With the recent news of blizzard opening classic servers how do ya'll think this will effect numbers player wise if the games are released in somewhat close proximity of each other? There is a huge demand for classic wow obviously, hell I'm even looking forward to reliving it again.
Could this slightly sway VR to adjust there game play somewhat with the new possible competition? I know there to completely different games but classic did offer much more social aspect back in the day.
Thanks for your replies
Isn't Pantheon targeting the Classic MMO audience? If so, then Classic WoW isn't in the same league as Pantheon. The community on this site, and for good reason, shunned WoW when it released in 2004. It completely dumbed down the genre, opened the flood gates for non-MMO gamers to influence the direction of the MMO genre, and here we are now over a decade later and we were right.
So I don't think Pantheon has anything to worry about regarding "classic" WoW servers.
I think VR has plenty of reason to worry about WoW in any form. Basically, it punked EQ1 (and EQ2) and took their customers. There's plenty to be concerned about if Pantheon only ends up as an 'EQ1 with modern graphics'. If there's nothing more than nostalgia attracting the potential Pantheon customer, what's stopping a WoW re-release from taking more of Brad's customers?
I'm pretty sure that VR doesn't want to put in years and years of work only to be out of business at Launch Day + 1 year.
I believe the reason why most of us left UO, EQ, DAoC, and Shadowborne were because of how the game has aged and being burnt out several years over on the available content. Give us a new game, with new territories to explore, with similar mechanics (ie. grouping to xp), and new graphics and we'll be happy. That's all we've asked for for over a decade now.
Classic WoW servers is just offering more of the same. Why would anyone want to continuously repeat the same content that they continuously repeated for how many years before Cataclysm changed it all? Now if Blizzard released a new MMO with classic WoW mechanics and design philosophy, then we'd have something to be concerned about.
Isn't Pantheon targeting the Classic MMO audience? If so, then Classic WoW isn't in the same league as Pantheon. The community on this site, and for good reason, shunned WoW when it released in 2004. It completely dumbed down the genre, opened the flood gates for non-MMO gamers to influence the direction of the MMO genre, and here we are now over a decade later and we were right.
So I don't think Pantheon has anything to worry about regarding "classic" WoW servers.
I don't think most people shunned WoW early on. The purists like myself regretted some aspects of it like the linear nature and weak death penalty, but otherwise, it wasn't that different from EQ circa 2005.
WoW classic will be good for Pantheon if the time is right. It would undoubtedly take potential players if the two launched simultaneously, but should WoW classic come out at least a few months prior, it would increase demand for a more traditional mmo experience. Pantheon would become the most comparable offering.
I never got into EQ. I chose DAOC as my MMO instead, and then SWG. I tried WoW late 2005 and the game was nothing like the PvE experience in DAoC. DAoC and EQ, from my understanding, were a lot alike in the PVE department. Essentially, you formed groups and camped mobs for hours to level up.
In WoW, you ran solo, collecting menial tasks...I mean quests marked with a ! for all the retards and lazy people who couldn't be bothered to talk to NPC's Elder Scrolls style. For groups, you spammed a channel for a significant amount of time to find a group, and then travel a significant distance to start the instanced dungeon.
In old MMO's, people were experts at grouping including tanking, healing, and support roles. CC was a real thing and mandatory. People knew the ins and outs of all classes because we grouped all the time. In WoW, people acting like they had no sense and were obsessed with loot like they were playing Diablo or something.
As an aside, it seems EQ1 has brought the classic death penalty back. At max level res does not give you back your xp loss. Its a bug though, and will be fixed... eventually.
wow classic will be cool , for a while but will die fast , once the HC gets to the top and farm the content then what? , the difference btw casual and HC on classic was huge....ditto for pvp , a T2 rogue could kill a casual before cheap shot faded off...how is that fun ? isnt fun for the casual since they die before even having a chance , and isnt fun for the rogue because its feel like killing a boar on durotar.
the rosed tinted glasses will be broken before classic hits 1 year.
Pantheon however is a fresh new mmo , new content , new zones , new lore , if done right can keep ppl interested for a long time. Some decisions are still on the "bad" side imo , but thats a personal opinion.
WoW already has the timewalkers feature where you can go back and run previous raids and encounters (including the ones that came out at original release). And all those quests people leveled up on are still there. So I'm not getting why WoW Classic is even a thing. But to each their own.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
WoW already has the timewalkers feature where you can go back and run previous raids and encounters (including the ones that came out at original release). And all those quests people leveled up on are still there. So I'm not getting why WoW Classic is even a thing. But to each their own.
The content may be there, but with the current design you cannot recreate the need to interact with people, the slower steeper pace, and the challenge. You also cannot bring back the kind of open world PvP without removing battlegrounds - just to name a few reasons.
Isn't Pantheon targeting the Classic MMO audience? If so, then Classic WoW isn't in the same league as Pantheon. The community on this site, and for good reason, shunned WoW when it released in 2004. It completely dumbed down the genre, opened the flood gates for non-MMO gamers to influence the direction of the MMO genre, and here we are now over a decade later and we were right.
So I don't think Pantheon has anything to worry about regarding "classic" WoW servers.
I don't think most people shunned WoW early on. The purists like myself regretted some aspects of it like the linear nature and weak death penalty, but otherwise, it wasn't that different from EQ circa 2005.
WoW classic will be good for Pantheon if the time is right. It would undoubtedly take potential players if the two launched simultaneously, but should WoW classic come out at least a few months prior, it would increase demand for a more traditional mmo experience. Pantheon would become the most comparable offering.
I don't agree, because I don't think WoW was a traditional MMO experience. I think WoW was markedly different from the games that preceeded it and defined/initially grew the genre/MMO market (except, EQ2, which launched in the same general timeframe).
The only games that survived EQ and WoW were those that put an innovative spin on the genre...
WoW opened up the market to casuals, and made it possible for them to actually be end-gamers in an MMORPG. In EQ, being an end-game raider often meant raiding 4-6 days a week. WoW made it possible to do this with less time investment. It also considerably sped up the leveling timeline for new players, compared to older MMORPGs (before ez-mode patches/expansions).
WoW also introduced the concept of gear resets - or at least popularized it. It wasn't until WoW's popularity that you could actually expect literally all of your gear to become useless after a new expansion released. This was not the case in older games - even through level cap increases. It was fairly customary to still farm items from content 1-2 expansions back, sometimes even more, in EQ or DAoC.
I don't actually think the Death Penalty in EQ was that bad. The only thing that sucked was corpse rotting, but that became largely a non-issue for most people as the game populated and you had access to more Necros, SKs, Clerics, and Paladins. The bigger issue was running across zones from Binds (often in major cities) to where your corpse was... with no gear :-P
I think WoW classic is attractive to a different type of player than EQ was, and Pantheon will be attractive to the EQ type player. I don't think Pantheon will be a failure, but I think it's going to be working with in-built limitations since the players who really revered EQ (i.e. the players who weren't extremely fickle when it comes to that type of MMORPG) are all older Gen X or Early Millennial players, these days.
The two issues that I have with EQ-type games are:
1. I don't know if I have or care to schedule the amount of time needed to play them in a progressive manner... and
2. These games are very dependent on user base size, and the attitudes of the users who play it. If the players who play Pantheon are similar to the players who played EQ, then that will be very good for the game. If they are similar to the types of players who play games like WoW or Lineage II, that may not pan out as well, because it can turn those other players off. Its community is a large reason why EQ has been able to survive. It has always had some of the most dedicated players, and the attitudes of those players are like a snapshot in gamer history. Other newer games haven't had that, which is why the communities were so fickle and the games have been so susceptible to implosion (mass exodus soon after release, toxicity, etc.).
And to be honest, judging by the forums here (at least), I don't have much faith in this games prospective community. I will take a wait and see approach to that, though.
Given my life situation, I'm probably more prone to play another WoW-like game, even though I'd prefer an EQ-like game. Having to depend so deeply on other people can render the game unplayable for some, which is why they like the solo-friendliness of WoW and it's ilk. I hate it, but it's substantially better than sitting at the zone-in yelling "LFG!"
Isn't Pantheon targeting the Classic MMO audience? If so, then Classic WoW isn't in the same league as Pantheon. The community on this site, and for good reason, shunned WoW when it released in 2004. It completely dumbed down the genre, opened the flood gates for non-MMO gamers to influence the direction of the MMO genre, and here we are now over a decade later and we were right.
So I don't think Pantheon has anything to worry about regarding "classic" WoW servers.
I don't think most people shunned WoW early on. The purists like myself regretted some aspects of it like the linear nature and weak death penalty, but otherwise, it wasn't that different from EQ circa 2005.
WoW classic will be good for Pantheon if the time is right. It would undoubtedly take potential players if the two launched simultaneously, but should WoW classic come out at least a few months prior, it would increase demand for a more traditional mmo experience. Pantheon would become the most comparable offering.
I never got into EQ. I chose DAOC as my MMO instead, and then SWG. I tried WoW late 2005 and the game was nothing like the PvE experience in DAoC. DAoC and EQ, from my understanding, were a lot alike in the PVE department. Essentially, you formed groups and camped mobs for hours to level up.
In WoW, you ran solo, collecting menial tasks...I mean quests marked with a ! for all the retards and lazy people who couldn't be bothered to talk to NPC's Elder Scrolls style. For groups, you spammed a channel for a significant amount of time to find a group, and then travel a significant distance to start the instanced dungeon.
In old MMO's, people were experts at grouping including tanking, healing, and support roles. CC was a real thing and mandatory. People knew the ins and outs of all classes because we grouped all the time. In WoW, people acting like they had no sense and were obsessed with loot like they were playing Diablo or something.
Agree. But I don't think the WoW solo experience was a bad thing. I think that pre-end game, it sucks having to spend hours and hours looking for parties just to level. It wastes a ton of time. I remember days where I was online for 6 hours in EQ and needed a specific instance to be done for flagging purposes. I didn't do it. 6 hours, down the drain, cause there was nothing else to do...
MPG Trials in OoW. Vxed and Tipt in GoD. Farming specific dungeons for specific items in LDoN. Having to kill specific bosses for flagging in PoP. Having to go to specific zones or kill specific MOBs for Epic 1.0/1.5/2.0 Quests.
This caused all sorts of issues especially in the realm of class balance, as well, since depending on groups means that your class choice is a huge factor in how enjoyable or productive your gameplay is... Enjoy or picked the wrong class when you started? You may have to reroll to get any decent groupage at all...
I don't think WoW's solo quests leveling experience became an issue until Blizzard got lazy and extended it to areas of the game where it didn't belong... Like the World Quest System.
In reality, I'd probablyl prefer an AA system similar to EQ or EQ2 with open/contested group XP zones where you farmed experience and viable loot - like in EQ2. The EQ2 developers, rightfully, saw this as necessary when you have limited amounts of dungeons and dungeon lockouts.
Otherwise, your game becomes a solo fest. That convenience is nice at first, you players start to question why they're playing a multi-player game if 90% of their gameplay is solo (especially when they're paying for it).
The progression race is keeping WoW in the game. Blizzard has done the impossible. They've convinced every casual player that they are a progression raider, the same way they've convinced the casuals in Overwatch that they are competitive FPS players :-P
They have a knack for that, but it's necessary for them due to the derivative and redundant nature of their content design. That's why they've ballooned up the difficulty tiers for raiding and ditched 10 man raiding :-P
That is very odd, were you not in a guild? Whenever a group/small raid was needed to get people through content, our guild usually got something together for people. We were probably more of a 2nd tier raiding guild (We didn't require attendance, like most top guilds). I had high dps as my Necro and my wife had top geared Chanter/Cleric, so we usually helped form what was needed for people to get through things. Most guilds back then did, from my remembering.
If you rarely attended things and played, then I know some guilds kind of were like meh....But ours tried to get everyone qualified, especially due to our status as 2nd tier and raid attendance not being required. We could be slow though, since we could only drag (help lower/lesser geared people) 1-2 people at a time through some stuff.
Thinking back, it is kind of funny to think how we were a lower tier raid guild, and when they had 72 person raids and we would have to unfortunately leave people out of the raid sometimes. Now it seems most raiding is 12-24 people in a lot of games. Back then though, some zones if they had 2 large raids in zone it may crash like Chardok, 200 people in the zone was almost guarantee zone crashing. Trains were crazy in that zone, it looked like the zerg in starcraft, if someone let a mob run far.
Wow beat eq for one reason - quests. At the time eq was known as neverquest. There is no way pantheon copies that classic mentality of constant camping no questing.
Ermm that wasn't the reason, you are forgetting EQ2 which was quest based and came out before WOW. Yeah two weeks before but like it or not it was still before WOW so how did WOW beat EQ2.
There's a huge demand for classic WoW because we don't have proper MMO on the market atm. Pantheon is going to be one unless they screw it up somehow, so 12 years old game shouldn't be a competitor for them in any way.
yea, those 200 people will be a MASSIVE success :P
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Wow beat eq for one reason - quests. At the time eq was known as neverquest. There is no way pantheon copies that classic mentality of constant camping no questing.
Ermm that wasn't the reason, you are forgetting EQ2 which was quest based and came out before WOW. Yeah two weeks before but like it or not it was still before WOW so how did WOW beat EQ2.
EQ2 initially had a lot of lag and crashing problems. I suspect that it wasn't quite ready to release, but they had to release when they did in order to beat WoW to the market. Of course WoW had equal problems with stability and crashing, but EQ2 was not positioned to say 'look - we are good, come play here'
WoW also was opening up 'new' lore. A lot of people that had played their strategy games wanted an experience in that world. WoW could also run on a toaster.
Wow beat eq for one reason - quests. At the time eq was known as neverquest. There is no way pantheon copies that classic mentality of constant camping no questing.
Ermm that wasn't the reason, you are forgetting EQ2 which was quest based and came out before WOW. Yeah two weeks before but like it or not it was still before WOW so how did WOW beat EQ2.
When eq2 released it was not playable by most machines, so wow beat eq2 for a different reason.
With the recent news of blizzard opening classic servers how do ya'll think this will effect numbers player wise if the games are released in somewhat close proximity of each other? There is a huge demand for classic wow obviously, hell I'm even looking forward to reliving it again.
Could this slightly sway VR to adjust there game play somewhat with the new possible competition? I know there to completely different games but classic did offer much more social aspect back in the day.
Thanks for your replies
First of all, I would really like to know, how did you manage to come up with "Pantheon VS WoW Classic" . There is no VS.
Pantheon is not a game , as we speak , and in no way you can compare WoW Classic with anything, let alone Pantheon.
Secondly , when will you guys stop supporting bad games and or bad companies/management ?!
On January 13, 2014, Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen was announced alongside a Kickstarter campaign
That is almost 4 years ago and all you guys have is some ... pre-pre-pre-zzzzzz-alpha version.
Yes yes. "but but .. it has potential". Even I , if I start making a list with some uber super mega nice features on paper, at the end you will say "...it has potential".
So yeah. When we finally see MMO games, coming up from kickstarters , only then, I will change my mind. And when I say games, I mean GAMES , and not some .. demo from 3 guys who just want to make a living by keeping that...demo "alive".
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy? Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
So yeah. When we finally see MMO games, coming up from kickstarters , only then, I will change my mind. And when I say games, I mean GAMES , and not some .. demo from 3 guys who just want to make a living by keeping that...demo "alive".
I actually think a lot of these kickstarters are a bunch of unemployed game developers who can't find work who are using their only skills as a means to keep themselves off the unemployment line. That if something else came their way, they'd be all over it in a heartbeat.
So many remember WoW and EQ2 but no one remembers another that came around the same time which if it took off would of changed the mmo even more and that was Vanguard. Pantheon is really just a remake of Vanguard not WoW or EQ2 or even older titles. Vanguard could of been one of the best MMO's to come out but again failed as EQ2 did to think of future pc gaming which was not going with 4.5GHz single core CPU's but instead went with multi-core CPU's and WoW won out in the MMO scene because it ran on single cores running 1.8GHZ and then a small video card nothing like the other above required that is how WoW did it not by making a beast of a game that required a PC for 6 years down the road but one that was already out.
Sense the release of World of Warcraft many games tried to copy its design to make there game get the players but the secret is they used old tech to make the game work not systems that where not even out yet. Yeah Wow was a good game with all the bells and whistles but it was never a EQ or UO oe DAoC it was its own game and was made to work on older systems like the other that came before.
But to me Pantheon is not going to be the next great game its going to be another EQ and or copy of the classic game that many of us cut or teeth on with graphics no better then what we had 10 years ago when Lotro and many others came out with. The game is going to try and grab as many old schoolers it can but sorry alot of us do not want another copy cat game alot of us are waiting for something better, Something that does not use the classic tab targeting and 10 tool bars of half wasted skills and slow combat that lasts way to long but a game thats going to grab our attention and give us something we have never seen before.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Isn't Pantheon targeting the Classic MMO audience? If so, then Classic WoW isn't in the same league as Pantheon. The community on this site, and for good reason, shunned WoW when it released in 2004. It completely dumbed down the genre, opened the flood gates for non-MMO gamers to influence the direction of the MMO genre, and here we are now over a decade later and we were right.
So I don't think Pantheon has anything to worry about regarding "classic" WoW servers.
I don't think most people shunned WoW early on. The purists like myself regretted some aspects of it like the linear nature and weak death penalty, but otherwise, it wasn't that different from EQ circa 2005.
WoW classic will be good for Pantheon if the time is right. It would undoubtedly take potential players if the two launched simultaneously, but should WoW classic come out at least a few months prior, it would increase demand for a more traditional mmo experience. Pantheon would become the most comparable offering.
I don't agree, because I don't think WoW was a traditional MMO experience. I think WoW was markedly different from the games that preceeded it and defined/initially grew the genre/MMO market (except, EQ2, which launched in the same general timeframe).
The only games that survived EQ and WoW were those that put an innovative spin on the genre...
WoW opened up the market to casuals, and made it possible for them to actually be end-gamers in an MMORPG. In EQ, being an end-game raider often meant raiding 4-6 days a week. WoW made it possible to do this with less time investment. It also considerably sped up the leveling timeline for new players, compared to older MMORPGs (before ez-mode patches/expansions).
WoW also introduced the concept of gear resets - or at least popularized it. It wasn't until WoW's popularity that you could actually expect literally all of your gear to become useless after a new expansion released. This was not the case in older games - even through level cap increases. It was fairly customary to still farm items from content 1-2 expansions back, sometimes even more, in EQ or DAoC.
I don't actually think the Death Penalty in EQ was that bad. The only thing that sucked was corpse rotting, but that became largely a non-issue for most people as the game populated and you had access to more Necros, SKs, Clerics, and Paladins. The bigger issue was running across zones from Binds (often in major cities) to where your corpse was... with no gear :-P
I think WoW classic is attractive to a different type of player than EQ was, and Pantheon will be attractive to the EQ type player. I don't think Pantheon will be a failure, but I think it's going to be working with in-built limitations since the players who really revered EQ (i.e. the players who weren't extremely fickle when it comes to that type of MMORPG) are all older Gen X or Early Millennial players, these days.
The two issues that I have with EQ-type games are:
1. I don't know if I have or care to schedule the amount of time needed to play them in a progressive manner... and
2. These games are very dependent on user base size, and the attitudes of the users who play it. If the players who play Pantheon are similar to the players who played EQ, then that will be very good for the game. If they are similar to the types of players who play games like WoW or Lineage II, that may not pan out as well, because it can turn those other players off. Its community is a large reason why EQ has been able to survive. It has always had some of the most dedicated players, and the attitudes of those players are like a snapshot in gamer history. Other newer games haven't had that, which is why the communities were so fickle and the games have been so susceptible to implosion (mass exodus soon after release, toxicity, etc.).
And to be honest, judging by the forums here (at least), I don't have much faith in this games prospective community. I will take a wait and see approach to that, though.
Given my life situation, I'm probably more prone to play another WoW-like game, even though I'd prefer an EQ-like game. Having to depend so deeply on other people can render the game unplayable for some, which is why they like the solo-friendliness of WoW and it's ilk. I hate it, but it's substantially better than sitting at the zone-in yelling "LFG!"
I agree that WoW wasn't a traditional MMO, even in the beginning. That is why I said a more traditional mmo. It did incorporate some of the things we liked about the genre early on, not the least of which was that it was harder in general, encouraged more grouping, and had far less accessibility options, even if it still had instancing (the worst of all). Even leveling took longer, and was much more troublesome alone (particularly with pvp) than it has become since. Some of the more egregious factors you point out were not part of classic WoW (no gear resets, few casual raiders).
Player types are not the dichotomy you describe. There are people who enjoy both. Those with an extreme like for one of the two may not find the other nearly as enjoyable, but few rejected it altogether. That level or like or dislike is also relative in that the design of wow classic was much closer to that of EQ than current WoW or other new mmorpgs.
Thus, classic WoW will once again popularize aspects of mmorpgs that have been cast aside. Many who play it will be looking for something else to scratch that itch once it's over. That can only be a good thing for Pantheon.
Wow beat eq for one reason - quests. At the time eq was known as neverquest. There is no way pantheon copies that classic mentality of constant camping no questing.
I literally never heard it referred to as neverquest. Evercrack, yes, but not neverquest. Of course I was about 6 months late to WoW so maybe that was why.
Anyways, I would take "neverquest" over "fetch me 10 wolf canines, except magically only 1 out of every 5 wolves has canines that drop"
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Wow beat eq for one reason - quests. At the time eq was known as neverquest. There is no way pantheon copies that classic mentality of constant camping no questing.
If Pantheon is a quest hub to quest hub circus I'll be deeply saddened. But I don't think they are going that way. Did you miss the quests in EQ? You had to actually talk and hail people to get them.
It sounds like you are agreeing with me that some questing is warranted, as you argue that eq had quests.
However, the classic eq quest system was poorly implemented and effectively was not a part of the main game at all. Many were broken, and almost none had rewards enough to motivate the population to want to do them. Hence the common mockery "neverquest".
Quest hub to quest hub is definitely not needed, but there does need to be enough working questing WITH rewards that it makes sense for the population to consider them part of the game.
Actually having to read NPC dialog and having to actually interact with them and figure out their quest is "poor implementation"?
No, poor implementation is a quest system where the quest is so poorly written that its not clear what keyword is needed to advance the quest, and when you finally finish the quest reward was a slap in the face. Poorly implemented meaning so bad that almost no one used it.
Dont get me wrong - Im not saying wow is superior, but at the time wow launched there was a hunger for something more than just camping forever and ever. IMO that is the main reason people left eq at that point. Thats all Im saying.
I will agree with this. EQ had some superiority in that the quests actually felt like, for real quests. However, he is correct that a lot of times it was difficult to determine what word you needed to say, and also that the majority of the time the rewards were pretty terrible.
However, again, I would still take that system any day of the week over WoW. Some of the most rage inducing moments I've had in my life were the ridiculous escort quests in that game where you had to sit around thumbing your ass for 15 minutes because some dumb ass quest NPC decided he randomly had a torn Achilles tendon and could only move at .2 mph.
Realistically there is an opportunity to do it a LOT better. Make the quests long and difficult and take thought and such like in old EQ, but balance out the rewards so that they're actually worth doing.
I've always thought WoW's biggest mistake was making quests the primary way of gaining XP. Quests should have been for gear IMO, not XP, the XP should be from killing mobs, or exploring, or whatever. The problem with WoW's system is it removed pretty much all choice from the game.
In EQ if saw a bandit compound on a hill and wanted to beat my way to the top of it to see what was there, I could, and there was an actual benefit to it. I got XP and money and whatever. In WoW there was literally 0 percent in killing, doing, or going anywhere in the game UNLESS you had a quest for it. It took literally all fun of exploration out of the game for me.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Wow beat eq for one reason - quests. At the time eq was known as neverquest. There is no way pantheon copies that classic mentality of constant camping no questing.
I literally never heard it referred to as neverquest. Evercrack, yes, but not neverquest. Of course I was about 6 months late to WoW so maybe that was why.
Anyways, I would take "neverquest" over "fetch me 10 wolf canines, except magically only 1 out of every 5 wolves has canines that drop"
Neverquest was what my friends and I called it. I doubt if we were alone. My friends and I played for 5 or so years so we enjoyed the game. We just laughed that it was called Everquest when about 90% of the quests were not worth doing
Comments
Classic WoW servers is just offering more of the same. Why would anyone want to continuously repeat the same content that they continuously repeated for how many years before Cataclysm changed it all? Now if Blizzard released a new MMO with classic WoW mechanics and design philosophy, then we'd have something to be concerned about.
In WoW, you ran solo, collecting menial tasks...I mean quests marked with a ! for all the retards and lazy people who couldn't be bothered to talk to NPC's Elder Scrolls style. For groups, you spammed a channel for a significant amount of time to find a group, and then travel a significant distance to start the instanced dungeon.
In old MMO's, people were experts at grouping including tanking, healing, and support roles. CC was a real thing and mandatory. People knew the ins and outs of all classes because we grouped all the time. In WoW, people acting like they had no sense and were obsessed with loot like they were playing Diablo or something.
At max level res does not give you back your xp loss. Its a bug though, and will be fixed... eventually.
the rosed tinted glasses will be broken before classic hits 1 year.
Pantheon however is a fresh new mmo , new content , new zones , new lore , if done right can keep ppl interested for a long time. Some decisions are still on the "bad" side imo , but thats a personal opinion.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
WE used to talk about WoW killers, Now we are talking about WoW killing?
What was the name of the last MMO that was shut down specifically because of a player base mass exodus to one new game?
I would think there should be a place in the market for both of these titles. Assuming they deliver what their players want.
I don't agree, because I don't think WoW was a traditional MMO experience. I think WoW was markedly different from the games that preceeded it and defined/initially grew the genre/MMO market (except, EQ2, which launched in the same general timeframe).
The only games that survived EQ and WoW were those that put an innovative spin on the genre...
WoW opened up the market to casuals, and made it possible for them to actually be end-gamers in an MMORPG. In EQ, being an end-game raider often meant raiding 4-6 days a week. WoW made it possible to do this with less time investment. It also considerably sped up the leveling timeline for new players, compared to older MMORPGs (before ez-mode patches/expansions).
WoW also introduced the concept of gear resets - or at least popularized it. It wasn't until WoW's popularity that you could actually expect literally all of your gear to become useless after a new expansion released. This was not the case in older games - even through level cap increases. It was fairly customary to still farm items from content 1-2 expansions back, sometimes even more, in EQ or DAoC.
I don't actually think the Death Penalty in EQ was that bad. The only thing that sucked was corpse rotting, but that became largely a non-issue for most people as the game populated and you had access to more Necros, SKs, Clerics, and Paladins. The bigger issue was running across zones from Binds (often in major cities) to where your corpse was... with no gear :-P
I think WoW classic is attractive to a different type of player than EQ was, and Pantheon will be attractive to the EQ type player. I don't think Pantheon will be a failure, but I think it's going to be working with in-built limitations since the players who really revered EQ (i.e. the players who weren't extremely fickle when it comes to that type of MMORPG) are all older Gen X or Early Millennial players, these days.
The two issues that I have with EQ-type games are:
1. I don't know if I have or care to schedule the amount of time needed to play them in a progressive manner... and
2. These games are very dependent on user base size, and the attitudes of the users who play it. If the players who play Pantheon are similar to the players who played EQ, then that will be very good for the game. If they are similar to the types of players who play games like WoW or Lineage II, that may not pan out as well, because it can turn those other players off. Its community is a large reason why EQ has been able to survive. It has always had some of the most dedicated players, and the attitudes of those players are like a snapshot in gamer history. Other newer games haven't had that, which is why the communities were so fickle and the games have been so susceptible to implosion (mass exodus soon after release, toxicity, etc.).
And to be honest, judging by the forums here (at least), I don't have much faith in this games prospective community. I will take a wait and see approach to that, though.
Given my life situation, I'm probably more prone to play another WoW-like game, even though I'd prefer an EQ-like game. Having to depend so deeply on other people can render the game unplayable for some, which is why they like the solo-friendliness of WoW and it's ilk. I hate it, but it's substantially better than sitting at the zone-in yelling "LFG!"
Agree. But I don't think the WoW solo experience was a bad thing. I think that pre-end game, it sucks having to spend hours and hours looking for parties just to level. It wastes a ton of time. I remember days where I was online for 6 hours in EQ and needed a specific instance to be done for flagging purposes. I didn't do it. 6 hours, down the drain, cause there was nothing else to do...
MPG Trials in OoW. Vxed and Tipt in GoD. Farming specific dungeons for specific items in LDoN. Having to kill specific bosses for flagging in PoP. Having to go to specific zones or kill specific MOBs for Epic 1.0/1.5/2.0 Quests.
This caused all sorts of issues especially in the realm of class balance, as well, since depending on groups means that your class choice is a huge factor in how enjoyable or productive your gameplay is... Enjoy or picked the wrong class when you started? You may have to reroll to get any decent groupage at all...
I don't think WoW's solo quests leveling experience became an issue until Blizzard got lazy and extended it to areas of the game where it didn't belong... Like the World Quest System.
In reality, I'd probablyl prefer an AA system similar to EQ or EQ2 with open/contested group XP zones where you farmed experience and viable loot - like in EQ2. The EQ2 developers, rightfully, saw this as necessary when you have limited amounts of dungeons and dungeon lockouts.
Otherwise, your game becomes a solo fest. That convenience is nice at first, you players start to question why they're playing a multi-player game if 90% of their gameplay is solo (especially when they're paying for it).
The progression race is keeping WoW in the game. Blizzard has done the impossible. They've convinced every casual player that they are a progression raider, the same way they've convinced the casuals in Overwatch that they are competitive FPS players :-P
They have a knack for that, but it's necessary for them due to the derivative and redundant nature of their content design. That's why they've ballooned up the difficulty tiers for raiding and ditched 10 man raiding :-P
If you rarely attended things and played, then I know some guilds kind of were like meh....But ours tried to get everyone qualified, especially due to our status as 2nd tier and raid attendance not being required. We could be slow though, since we could only drag (help lower/lesser geared people) 1-2 people at a time through some stuff.
Thinking back, it is kind of funny to think how we were a lower tier raid guild, and when they had 72 person raids and we would have to unfortunately leave people out of the raid sometimes. Now it seems most raiding is 12-24 people in a lot of games. Back then though, some zones if they had 2 large raids in zone it may crash like Chardok, 200 people in the zone was almost guarantee zone crashing. Trains were crazy in that zone, it looked like the zerg in starcraft, if someone let a mob run far.
Ermm that wasn't the reason, you are forgetting EQ2 which was quest based and came out before WOW. Yeah two weeks before but like it or not it was still before WOW so how did WOW beat EQ2.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
WoW also was opening up 'new' lore. A lot of people that had played their strategy games wanted an experience in that world. WoW could also run on a toaster.
I don't believe quests had much to do with it
Pantheon is not a game , as we speak , and in no way you can compare WoW Classic with anything, let alone Pantheon.
Secondly , when will you guys stop supporting bad games and or bad companies/management ?!
On January 13, 2014, Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen was announced alongside a Kickstarter campaign
That is almost 4 years ago and all you guys have is some ... pre-pre-pre-zzzzzz-alpha version.
Yes yes. "but but .. it has potential". Even I , if I start making a list with some uber super mega nice features on paper, at the end you will say "...it has potential".
So yeah. When we finally see MMO games, coming up from kickstarters , only then, I will change my mind. And when I say games, I mean GAMES , and not some .. demo from 3 guys who just want to make a living by keeping that...demo "alive".
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
Sense the release of World of Warcraft many games tried to copy its design to make there game get the players but the secret is they used old tech to make the game work not systems that where not even out yet. Yeah Wow was a good game with all the bells and whistles but it was never a EQ or UO oe DAoC it was its own game and was made to work on older systems like the other that came before.
But to me Pantheon is not going to be the next great game its going to be another EQ and or copy of the classic game that many of us cut or teeth on with graphics no better then what we had 10 years ago when Lotro and many others came out with. The game is going to try and grab as many old schoolers it can but sorry alot of us do not want another copy cat game alot of us are waiting for something better, Something that does not use the classic tab targeting and 10 tool bars of half wasted skills and slow combat that lasts way to long but a game thats going to grab our attention and give us something we have never seen before.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw
Player types are not the dichotomy you describe. There are people who enjoy both. Those with an extreme like for one of the two may not find the other nearly as enjoyable, but few rejected it altogether. That level or like or dislike is also relative in that the design of wow classic was much closer to that of EQ than current WoW or other new mmorpgs.
Thus, classic WoW will once again popularize aspects of mmorpgs that have been cast aside. Many who play it will be looking for something else to scratch that itch once it's over. That can only be a good thing for Pantheon.
I literally never heard it referred to as neverquest. Evercrack, yes, but not neverquest. Of course I was about 6 months late to WoW so maybe that was why.
Anyways, I would take "neverquest" over "fetch me 10 wolf canines, except magically only 1 out of every 5 wolves has canines that drop"
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I will agree with this. EQ had some superiority in that the quests actually felt like, for real quests. However, he is correct that a lot of times it was difficult to determine what word you needed to say, and also that the majority of the time the rewards were pretty terrible.
However, again, I would still take that system any day of the week over WoW. Some of the most rage inducing moments I've had in my life were the ridiculous escort quests in that game where you had to sit around thumbing your ass for 15 minutes because some dumb ass quest NPC decided he randomly had a torn Achilles tendon and could only move at .2 mph.
Realistically there is an opportunity to do it a LOT better. Make the quests long and difficult and take thought and such like in old EQ, but balance out the rewards so that they're actually worth doing.
I've always thought WoW's biggest mistake was making quests the primary way of gaining XP. Quests should have been for gear IMO, not XP, the XP should be from killing mobs, or exploring, or whatever. The problem with WoW's system is it removed pretty much all choice from the game.
In EQ if saw a bandit compound on a hill and wanted to beat my way to the top of it to see what was there, I could, and there was an actual benefit to it. I got XP and money and whatever. In WoW there was literally 0 percent in killing, doing, or going anywhere in the game UNLESS you had a quest for it. It took literally all fun of exploration out of the game for me.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche