back someone comparing how many people on the server outside of his guild he knew now compared to back in the day and it was pretty stark difference. I can say my own experiences are the same. LFR/LFD destroyed much of the sense of server community. They didn't really impact guild communities that much.
I've only seen a few quotes from this guy, but they're all the same. Always fearful that launch won't work because of the "target audience." Every time I read any of these, it just sounds like he's getting ready to blame players that aren't interested in the game.
I remember a few years back someone comparing how many people on the server outside of his guild he knew now compared to back in the day and it was pretty stark difference. I can say my own experiences are the same. LFR/LFD destroyed much of the sense of server community. They didn't really impact guild communities that much.
Good point it also goes along with what I was saying earlier in the thread, this is what is truly missing in these games today. There is plenty of reason to group in modern games from group based dungeons to raids to guilds (even in the games people decry as being the most solo oriented overall). There are few steps taken to bring these groups of people together for something more than that.
This doesn't exactly have to mean sandbox (Like SWG or UO) either. Hell things as simple as player to player training, different racial languages to speak/learn, etc.. Can help in this. Lore unlocks based on community involvement is another avenue. SO many possibilities. So it worries me to hear nothing but the words Challenge and group from a games community. As that's not what creates a good virtual world, all that really does
is make grouping necessary to tackle content, it doesn't really promote
much more than that.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
Boobs are LIFE, Boobs are LOVE, Boobs are JUSTICE, Boobs are mankind's HOPES and DREAMS. People who complain about boobs have lost their humanity.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
The point I would think is you don't just focus on one thing to make a successful MMORPG.. Going all the way back to my initial experience with MMORPG's in 2002, I've never experienced one where I had to play at a certain time. Because they weren't all about one sole activity, that's a very shallow game if this is the case......
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
It wasn't even my question lol. Brad answered Shaigh without probably actually reading what he wrote. So, he either misunderstood the question or dodged it. I just rephrased it, or reiterated it to him. Because I'm curious without any group tools and etc. what their plans are. After all, this mmo is supposedly taking the old and adding some new. Maybe they have a system in place. Considering how much they want to emphasis on grouping. I would imagine this has to be an important topic.
While I fully agree that cross realm Dungeon Finder and LFG tools is a bad idea there is nothing wrong with implementing them so long as they are not cross realm. Dungeon finders and LFG tools are great additions to an MMORPG if done right. Truth be told, they are necessary features for today's player demographic. They just need to be implemented smartly.
I think if one is going to create an MMO where grouping is important, where socializing is important, where community is important, and where content and game mechanics are designed to be 'sticky' and keep players attention for months, even years, then yes, you need to do what you can to help foster in-game relationships. You need to help players with similar tastes and playstyles find each other so they can become friends. You need to make it so groups are not too difficult to organize and put together. You need to create an environment that doesn't impede socializing and interaction.
That said, it has to be done right and with the goal that you're helping bring people together so that they can form relationships that last for weeks, months, even years. For example, simply creating functionality that allows several people to easily come together, form a group, zip through a dungeon with little to no need to communicate, and then disperse doesn't cut it. Sure, you technically helped 'find people to do a dungeon', but that's really about it. If the player doesn't need to interact with the other players, they're not making friends, and community is not being built. If there isn't some downtime for people to chat about RL, you're not creating an environment where real friendships are going to form.
So yes, MMOs need to help people come together. But they need to do it in meaningful ways that result in people finding friends and a community emerging from all of the interaction.
seems brad been a member here since 2005!
well one thing i liked from wow vanilla was you could find the players but physically had to get to a area and use a summon stone and if i recall needed 2 to get there. now i think it was a good comprimise. i personally do not like the join queue and auto join and warp to dungeon thing that exist nowadays. however , that said i do not like to spam server chat for group or have to wait for members to travel all across the world for 1 hour to get there and some even drop before then(assuming travelling is not super fast),so maybe have 2 get there and summon rest. also , having gone back to eq1 for the progression server i have to say DO NOT bring back camps on rare mobs or loot or raids! i enjoyed my nostalgia trip but once higher up and facing this aspect of the game i basically quit also at once.
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
The way modern day MMORPGs handle this is by using "megaservers." In the case of a traditional MMORPG with say... 5 servers, using "megaserver" tech instead would mean that there could potentially be 5 times more players available to group. Many people don't like the whole "megaserver" thing, but it does serve a purpose and there is never a need for merges.
Pantheon (and I suppose Brad) has decided to go traditional and so the truth is that they will simply not address this problem at all. It will have peak population and low population times and if people ONLY play at low population times, it will be more difficult to find people to play with.
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
The way modern day MMORPGs handle this is by using "megaservers." In the case of a traditional MMORPG with say... 5 servers, using "megaserver" tech instead would mean that there could potentially be 5 times more players available to group. Many people don't like the whole "megaserver" thing, but it does serve a purpose and there is never a need for merges.
Pantheon (and I suppose Brad) has decided to go traditional and so the truth is that they will simply not address this problem at all. It will have peak population and low population times and if people ONLY play at low population times, it will be more difficult to find people to play with.And this is why it will be a niche game with people playing it who don't mind having to use the old style of putting a group together.
You seem to not understand this game is not being made for the masses.
A PVE game with updated graphics and elements of the old with new ideas. Seems many have realized there are no large type of mmo being made with there type of content so they are latching on to this type of mmo hoping the devs with change certain aspects, sorry you wont win.
You seem to not understand this game is not being made for the masses.
A PVE game with updated graphics and elements of the old with new ideas. Seems many have realized there are no large type of mmo being made with there type of content so they are latching on to this type of mmo hoping the devs with change certain aspects, sorry you wont win.
So in other words, they're only interested it's what's flying around in their echo chamber?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
The way modern day MMORPGs handle this is by using "megaservers." In the case of a traditional MMORPG with say... 5 servers, using "megaserver" tech instead would mean that there could potentially be 5 times more players available to group. Many people don't like the whole "megaserver" thing, but it does serve a purpose and there is never a need for merges.
Pantheon (and I suppose Brad) has decided to go traditional and so the truth is that they will simply not address this problem at all. It will have peak population and low population times and if people ONLY play at low population times, it will be more difficult to find people to play with.And this is why it will be a niche game with people playing it who don't mind having to use the old style of putting a group together.
You seem to not understand this game is not being made for the masses.
A PVE game with updated graphics and elements of the old with new ideas. Seems many have realized there are no large type of mmo being made with there type of content so they are latching on to this type of mmo hoping the devs with change certain aspects, sorry you wont win.
No, I understand that it's a game being made for a small amount of people. I was just addressing the person that was asking how it was possible to make sure people play every day at 4 AM. I am actually one of the people that doesn't like the megaserver style. I do think that it's funny that you think I'm trying to "win" and get the game changed into a megaserver though.
The problem for group-oriented MMO's is how they tend to split up the playerbase all over the world due to level-mechanics. While its not that much of a problem at launch or during primetime it becomes a huge issue if you mostly play during off-hours more than three months after launch.
What kinds of mechanisms do you have in store to make sure people can enjoy your game at hours when very few people are around?
It's all about having enough people online. Too many, and you have over-crowding and too much competition for resources and frustration. But too few is even worse: not having enough people online not only makes it more difficult to find groups, it hinders the development of a real MMO community (something we feel, for a game like Pantheon, is absolutely essential).
So monitoring server/shard populations is very important. If they are too low, then shards need to be combined. If they are too high, then new shards need to be deployed.
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
How is it possible for developers to make sure enough people play the game everyday, say at 4am? You want them to hand out extra reward to people for playing after 12am? Does this kind of question make any sense? How can developer dictate when players should play or not? They have already said it will be group oriented mmo so that means a player should play during a time when he or she can find a group easily.
Not everyone plays evenings and weekends so I was curious how pantheon devs viewed those kinds of situations and what their plans were to alleviate the problem. There are quite a lot of things that devs can do and I'm curious of the activities @Kilsin made hints about.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
While I fully agree that cross realm Dungeon Finder and LFG tools is a bad idea there is nothing wrong with implementing them so long as they are not cross realm. Dungeon finders and LFG tools are great additions to an MMORPG if done right. Truth be told, they are necessary features for today's player demographic. They just need to be implemented smartly.
Well, there are ways to replace them with in game content. The right place to find adventurers for a dungeon or dangerous quest is of course the tavern. Have certain physical in game places just for that purpose instead of a menu and the world actually will feel more alive.
Physically meeting potential party members do have advantages after all. Let potential groups get a table at the tavern, you could even make it so that hovering over the table will show you what the group want to do.
Having everyone just spamming the general chat or the local one in the main city suck, but it must be possible to make finding a group slightly more fun.
Yeah this is touching a key point. The "modern" quality of life improments just needs to be made as a natural part of the game world, instead of a technical solution that breaks immersion. This idea of dungeon/group finder as a tavern is an excellent example, and it only take some magination to come up with similar in-game not immersion breaking replacements for other systems.
Fast travel, I know many don't like that, but I mean eq had fast travel, it was called gates and because it was made on the games premisses, it was not immersion breaking. Mail system, yes again don't make mails available from anywhere in the world, but only at your personal mailbox(es), and mail is not instantanious it takes time for a curier to carry it.. and while we are at it, maybe make currier missions for players.
So the point is these quality of life systems just need to part of the specific game worlds logic, and not bring the player back to reality on every turn. You should be playing in "our world now". Compromises may need to happen, but as a general rule quality of life improvements are good when done right.
Comments
A few quick comments in reaction to your points:
1. We know that not everyone wants a grouping game. But we also know how big the MMO gamespace is now. Because we are not a large publisher, and because we are not spending the big bucks (e.g. SWTOR), we don't need millions of subscribers to be a profitable and successful company. People do debate how many people want a game like this, and rightfully so. But also remember that calling such a group 'small' is really sort of relative. When EQ peaked at 500,000 players, that was considered an incredible number (and also, EQ was incredibly profitable, making around a half a billion dollars in profit for Sony). But since then, other games (most notably WoW) have blown open the doors and millions, perhaps even 10s of millions, of players have been exposed to the genre. Capturing a 'small' subset of that group for us would mean serious success. That number, especially today, could be called 'small', but for us would be 'huge'.
2. We do absolutely understand that many in our target audience, who want a grouping game, who want a community and social game, who want a home they'll play for months and even years, have grown up, gotten married, have kids, demanding jobs, etc. We are acutely aware of that. So while we will certainly have epic and challenging content, we are designing the game so that it doesn't require long, contiguous play sessions. I can't go into all of the details yet, but in general, you'll be able to play a couple of hours, log off, return perhaps the next night, and continue on.
3. But the target audience I'm talking about (the older player, who likely remembers the older style MMOs, the shared experiences, etc.) is not our only target audience. Our other important audience is a subset of younger gamers looking for a challenge, who enjoy co-op games (e.g. working in a group, as a team), but likely haven't experienced this in an MMO since this has been missing from MMOs for quite some time.
Lastly, some people argue that the 'old' days are over, and gamers today do not want what we're building. I really have do take issue with this. Yes, the gamespace has grown considerably. MMOs are no longer niche -- WoW, as a good example, grew the gamespace like crazy, primarily by making a more casual game (there's lots of other reasons too -- Blizzard make a lot of really smart decisions). Even more recent MMOs have targeted even more casual players -- you might even call them 'single player gamers who want to play in an online virtual world, but really don't want to group or socialize much, who want content they can take down themselves, and even content that can be quickly consumed). This is all fine. Fact: the number of people interested in MMOs has skyrocketed, and most of that growth has been casual and even single player gamers being drawn to MMOs (and some MMOs being designed with them in mind). When you grow an audience, the more people you get, the more different kinds of gamers you get. This has not only happened, but it makes sense. The bigger the group, the greater the variety of people within that group, and while they may in general all want an 'MMO', want to be part of that online experience, that they are looking for more specifically is going to vary considerably.
Where I draw the line though, and hold my ground, is when some people go beyond acknowledging that and also assert that the 'old school' gamer somehow no longer exists. Respectfully, I don't think this argument holds water. Growing a gamespace, making MMOs that appeal to more casual and even single player mindsets, does not also somehow magically remove and cause the audience that still wants a more social, group-oriented, challenging, community focused experience to literally vanish. They are still here. The group may be arguably a 'small' subset of the MMO gamespace because so many more people are now part of that gamespace. But 'small' when you're talking about millions of people is still a sizable group. And that group, for the most part, has felt orphaned. Just look at all of the debate, the long threads, where group/community gamers are debating constantly with the more single player oriented MMO player, arguing over what an MMO really is, what they want that the other group doesn't, etc. These debates have not only been raging for years, talked about on message boards, in blogs, etc., they also aren't going away.
What can this orphaned group do (other than rant and complain, wanting their voices heard)? They can either keep playing the old games, or even the emulators that are popping up, or they can keep trying some of the newer MMOs that simply aren't designed for them, hopping from one to the other. Or they can wait for a new MMO, a modern MMO with new features and ideas, but that is still built on the foundation that appeals to them.
Bottom line: if you are going to call this group 'small', then you also would have to call the players of EQ, UO, DAoC, the Final Fantasy MMOs, etc. a small group. Some of these 'old' games with, relative to the size of the gamespace now, a small playerbase, were extremely successful (and by that I mean both great games, and also that they made a ton of money). So the key here is that 'small' by today's standards is still at least hundreds of thousands of players. And it makes no sense, financially or creatively, to ignore them.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brad McQuaid
CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc.
www.pantheonmmo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The other issue I found (and that you may be referring to) is that by the time the game was stabilized, many things were changed (read: made easier) that, in my opinion, took away from the magic.
I take it you had nothing to add to the actual point I made?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Just keep on trucking Brad, we both know there's a subset of people waiting for this game... and it certainly isn't as small as some would like you to believe.
With all the issues Vanguard had and it had many, you could see what Vanguard could have become. It had all the right pieces, the right characteristics to make a fantastic mmo, the pieces for form communities, the incredibly large world with incredibly large continents(A lot bigger then most if not all MMO's in our current iteration of mmos) I could go on and on about what it had going for it. Unfortunately and we will probably never know was what happened behind the scenes to cause such a crash and burn but thats neither here nor there. Whats important is that Vanguard was another McQuaid project that was phenomenal but lacked polish, and most important, the time required to make it what it could have been. Vanguard was incredible even with its problems. It blew everything away in terms of scope, size, flavor of classes, land mass, openness. I sure hope they make it similar with no zones and it being all open how Vanguard was. I miss it.
I hope he pulls this one off.
I find people socialize just as much with people within their own guild as they did in the pre-FR/LFD days the difference is those tool killed a good chunk of the incentive to socialize with people outside of your guild.
I remember a few years back someone comparing how many people on the server outside of his guild he knew now compared to back in the day and it was pretty stark difference. I can say my own experiences are the same. LFR/LFD destroyed much of the sense of server community. They didn't really impact guild communities that much.
This doesn't exactly have to mean sandbox (Like SWG or UO) either. Hell things as simple as player to player training, different racial languages to speak/learn, etc.. Can help in this. Lore unlocks based on community involvement is another avenue. SO many possibilities. So it worries me to hear nothing but the words Challenge and group from a games community. As that's not what creates a good virtual world, all that really does is make grouping necessary to tackle content, it doesn't really promote much more than that.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
So, basically you are just going to do what every other mmo does? You will merge servers when pop is low and open new servers if the servers are bursting at the seems. I really don't think that answers what Shaigh asked. He is asking how you will help in game with making sure a player who doesn't exactly play at the prime times (or weren't there at first month or two during launch) get groups and finish other group related tasks, when at those odd hours players are sometimes hard to find.
Boobs are LIFE, Boobs are LOVE, Boobs are JUSTICE, Boobs are mankind's HOPES and DREAMS. People who complain about boobs have lost their humanity.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
well one thing i liked from wow vanilla was you could find the players but physically had to get to a area and use a summon stone and if i recall needed 2 to get there.
now i think it was a good comprimise.
i personally do not like the join queue and auto join and warp to dungeon thing that exist nowadays.
however , that said i do not like to spam server chat for group or have to wait for members to travel all across the world for 1 hour to get there and some even drop before then(assuming travelling is not super fast),so maybe have 2 get there and summon rest.
also , having gone back to eq1 for the progression server i have to say DO NOT bring back camps on rare mobs or loot or raids!
i enjoyed my nostalgia trip but once higher up and facing this aspect of the game i basically quit also at once.
Pantheon (and I suppose Brad) has decided to go traditional and so the truth is that they will simply not address this problem at all. It will have peak population and low population times and if people ONLY play at low population times, it will be more difficult to find people to play with.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Fast travel, I know many don't like that, but I mean eq had fast travel, it was called gates and because it was made on the games premisses, it was not immersion breaking. Mail system, yes again don't make mails available from anywhere in the world, but only at your personal mailbox(es), and mail is not instantanious it takes time for a curier to carry it.. and while we are at it, maybe make currier missions for players.
So the point is these quality of life systems just need to part of the specific game worlds logic, and not bring the player back to reality on every turn. You should be playing in "our world now". Compromises may need to happen, but as a general rule quality of life improvements are good when done right.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0