As far as Sinist's point on as a player buying their gear with in-game money is PTW, I disagree as they did earn it, even if its not through traditional or intended means.
Well, my point about that is that they didn't earn it on that class, which is a big deal.
A necromancer or druid going out and kiting/fear kiting easy safe places solo for 50 levels and then walking into the dungeons camping the low level mobs without any real effort (other than time killing easy PHs) is not the same as playing a class like the monk who was a very hard class to level, required skill to play and a social ability to excel.
That was my point. The necromancer bought his way to easy progression that others would normally have to work for in that class. All I would like is for the progression of a character to be more closely tied to game play skills with gear being a component of that process, not the main driver. That way, the necro (on their monk twink) still has to work to make that twink gear useful, rather than it simply powering them through play.
Necro-ing this point, but keep forgetting to reply - I had discussed that farming items is a negative consequence of having trade-able gear with no level restrictions. But, I'd much rather deal with farmers who twink alts and manage twinking by placing skill based caps as previously discussed than worrying about overpowered alts. Although they'd still have an advantage, it wouldn't be significant enough to steamroll content with appropriate caps.
And, high level gear should be more powerful than rags, so if your higher level character camped it, or your friend/guildie gave it to you - it should have more benefit than a cloth shirt. But, how well you wield it/use it though makes sense that it would improve with your skill-set, which could explain away artificially built in level/skill based damage/ac caps which are gradually removed as your level increases and skills improve.
As far as Sinist's point on as a player buying their gear with in-game money is PTW, I disagree as they did earn it, even if its not through traditional or intended means.
Well, my point about that is that they didn't earn it on that class, which is a big deal.
A necromancer or druid going out and kiting/fear kiting easy safe places solo for 50 levels and then walking into the dungeons camping the low level mobs without any real effort (other than time killing easy PHs) is not the same as playing a class like the monk who was a very hard class to level, required skill to play and a social ability to excel.
That was my point. The necromancer bought his way to easy progression that others would normally have to work for in that class. All I would like is for the progression of a character to be more closely tied to game play skills with gear being a component of that process, not the main driver. That way, the necro (on their monk twink) still has to work to make that twink gear useful, rather than it simply powering them through play.
Necro-ing this point, but keep forgetting to reply - I had discussed that farming items is a negative consequence of having trade-able gear with no level restrictions. But, I'd much rather deal with farmers who twink alts and manage twinking by placing skill based caps as previously discussed than worrying about overpowered alts. Although they'd still have an advantage, it wouldn't be significant enough to steamroll content with appropriate caps.
And, high level gear should be more powerful than rags, so if your higher level character camped it, or your friend/guildie gave it to you - it should have more benefit than a cloth shirt. But, how well you wield it/use it though makes sense that it would improve with your skill-set, which could explain away artificially built in level/skill based damage/ac caps which are gradually removed as your level increases and skills improve.
That is what I mean. I don't want twinking to be removed, just don't want twinking to be able to replace character development otherwise it becomes more of a cheat then an advantage. I know that is a fine line to walk as part of the appeal of twinking is that it feels kind of like you are cheating, but I think it is still possible to achieve that "feeling" of advantage in play without completely invalidating the play process of advancement. Skills system advancement combined with soft/hard level caps are a good way to control this. This way, twinking is still advantageous, but not a cheat to circumvent the effort in developing a character.
Ok, I concede that GW2 and Pantheon are worlds apart in concept. But I wanted to mention an experience I had in GW2.
In that game, you can get as rewards these clickable tokens that will add levels to a character. I kept getting the tokens, so pretty soon I had a collection of max level alts, all leveled entirely with tokens.
My ranger alt I played decently, since I have been a ranger in so many games. But the rest of the alts, I really sucked. Especially my rogue (thief), who might possibly have been the worst rogue ever.
My take away from this experience is that playing a character you did not level up yourself (however that happens - no need to point out the obvious that Pantheon won't have the GW2 mechanic I referenced) makes for a pretty crappy experience for you and for anyone who depends on you.
I think that alts should in some way benefit from the achievement of having leveled up a main already, but imo you should still have to do all the leveling properly.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
My take away from this experience is that playing a character you did
not level up yourself (however that happens - no need to point out the
obvious that Pantheon won't have the GW2 mechanic I referenced) makes
for a pretty crappy experience for you and for anyone who depends on
you.
It was the same in EQ as well. While early EQ had some skill requirements that helped to reduce overpowering a character, there were some items that allowed it to be done which then a player would take a class that was normally group dependent and go out and solo it up (or power level it with another person). The result is as you said, crap players who were terrible and usually ended up sitting on the zone line whining about how nobody would group with the PL Twink.
I think that alts should in some way benefit from the achievement of having leveled up a main already, but imo you should still have to do all the leveling properly.
Well, that is what twinking provides (and well... the progeny system they have planned will allow starting over with some benefit as well). A higher level has access to more money and can handle content solo that someone of lower level might have issues with. The gear gives them a power that they wouldn't normally have unless they went out and group camped all those items themselves.
The point of my mention is that this "advantage" should only be that, not a means to bypass character development. A skill system as was discussed with hard/soft caps can be adjusted and tuned in a way that would allow an advantage with twinking, but... still require effort to the skill development. So, you gain the benefit of having a higher character supply you with some nice things, but you don't get to ignore the entire process of developing a character in the system. That is, twinking doesn't invalidate game play.
You seem to want to shoo away anyone who does not envision every single game feature exactly as you do? I remember Brad making a statement, and this is not a quote but rather a "take away," that he wished people had not been as strident on the Vanguard boards in telling other people that "Vanguard is not for you," because it succeeded in keeping some people from ever playing Vangaurd. Do you want to be "that guy" here? Do you think that means you are helping anyone?
I'm glad you brought that up, because we're seeing a repeat performance with this fans of this title. It drove away people that otherwise may have really enjoyed Vanguard, and it's doing the same now for Pantheon.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
You seem to want to shoo away anyone who does not envision every single game feature exactly as you do? I remember Brad making a statement, and this is not a quote but rather a "take away," that he wished people had not been as strident on the Vanguard boards in telling other people that "Vanguard is not for you," because it succeeded in keeping some people from ever playing Vangaurd. Do you want to be "that guy" here? Do you think that means you are helping anyone?
I'm glad you brought that up, because we're seeing a repeat performance with this fans of this title. It drove away people that otherwise may have really enjoyed Vanguard, and it's doing the same now for Pantheon.
Again, Vanguard sold around 250k copies. It was a successful in that it sold enough, it failed to retain its players for many reasons that has nothing to do with the crowds running off the WoW players at the time.
Vanguard also later marketed itself multiple times and even went FTP as well as implementing many mainstream features over those years, again... appealing to those crowds you say were run off. Where were they by the way? Did Vanguard become successful then? Nope. Why? because as has been discussed many times, the failures of Vanguard were not because some WoW players got their feelings hurt.
Lets put Vanguards failures squarely on the shoulders of its faults, not using such to try and suggest that by not appealing to mainstream, that being honest with players who keep asking for mainstream, that it is why Vanguard struggled and eventually failed.
Vanguard did as it did for a host of reasons. People thumping their chest and telling prospective players to go back to WoW and play on ez-mode was just one of them. It was not the biggest reason, but it was among the reasons. And again, it's an issue Brad raised himself in some post of his long ago (which I have no hope of finding now).
Also, in this industry it is really, really hard (not impossible, but hard) for a game to be given a second chance by players who either didn't like it initially, or who soaked in a bad buzz about it.
So trying to "protect the game" from those dog gone "mainstream" players is a fool's errand and it will hurt sales.
A better practice would be to tell people why you think the game will be more fun one way, instead of another way, and that they might want to try it and see if they like it? That is better overall for the game's future.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Vanguard did as it did for a host of reasons. People thumping their chest and telling prospective players to go back to WoW and play on ez-mode was just one of them. It was not the biggest reason, but it was among the reasons. And again, it's an issue Brad raised himself in some post of his long ago (which I have no hope of finding now).
Also, in this industry it is really, really hard (not impossible, but hard) for a game to be given a second chance by players who either didn't like it initially, or who soaked in a bad buzz about it.
So trying to "protect the game" from those dog gone "mainstream" players is a fool's errand and it will hurt sales.
A better practice would be to tell people why you think the game will be more fun one way, instead of another way, and that they might want to try it and see if they like it? That is better overall for the game's future.
Most of these discussions could be avoided if people would just read the tenants on the site and educate themselves on the product VR is making.
What we get is people coming here telling Pantheon supporters that it is better to have features that conflict with those tenants.
So what is your solution? If you educate them, they argue against you, then throw out fallacies, and repeat things like "EQ is dead, it is Antiquted, VAnguard was a garbage game, blah blah". So how are those people to respond? I mean, these people are coming in and essentially telling everyone that the very purpose and focus of this game is wrong and should be like all the other mainstream garbage OR they go on about another game they loved and demand this game be made to be like that game, because it was better than EQ/VG.
Please explain how you discuss with them? What else can you say but.. "ummm... but this game isn't being made for that style, or that audience... maybe it isn't the game for you?".
Is that running them off? Or should we then listen to everything they have to say, and have the developers come here and listen how this game will fail if it doesn't cater to the 5 min a day solo player who wants flying mounts, fast travel, instant rez with no exp loss, easy content and hand me out systems? Should they listen to them, give them their ear and hear out these people who can't be bothered to read the site and see what this game is about?
By all means, explain to me how we should treat such people who already don't have enough care to educate themselves about the game they claim needs to change to fit them.
I have to agree with OP here, too much focus on gear instead of stats and player skill does not work well with most RMT systems.
When people can buy or or in game money (which also is a problem in games where gold sellers provide that service) the gear need to be pretty balanced.
And yes, I do know that people do like to get new cool gear but when someone just can buy the good gear you kinda destroy that fun anyways.
So either you sell just cosmetic stuff and things that don't affect the balance (bank slots, character slots and similar) or you need to have a rather low dependence on gear. Or you have to have all gear locked as soon as it is dropped or crafted but that do mess up the games economy.
The thing anyways is that once someone buy that good gear they usually tire of the game fast anyways and it annoys the people who don't enough so many of them just wont bother with the game at all.
Short term you might get a large sum by selling gear and gold but in the long run it will hurt your game.
Stop acting like Pantheon is a goal post that you have been hired to defend.
Stop acting like if someone says something you don't agree with, that you need to write a half page diatribe laced with insults.
Stop acting like everyone whose game enjoyment varies from your own is your enemy.
Stop talking down to people.
Try saying "well I see how you might like x," but the current plan is to go with y. The developers have said they feel y is better because ________.
Or, "I would rather the devs do x for _______ reason.
Otherwise, you're not really discussing the game so much as you are using the game as your personal vehicle for being obnoxious.
How about you grow up and quit expecting people to act in a manner that you desire? The world does not revolve around you, people will disagree with you and just because you have an opinion, doesn't make it sound or valid one.
I argue my points, I do so logically and expect you to do the same. If you can't handle being questioned or having your positions questioned, then you have no place being in a social environment because your ego is too fragile to deal with disapproval.
By the way, I have said that exact thing many times.. even to you and your response "This game is not EQ.. blah blah"
Notice I don't have problems discussing with people discussing the game, rather my problems stem from those who are emotionally driven and have thin skins because they can't stand someone being critical of a position they take.
If you want your ego messaged, look elsewhere, I am not your motivational coach. /shrug
Yes you just demonstrated how well you deal with being disagreed with, lol.
I have met your arguments many times, you have became dismissive and then fallicous.
Look at this very example. I asked you how I was to respond to people as I explained and you came back with some emotional requirement of how I am to not offend people using a bunch of emotional indicators on how I should be concerned about their feelings, then you claimed I should approach it a certain way that you yourself already dismissed me for in a previous discussion.
Now you are mocking and dismissive.
You are showing exactly why people would prefer to be short and run off such people. You aren't discussing, you are emotionally arguing. Typical of such issues.
I have met your arguments many times, you have became dismissive and then fallicous.
I am not here to make arguments. I am here to engage in friendly discussion, oftentimes and usually about matters of opinion.
This is not a courtroom. It is a game forum. The people here are not on trial because they happen to see something from a different point of view than you do.
You are here to have arguments.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I have met your arguments many times, you have became dismissive and then fallicous.
I am not here to make arguments. I am here to engage in friendly discussion, oftentimes and usually about matters of opinion.
This is not a courtroom. It is a game forum. The people here are not on trial because they happen to see something from a different point of view than you do.
You are here to have arguments.
There are valid/invalid, sound/unsound positions. You will not hear me argue with you over subjective aspects. Pie vs Cake arguments past simple discussion does not interest me. That said, within these "discussions" there are premises that are invalid, or unsound and they drive peoples opinions. If you want me to accept them simply because you think it is polite, sorry. I would rather be impolite in pointing out a flaw in someones "discussion", than continue on the ignorance of their point.
People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
Most of these discussions could be avoided if people would just read the tenants on the site and educate themselves on the product VR is making.
What we get is people coming here telling Pantheon supporters that it is better to have features that conflict with those tenants.
So what is your solution? If you educate them, they argue against you, then throw out fallacies, and repeat things like "EQ is dead, it is Antiquted, VAnguard was a garbage game, blah blah". So how are those people to respond? I mean, these people are coming in and essentially telling everyone that the very purpose and focus of this game is wrong and should be like all the other mainstream garbage OR they go on about another game they loved and demand this game be made to be like that game, because it was better than EQ/VG.
Please explain how you discuss with them? What else can you say but.. "ummm... but this game isn't being made for that style, or that audience... maybe it isn't the game for you?".
Is that running them off? Or should we then listen to everything they have to say, and have the developers come here and listen how this game will fail if it doesn't cater to the 5 min a day solo player who wants flying mounts, fast travel, instant rez with no exp loss, easy content and hand me out systems? Should they listen to them, give them their ear and hear out these people who can't be bothered to read the site and see what this game is about?
By all means, explain to me how we should treat such people who already don't have enough care to educate themselves about the game they claim needs to change to fit them.
If you have a solution, I am all ears.
I hear you and both sides of this. It's a tough one. Yes, we need to be up-front about what Pantheon is all about. We try to be clear about it -- we talk about it posts, interviews, and even have a page on our website dedicated to the tenets of the game: https://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/game_tenets/
We've also tried to be as up front as possible describing the game in general:
All that said, and some of you are referring to a post I made awhile back, so let me try to make that same point, hopefully more up-to-date and clear this time:
We are being clear about what Pantheon is and is not, about who the audience we are targeting is, and that we are not making a game trying to appeal to everyone, all of the time. I think that's fair, and our responsibility -- pretending the game is something else, or something more in order to get more people to try it out wouldn't be right, it wouldn't ethical IMHO. We need to be honest and open.
That said, I do think we (and the people who are already following Pantheon, our supporters, our fans) should be careful about how we present to others who aren't familiar with the game what it is all about. There's no need to be rude or to make the person who has issues with Pantheon's premise feel belittled or marginalized or to feel unwelcome. I understand that when someone comes in and demands Pantheon be something different than what it is can be frustrating. Especially if they come across as if they are 'entitled' to have their tastes and desires met in every game, as if every developer has some sort of responsibility to make everyone happy. I get that, and I can understand the desire to rant against the 'entitlement' mentality that some people have. I get it.
But I also strongly believe that there are a lot of players out there who have never experienced a game like Pantheon. Perhaps they were too young when the earlier MMOs were out and so never experienced them. Perhaps they had a bad experience with a game that had some features or mechanics that sound similar to Pantheon's. So when they read about the game, its tenants, its core premise, perhaps some of it seems strange to them, or unnecessary, or unattractive. Perhaps on the surface, because they lack perspective and context, they voice an objection or are skeptical as to whether some aspect or mechanic is going to work or not.
I truly believe that many of those people, if they give Pantheon a try, will end up liking it. I can't tell you how many... most? some? a few? I can't predict that level of specificity. But I do strongly believe that a significant group of MMO players who haven't experienced what we are trying to create (and in some cases re-create) and who therefore challenge, or question, or even criticize aspects of the game, if they eventually give the game a chance, will find out that they actually love it. I really believe that. Some things in life simply have to be experienced before you really know if you like something or not.
So that's the conundrum or challenge:
We need to be honest about what Pantheon is all about and to whom it is being made for, the audiences we are targeting. Trying to hide the more controversial tenets so that some people aren't scared away would be a marketing tactic involving dishonesty, and I'm not ok with that. Creating a PR/Marketing plan or approach that avoided talking about the core of the game, that it's a game focused around cooperative play, about community, about challenge, about being rewarded for playing and not accepting RL money or having cash shops, isn't acceptable or ok. Sometimes products or games or movies or whatever *are* marketed that way, but I think it's shady and even sometimes dishonest. So, as you can see from our tenants, our FAQ, our interviews, etc. we are not shying away from letting people know what Pantheon is all about, even if the issue is controversial.
But at the same time, we can do this in a way that isn't negative in nature, or that comes across as elitist, or that criticizes people who question or seem to have issue with what Pantheon is. Instead, we should try to explain *why* we've made the design decisions we've made, *why* we think certain mechanics are what a large group of MMOs players are looking for, *why* there's a group of MMO players who feel orphaned. And perhaps even more importantly, what are the benefits of a game like Pantheon vs. perhaps other MMOs, or what experiences you can have in a game like Pantheon that you perhaps cannot in other more recent MMOs.
.... continued in next post -- as usual, I've exceeded how long a post can be here....
--
-------------------------------------------------------------- Brad McQuaid CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc. www.pantheonmmo.com --------------------------------------------------------------
Explain politely but firmly how cooperative play can be more fun and more memorable than single player play. Explain your own experiences in MMOs that had vibrant communities. Explain why earning an item in-game can be more rewarding and meaningful than simply buying it in a cash shop. Let people know how you found people to play with in EQ or other earlier MMOs and then they became friends and people you really cared about and in many cases are still in contact with even though you haven't played with them in an MMO for years. Talk about the positives of class interdependence -- someone might on the surface feel like being restricted as to what you can do by the class you've chosen is a negative. But if you take the time to talk about how rewarding it is to go into a battle where you and your groupmates have different roles to play, and by depending on each other in order to prevail can actually be more fun and rewarding then being able to do everything yourself, not really needing another person around in order to progress through the game.
I could go on and on and don't want to ramble, but I really think some people will re-think whether or not they are interested in a game like Pantheon if we (both the developers and the community) take the time to try to help them understand that what may seem like a negative or a restriction on the surface actually leads to a more rewarding and fun experience. On the other hand, if they're merely told 'well, this game doesn't sound like it's for you, so, well, go away', then what has really been accomplished?
No, I am not delusional. I know that many people will not be convinced no matter what. Some will have to experience these things themselves before they can determine if the game is for them or not. And, yes, some people even after they experience it will decide, no, this game is not for them. This isn't 1999. The number of people playing MMOs is no longer in the hundreds of thousands, but in the 10s of millions. That means there are a lot more types of online gamers out there now, a much wider and more varied audience. But while that means there is likely a large number of people who won't interested in a game like Pantheon, it also absolutely means there is likely a large number of people who have never experienced a game like Pantheon that *will* like it once they've experienced it or once it's been explained to them.
That's why, for example, Pantheon will be free to play the first 10 levels or so. No up-front cost, so no real risk in trying it out. That's why we're making sure that while the game will look great and take advantage of newer technologies, that it won't require you to have a super high end machine in order to play (a grave mistake we made with Vanguard, btw). We want people to try it out because while some won't like it, many will find out that they actually do.
So, in summary, yes let's be honest about the game that is being made, its core tenets and goals, etc. But at the same time, let's not be dismissive of people who criticize or are skeptical or state that some aspect of the game doesn't sound appealing to them. Let them know why you are attracted to Pantheon, why its tenets and core mechanics are appealing to you. Take the time to explain why you feel many more recent MMOs have veered off course and therefore don't appeal to you or don't re-create the experiences you cherished playing some of the earlier MMOs.
Lastly, I know many of you are already doing this, and doing it well, and we appreciate that very much. I am speaking to those proponents and supporters of Pantheon who are understandably frustrated by some people who criticize what they don't necessarily understand. I get it. I get frustrated too at times. But a kind answer turns away wrath. Let's make an effort to convince the skeptic that he may actually end up liking Pantheon if he gives it a try. Let's take the time to talk about the great experiences we had playing some of the earlier MMOs and why they were so much fun and memorable. Sure, it's easier to just say 'well, this game isn't for you', but sometimes the easy way is not the best way.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------- Brad McQuaid CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc. www.pantheonmmo.com --------------------------------------------------------------
Um, wait, what ? Games are obviously entertainment.
So a movie is a game?
Not all movies are entertainment.
Not all games are entertainment.
However, games like EQ, VG and Pantheon are definitely entertainment.
You aren't following the logic. A game can not be entertainment because a game has its own definition, just as a movie has its own definition. Both can "provide" entertainment, but they themselves are not entertainment by definition. That is, a game may be played "for" entertainment, but a game is not specifically defined as entertainment itself.
This is important when we evaluate what a person seeks when they play a game. That is, a person who wants to play a game expects a competition of obstacles and objectives constrained by rules to which create situations of challenge and failure. The person seeking entertainment may just be seeking a certain experience or action that they find entertaining and is not concerned about the structure of rules and conditions required for success.
These two expectations often collide due to what is expected in a game.
That's why, for example, Pantheon will be free to play the first 10 levels or so.
Are you planning keeping those "free to play" levels on a different environment separate from the "pay to play" players? If not, do you have plans to deal with the numerous problems that will arise from allowing FTP in a contested content game?
I'd hope they'd be limited to only /reply and /group, and only have access to 1-10 content near the city they start at.
I don't think that will be enough. It is likely most of the dungeons and rare spawns will be perma camped by gold farmers and bots/boxing groups, etc... Then you have the FTP trolls, harassers, and griefers following around people and messing with them. Just think of every bad thing that you could do in EQ, that was controlled by reputation and think about how a FTP player has no consequence, no monetary expense, etc... and it will be bad. Every FTP game I have tried is littered with such, Pantheon will be no different and I think it is a bad decision to force people who want to pay to play the game from the start to have to play with the FTP crowd.
What I would suggest is that they make a special server that is only for FTP players and contains the content that they want to be allowed for FTP. Then, if the person decides to pay to play the game, they are then moved to a pay to play server. This way, pay to play never has to deal with the numerous issues that will come from FTP content.
I don't know how others feel, but it is a major turn off to play with the FTP crowd. I have been there, done that, and it is why I don't play MMOs these days.
That's why, for example, Pantheon will be free to play the first 10 levels or so.
Are you planning keeping those "free to play" levels on a different environment separate from the "pay to play" players? If not, do you have plans to deal with the numerous problems that will arise from allowing FTP in a contested content game?
What problems are you talking about, specifically? Your response is somewhat vague.
*Explains politely but firmly,* "Pantheon is first a deeply social game." Please read the FAQ. Treating FTP new players like they have plague, or shunning them entirely, is not being social, and it does not "help people get together and group and also to make lasting friendships." Again, see the FAQ.
I know. I get it. You want a game made up entirely of "elite" people like yourself. Understandable. But that's not what Pantheon is. Maybe after reading the tenants and FAQ you might decide to give Pantheon a try and see if you like it as it is, and as it is envisioned, instead of based on a sense of entitlement that it has to be made just for you.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I'd hope they'd be limited to only /reply and /group, and only have access to 1-10 content near the city they start at.
I don't think that will be enough. It is likely most of the dungeons and rare spawns will be perma camped by gold farmers and bots/boxing groups, etc... Then you have the FTP trolls, harassers, and griefers following around people and messing with them. Just think of every bad thing that you could do in EQ, that was controlled by reputation and think about how a FTP player has no consequence, no monetary expense, etc... and it will be bad. Every FTP game I have tried is littered with such, Pantheon will be no different and I think it is a bad decision to force people who want to pay to play the game from the start to have to play with the FTP crowd.
What I would suggest is that they make a special server that is only for FTP players and contains the content that they want to be allowed for FTP. Then, if the person decides to pay to play the game, they are then moved to a pay to play server. This way, pay to play never has to deal with the numerous issues that will come from FTP content.
I don't know how others feel, but it is a major turn off to play with the FTP crowd. I have been there, done that, and it is why I don't play MMOs these days.
Don't think this will be necessary at all. Without the ability to spam, and access to only a few zones, there is very little a trial account can do. What, they're gonna grief a newbie dungeon are they? Are they going to spam emote to people in town? I mean honestly, there just isn't that much they can do.
Comments
And, high level gear should be more powerful than rags, so if your higher level character camped it, or your friend/guildie gave it to you - it should have more benefit than a cloth shirt. But, how well you wield it/use it though makes sense that it would improve with your skill-set, which could explain away artificially built in level/skill based damage/ac caps which are gradually removed as your level increases and skills improve.
That is what I mean. I don't want twinking to be removed, just don't want twinking to be able to replace character development otherwise it becomes more of a cheat then an advantage. I know that is a fine line to walk as part of the appeal of twinking is that it feels kind of like you are cheating, but I think it is still possible to achieve that "feeling" of advantage in play without completely invalidating the play process of advancement. Skills system advancement combined with soft/hard level caps are a good way to control this. This way, twinking is still advantageous, but not a cheat to circumvent the effort in developing a character.
In that game, you can get as rewards these clickable tokens that will add levels to a character. I kept getting the tokens, so pretty soon I had a collection of max level alts, all leveled entirely with tokens.
My ranger alt I played decently, since I have been a ranger in so many games. But the rest of the alts, I really sucked. Especially my rogue (thief), who might possibly have been the worst rogue ever.
My take away from this experience is that playing a character you did not level up yourself (however that happens - no need to point out the obvious that Pantheon won't have the GW2 mechanic I referenced) makes for a pretty crappy experience for you and for anyone who depends on you.
I think that alts should in some way benefit from the achievement of having leveled up a main already, but imo you should still have to do all the leveling properly.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Well, that is what twinking provides (and well... the progeny system they have planned will allow starting over with some benefit as well). A higher level has access to more money and can handle content solo that someone of lower level might have issues with. The gear gives them a power that they wouldn't normally have unless they went out and group camped all those items themselves.
The point of my mention is that this "advantage" should only be that, not a means to bypass character development. A skill system as was discussed with hard/soft caps can be adjusted and tuned in a way that would allow an advantage with twinking, but... still require effort to the skill development. So, you gain the benefit of having a higher character supply you with some nice things, but you don't get to ignore the entire process of developing a character in the system. That is, twinking doesn't invalidate game play.
I'm glad you brought that up, because we're seeing a repeat performance with this fans of this title. It drove away people that otherwise may have really enjoyed Vanguard, and it's doing the same now for Pantheon.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Vanguard also later marketed itself multiple times and even went FTP as well as implementing many mainstream features over those years, again... appealing to those crowds you say were run off. Where were they by the way? Did Vanguard become successful then? Nope. Why? because as has been discussed many times, the failures of Vanguard were not because some WoW players got their feelings hurt.
Lets put Vanguards failures squarely on the shoulders of its faults, not using such to try and suggest that by not appealing to mainstream, that being honest with players who keep asking for mainstream, that it is why Vanguard struggled and eventually failed.
Nice try though.
Also, in this industry it is really, really hard (not impossible, but hard) for a game to be given a second chance by players who either didn't like it initially, or who soaked in a bad buzz about it.
So trying to "protect the game" from those dog gone "mainstream" players is a fool's errand and it will hurt sales.
A better practice would be to tell people why you think the game will be more fun one way, instead of another way, and that they might want to try it and see if they like it? That is better overall for the game's future.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
What we get is people coming here telling Pantheon supporters that it is better to have features that conflict with those tenants.
So what is your solution? If you educate them, they argue against you, then throw out fallacies, and repeat things like "EQ is dead, it is Antiquted, VAnguard was a garbage game, blah blah". So how are those people to respond? I mean, these people are coming in and essentially telling everyone that the very purpose and focus of this game is wrong and should be like all the other mainstream garbage OR they go on about another game they loved and demand this game be made to be like that game, because it was better than EQ/VG.
Please explain how you discuss with them? What else can you say but.. "ummm... but this game isn't being made for that style, or that audience... maybe it isn't the game for you?".
Is that running them off? Or should we then listen to everything they have to say, and have the developers come here and listen how this game will fail if it doesn't cater to the 5 min a day solo player who wants flying mounts, fast travel, instant rez with no exp loss, easy content and hand me out systems? Should they listen to them, give them their ear and hear out these people who can't be bothered to read the site and see what this game is about?
By all means, explain to me how we should treat such people who already don't have enough care to educate themselves about the game they claim needs to change to fit them.
If you have a solution, I am all ears.
When people can buy or or in game money (which also is a problem in games where gold sellers provide that service) the gear need to be pretty balanced.
And yes, I do know that people do like to get new cool gear but when someone just can buy the good gear you kinda destroy that fun anyways.
So either you sell just cosmetic stuff and things that don't affect the balance (bank slots, character slots and similar) or you need to have a rather low dependence on gear. Or you have to have all gear locked as soon as it is dropped or crafted but that do mess up the games economy.
The thing anyways is that once someone buy that good gear they usually tire of the game fast anyways and it annoys the people who don't enough so many of them just wont bother with the game at all.
Short term you might get a large sum by selling gear and gold but in the long run it will hurt your game.
Stop acting like if someone says something you don't agree with, that you need to write a half page diatribe laced with insults.
Stop acting like everyone whose game enjoyment varies from your own is your enemy.
Stop talking down to people.
Try saying "well I see how you might like x," but the current plan is to go with y. The developers have said they feel y is better because ________.
Or, "I would rather the devs do x for _______ reason.
Otherwise, you're not really discussing the game so much as you are using the game as your personal vehicle for being obnoxious.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
How about you grow up and quit expecting people to act in a manner that you desire? The world does not revolve around you, people will disagree with you and just because you have an opinion, doesn't make it sound or valid one.
I argue my points, I do so logically and expect you to do the same. If you can't handle being questioned or having your positions questioned, then you have no place being in a social environment because your ego is too fragile to deal with disapproval.
By the way, I have said that exact thing many times.. even to you and your response "This game is not EQ.. blah blah"
Notice I don't have problems discussing with people discussing the game, rather my problems stem from those who are emotionally driven and have thin skins because they can't stand someone being critical of a position they take.
If you want your ego messaged, look elsewhere, I am not your motivational coach. /shrug
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Look at this very example. I asked you how I was to respond to people as I explained and you came back with some emotional requirement of how I am to not offend people using a bunch of emotional indicators on how I should be concerned about their feelings, then you claimed I should approach it a certain way that you yourself already dismissed me for in a previous discussion.
Now you are mocking and dismissive.
You are showing exactly why people would prefer to be short and run off such people. You aren't discussing, you are emotionally arguing. Typical of such issues.
This is not a courtroom. It is a game forum. The people here are not on trial because they happen to see something from a different point of view than you do.
You are here to have arguments.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
We've also tried to be as up front as possible describing the game in general:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/what_is_pantheon/
And I think we have a pretty solid FAQ too, although it will continue to grow:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/faqs/
All that said, and some of you are referring to a post I made awhile back, so let me try to make that same point, hopefully more up-to-date and clear this time:
We are being clear about what Pantheon is and is not, about who the audience we are targeting is, and that we are not making a game trying to appeal to everyone, all of the time. I think that's fair, and our responsibility -- pretending the game is something else, or something more in order to get more people to try it out wouldn't be right, it wouldn't ethical IMHO. We need to be honest and open.
That said, I do think we (and the people who are already following Pantheon, our supporters, our fans) should be careful about how we present to others who aren't familiar with the game what it is all about. There's no need to be rude or to make the person who has issues with Pantheon's premise feel belittled or marginalized or to feel unwelcome. I understand that when someone comes in and demands Pantheon be something different than what it is can be frustrating. Especially if they come across as if they are 'entitled' to have their tastes and desires met in every game, as if every developer has some sort of responsibility to make everyone happy. I get that, and I can understand the desire to rant against the 'entitlement' mentality that some people have. I get it.
But I also strongly believe that there are a lot of players out there who have never experienced a game like Pantheon. Perhaps they were too young when the earlier MMOs were out and so never experienced them. Perhaps they had a bad experience with a game that had some features or mechanics that sound similar to Pantheon's. So when they read about the game, its tenants, its core premise, perhaps some of it seems strange to them, or unnecessary, or unattractive. Perhaps on the surface, because they lack perspective and context, they voice an objection or are skeptical as to whether some aspect or mechanic is going to work or not.
I truly believe that many of those people, if they give Pantheon a try, will end up liking it. I can't tell you how many... most? some? a few? I can't predict that level of specificity. But I do strongly believe that a significant group of MMO players who haven't experienced what we are trying to create (and in some cases re-create) and who therefore challenge, or question, or even criticize aspects of the game, if they eventually give the game a chance, will find out that they actually love it. I really believe that. Some things in life simply have to be experienced before you really know if you like something or not.
So that's the conundrum or challenge:
We need to be honest about what Pantheon is all about and to whom it is being made for, the audiences we are targeting. Trying to hide the more controversial tenets so that some people aren't scared away would be a marketing tactic involving dishonesty, and I'm not ok with that. Creating a PR/Marketing plan or approach that avoided talking about the core of the game, that it's a game focused around cooperative play, about community, about challenge, about being rewarded for playing and not accepting RL money or having cash shops, isn't acceptable or ok. Sometimes products or games or movies or whatever *are* marketed that way, but I think it's shady and even sometimes dishonest. So, as you can see from our tenants, our FAQ, our interviews, etc. we are not shying away from letting people know what Pantheon is all about, even if the issue is controversial.
But at the same time, we can do this in a way that isn't negative in nature, or that comes across as elitist, or that criticizes people who question or seem to have issue with what Pantheon is. Instead, we should try to explain *why* we've made the design decisions we've made, *why* we think certain mechanics are what a large group of MMOs players are looking for, *why* there's a group of MMO players who feel orphaned. And perhaps even more importantly, what are the benefits of a game like Pantheon vs. perhaps other MMOs, or what experiences you can have in a game like Pantheon that you perhaps cannot in other more recent MMOs.
.... continued in next post -- as usual, I've exceeded how long a post can be here....
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brad McQuaid
CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc.
www.pantheonmmo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brad McQuaid
CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc.
www.pantheonmmo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not all games are entertainment.
However, games like EQ, VG and Pantheon are definitely entertainment.
This is important when we evaluate what a person seeks when they play a game. That is, a person who wants to play a game expects a competition of obstacles and objectives constrained by rules to which create situations of challenge and failure. The person seeking entertainment may just be seeking a certain experience or action that they find entertaining and is not concerned about the structure of rules and conditions required for success.
These two expectations often collide due to what is expected in a game.
What I would suggest is that they make a special server that is only for FTP players and contains the content that they want to be allowed for FTP. Then, if the person decides to pay to play the game, they are then moved to a pay to play server. This way, pay to play never has to deal with the numerous issues that will come from FTP content.
I don't know how others feel, but it is a major turn off to play with the FTP crowd. I have been there, done that, and it is why I don't play MMOs these days.
What problems are you talking about, specifically? Your response is somewhat vague.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I know. I get it. You want a game made up entirely of "elite" people like yourself. Understandable. But that's not what Pantheon is. Maybe after reading the tenants and FAQ you might decide to give Pantheon a try and see if you like it as it is, and as it is envisioned, instead of based on a sense of entitlement that it has to be made just for you.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests