Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
"Pledge" very odd term,i don't give out free money,especially to other rich game developers.
The ONLY way i give a game developer money is if they sell shares,i would call it a real investment.There is still a problem,we have to TRUST the business to not dilute our shares,make our investment worthless with various types of shares and all the rest of the BS that goes on in stocks and investor firms.
BEST option is to let the developer get their own money,own investors and don't bother trying to make a half assed game just to give yourself an income,to make a living,i only want whole hearted game developers.
I'm sorry guys, I really, really, really tried. I can' t seem to find a way to disagree with this post. I'm not saying I'm not going to give Brad some moniez, just that from looking back through history, Wizardry's post makes sense and hits home.
Its easy to disagree with it. I do so on grounds that the mmorpg industry is one that is extremely hard to garner funding in. Its been tapped out by soulless corps peddling clone games which have tanked, leading investors to believe the genre is too volatile.
If you want a different mmo today, you are going to have to support homegrown games. Once a few of them take off, we may once again see the genre infused with new money and life.
Dullahan is absolutely right. In a way its not just about Pantheon. Hopefully one day soon investors will want to fund more games. But as long as they think its too volatile and arent sure what can and cant work they will be resistant to handing out new money. I think its just a matter of getting the ball rolling on these indie projects. Not just this game, but others. I have funded several games I might not even play. Because I think its important that other games that arent just WoW clone or Korean grinder clone number 5976. So I have given monery to Pathfinder, Pantheon, SotA, and SoL. I have also given to a few single player indie projects as well. Not all of them will succeed but if enough do big investors will come back to the trough. That it the theory anyways. But Id rather try to help that effort than sit and stew in mindless mediocrity of many current games. And I get that not everyone can afford to throw money out left and right. But if you can afford it think of it as not just an investment in that game but in the future of games (Be that you invest in this game or Crowfall, or CoE, etc)
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Dullahan is absolutely right. In a way its not just about Pantheon. Hopefully one day soon investors will want to fund more games. But as long as they think its too volatile and arent sure what can and cant work they will be resistant to handing out new money. I think its just a matter of getting the ball rolling on these indie projects. Not just this game, but others. I have funded several games I might not even play. Because I think its important that other games that arent just WoW clone or Korean grinder clone number 5976. So I have given monery to Pathfinder, Pantheon, SotA, and SoL. I have also given to a few single player indie projects as well. Not all of them will succeed but if enough do big investors will come back to the trough. That it the theory anyways. But Id rather try to help that effort than sit and stew in mindless mediocrity of many current games. And I get that not everyone can afford to throw money out left and right. But if you can afford it think of it as not just an investment in that game but in the future of games (Be that you invest in this game or Crowfall, or CoE, etc)
No no, you and D are right as well, but Wizardry isn't wrong either. The industry isn't going to change without some successes opening doors to gain investor trust again, and we have to start with the homegrown's. BUT, in that same vein of thought, if you look at how many kickstarters and early access games end up going vaporware, or not being at all what they claimed, or otherwise horrid in someway or another, that it's easy to see why Wiz and many, many others are jaded and aren't going to toss a dime in the beggar pots that indies and such are holding out.
Trolling, being trolled, getting banned, yelling at mods, getting perma banned, making new accounts, and still trolling this site since 2004 =D
Dullahan is absolutely right. In a way its not just about Pantheon. Hopefully one day soon investors will want to fund more games. But as long as they think its too volatile and arent sure what can and cant work they will be resistant to handing out new money. I think its just a matter of getting the ball rolling on these indie projects. Not just this game, but others. I have funded several games I might not even play. Because I think its important that other games that arent just WoW clone or Korean grinder clone number 5976. So I have given monery to Pathfinder, Pantheon, SotA, and SoL. I have also given to a few single player indie projects as well. Not all of them will succeed but if enough do big investors will come back to the trough. That it the theory anyways. But Id rather try to help that effort than sit and stew in mindless mediocrity of many current games. And I get that not everyone can afford to throw money out left and right. But if you can afford it think of it as not just an investment in that game but in the future of games (Be that you invest in this game or Crowfall, or CoE, etc)
No no, you and D are right as well, but Wizardry isn't wrong either. The industry isn't going to change without some successes opening doors to gain investor trust again, and we have to start with the homegrown's. BUT, in that same vein of thought, if you look at how many kickstarters and early access games end up going vaporware, or not being at all what they claimed, or otherwise horrid in someway or another, that it's easy to see why Wiz and many, many others are jaded and aren't going to toss a dime in the beggar pots that indies and such are holding out.
We can't both be right.
Either the industry needs indie games fueled by crowdfunding, or it doesn't. I contend that it quite obviously does, because 1) I haven't enjoyed recent mainstream offerings and 2) there a dearth of fully funded, publisher backed mmos in development.
I believe it will take at least some of us crowdfunding mmos to get us back to where we can all enjoy the luxury of buying completed mmorpgs that we actually want to play.
If you could pledge less than 100 bucks, that would be a start. I don't mind supporting games I'm really interested in, but the price tag for this one is a bit too hefty atm.
Perhaps when it gets closer to a finished product.
Is the game buy-to-play with a sub? If so, I'd consider a $50 pledge if this also bought me the final release version of the game. I'm not going to pay for development along the way and then buy the final product.
Is the game buy-to-play with a sub? If so, I'd consider a $50 pledge if this also bought me the final release version of the game. I'm not going to pay for development along the way and then buy the final product.
Its to be B2P+Sub.
As to a $50 pledge, they are considering it. It would probably include the game + 1 month game time.
I kinda think that $50 should just get you beta access, not alpha. There should be more bonuses then just 1 extra copy for $100 after all. Besides, we all know some people that shouldn't get alpha access, that should be for hardcore fans that really want to help the game out instead of people who just pre-order. Saves us a lot of whining from the gang that believe alpha should be in close to perfect shape to enjoy as a full game instead of limited testing to get the game working as intended).
Anyways, I havn't supported the game myself yet ( I am moving into a house this autumn so I am saving up for new furniture and stuff, I will pledge $100 as soon as everything is in place though, promise ).
It likely will not include alpha as we are rapidly nearing the number of alpha testers we will need.
Ok, That made me just pledge those $100. Ah, well, was going to do it anyways.
Is the game buy-to-play with a sub? If so, I'd consider a $50 pledge if this also bought me the final release version of the game. I'm not going to pay for development along the way and then buy the final product.
Its to be B2P+Sub.
As to a $50 pledge, they are considering it. It would probably include the game + 1 month game time.
As to a $50 pledge, they are considering it. It would probably include the game + 1 month game time.
P2P usually includes buying the game, I can't think of any P2P that have released without a box price (even if some that been out a while have allowed you to just start to pay the monthly fees).
B2P doesn't have subs so lets not confuse people. It is the standard model Wow currently uses (hopefully without any kind of cashshop though like Wow have).
A few reasons why I never pledge to these types of games, and why Brad will never see any of my hard earned dollars.
1) They take the Kickstarter route so they don't have to answer to a publisher, instead, they "claim" that they wish to deal with the consumer only and treat them like investors. The issue is we are not treated like investors at all, they act like we should be thrilled when they reveal any parts of their game like they are doing us a favor, yet they wouldn't have a game if it wasn't for us. Investors are given annual reports and are spoken to by the CEO of the company.
2) Brad's antics with Vanguard: Saga of Heroes and the entire Sigil Games debacle is also something to worry about. Sure I believe in second chances, but at the same time the MMO genre is littered with these pledge games with many of them not even released yet and most of them being this earlie access mess that never leaves alpha.
The entire genre right now is a hot mess TBH. They cancel games that show any promise, and keep mass producing these fantasy games that quite frankly we are tired of.This guy Brad is trying to ride off his success in EQ, but what he needs to realise is that its no longer 1998 or 2000, the MMO playing field has changed, and most of the hardcore are gamers are a dying breed. People are being hand fed these EZ mode games now, and would not respond well at all to a game like EQ or Ultima Online back when your loot dropped or perma death. I really don't see the game being a success even if it makes it past beta.
Do I wish them to fail? No I don't, but the likelyhood of success with the games graphics, Brad's rep, and the hardcore features hes promising in a MMO arena where most players are carebears tells me that its not gonna have the subs to support it. Maybe I'm missing something but it dosen't look good from here...
As to a $50 pledge, they are considering it. It would probably include the game + 1 month game time.
P2P usually includes buying the game, I can't think of any P2P that have released without a box price (even if some that been out a while have allowed you to just start to pay the monthly fees).
B2P doesn't have subs so lets not confuse people. It is the standard model Wow currently uses (hopefully without any kind of cashshop though like Wow have).
OK give me a $50 tier and I will swallow my suspicion of Brad's reliability. On that basis the game looks far enough along to be worth the risk and good enough to want to play for at least a month.
Is the game buy-to-play with a sub? If so, I'd consider a $50 pledge if this also bought me the final release version of the game. I'm not going to pay for development along the way and then buy the final product.
Its to be B2P+Sub.
As to a $50 pledge, they are considering it. It would probably include the game + 1 month game time.
The Supporter Forum Access + 1 Game Copy + 1 month + Beta would be fair at this point for $50. 50 Bucks should get your more now than it would at launch as you're buying in early.
The $100 tier does include some in-game items, a title, an additional copy of the game, early name reservation, and alpha, so I think there would be enough of a difference to justify the extra 50 bucks if someone was willing to shell it out. I'd tack on the following pledge:
It would also probably be a good idea to bring back the Subscription option and allow it to accumulate into pledges.
Originally, I had every intention of just letting my $5 a month go all the way until launch. It made me feel good knowing I was continually supporting the game and that I'd eventually "level up" into different pledges by launch. When they removed the option of building towards pledges via subscription, I just shut it off. Bad idea.
It would also probably be a good idea to bring back the Subscription option and allow it to accumulate into pledges.
Originally, I had every intention of just letting my $5 a month go all the way until launch. It made me feel good knowing I was continually supporting the game and that I'd eventually "level up" into different pledges by launch. When they removed the option of building towards pledges via subscription, I just shut it off. Bad idea.
So they had money coming in from monthly backer "subs" and they cut it off?
It would also probably be a good idea to bring back the Subscription option and allow it to accumulate into pledges.
*snip*
So they had money coming in from monthly backer "subs" and they cut it off?
You can still sub, but it now just grants supporter/champion forum access/ability to post versus also accumulating to your pledge total. Which, I'd argue there's really no point to do that instead of buying a pledge when the pledge grants you unlimited forum access unless you just wanted to donate money to the team.
Prior to the change, the sub accumulated into your total pledge amount. And, if your 5 bucks or 15 a month raised you to a higher pledge, then you earned those rewards. It was a change I wasn't in agreement with as well.
At the time of the change, it was referred to as a business decision - Kilsin's post is still under the New's and Annoucements page on the OF. Pledge changes I think. I'll try to find a link.
"Pledge" very odd term,i don't give out free money,especially to other rich game developers.
The ONLY way i give a game developer money is if they sell shares,i would call it a real investment.There is still a problem,we have to TRUST the business to not dilute our shares,make our investment worthless with various types of shares and all the rest of the BS that goes on in stocks and investor firms.
BEST option is to let the developer get their own money,own investors and don't bother trying to make a half assed game just to give yourself an income,to make a living,i only want whole-hearted game developers.
We've certainly attempted to be as clear as possible that we are also looking for angel investors and, while we're looking for more, have done pretty well in that area.
While it would not be appropriate to go into the details of these investments, they are true investments. But they have to be Accredited Investors by law. In order to, for example, sell shares in our company for investment money, the person investing has to be accredited. There are laws in place to protect people. Even it it did make sense to sell equity for smaller amounts of money, we couldn't. That's why crowdfunding is pledges/donations.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------- Brad McQuaid CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc. www.pantheonmmo.com --------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
If you want a different mmo today, you are going to have to support homegrown games. Once a few of them take off, we may once again see the genre infused with new money and life.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Maybe I should start a kickstarter to have people fund my gaming hobby?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Either the industry needs indie games fueled by crowdfunding, or it doesn't. I contend that it quite obviously does, because 1) I haven't enjoyed recent mainstream offerings and 2) there a dearth of fully funded, publisher backed mmos in development.
I believe it will take at least some of us crowdfunding mmos to get us back to where we can all enjoy the luxury of buying completed mmorpgs that we actually want to play.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
Perhaps when it gets closer to a finished product.
And I know it's shallow but I absolutely hate Terminus as the world name. It's such a small detail but it's killing my interest in the game...
As to a $50 pledge, they are considering it. It would probably include the game + 1 month game time.
That just might do it.
B2P doesn't have subs so lets not confuse people. It is the standard model Wow currently uses (hopefully without any kind of cashshop though like Wow have).
1) They take the Kickstarter route so they don't have to answer to a publisher, instead, they "claim" that they wish to deal with the consumer only and treat them like investors. The issue is we are not treated like investors at all, they act like we should be thrilled when they reveal any parts of their game like they are doing us a favor, yet they wouldn't have a game if it wasn't for us. Investors are given annual reports and are spoken to by the CEO of the company.
2) Brad's antics with Vanguard: Saga of Heroes and the entire Sigil Games debacle is also something to worry about. Sure I believe in second chances, but at the same time the MMO genre is littered with these pledge games with many of them not even released yet and most of them being this earlie access mess that never leaves alpha.
The entire genre right now is a hot mess TBH. They cancel games that show any promise, and keep mass producing these fantasy games that quite frankly we are tired of.This guy Brad is trying to ride off his success in EQ, but what he needs to realise is that its no longer 1998 or 2000, the MMO playing field has changed, and most of the hardcore are gamers are a dying breed. People are being hand fed these EZ mode games now, and would not respond well at all to a game like EQ or Ultima Online back when your loot dropped or perma death. I really don't see the game being a success even if it makes it past beta.
Do I wish them to fail? No I don't, but the likelyhood of success with the games graphics, Brad's rep, and the hardcore features hes promising in a MMO arena where most players are carebears tells me that its not gonna have the subs to support it. Maybe I'm missing something but it dosen't look good from here...
Just waiting on the announcement to ante up.
They can release the game and then maybe they get my money if it is good.
But free money in advance?
Hell no.
The Supporter Forum Access + 1 Game Copy + 1 month + Beta would be fair at this point for $50. 50 Bucks should get your more now than it would at launch as you're buying in early.
The $100 tier does include some in-game items, a title, an additional copy of the game, early name reservation, and alpha, so I think there would be enough of a difference to justify the extra 50 bucks if someone was willing to shell it out. I'd tack on the following pledge:
$50 Squire Pledge:
Unlimited Supporter Access
Beta Access
1 Copy of Game
1 Month Sub
Originally, I had every intention of just letting my $5 a month go all the way until launch. It made me feel good knowing I was continually supporting the game and that I'd eventually "level up" into different pledges by launch. When they removed the option of building towards pledges via subscription, I just shut it off. Bad idea.
So they had money coming in from monthly backer "subs" and they cut it off?
Prior to the change, the sub accumulated into your total pledge amount. And, if your 5 bucks or 15 a month raised you to a higher pledge, then you earned those rewards. It was a change I wasn't in agreement with as well.
At the time of the change, it was referred to as a business decision - Kilsin's post is still under the New's and Annoucements page on the OF. Pledge changes I think. I'll try to find a link.
Found the link:
http://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2470/refund-policy-pledge-and-subscription-update
While it would not be appropriate to go into the details of these investments, they are true investments. But they have to be Accredited Investors by law. In order to, for example, sell shares in our company for investment money, the person investing has to be accredited. There are laws in place to protect people. Even it it did make sense to sell equity for smaller amounts of money, we couldn't. That's why crowdfunding is pledges/donations.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brad McQuaid
CCO, Visionary Realms, Inc.
www.pantheonmmo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------