Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Reveals Naming Policies and Rules Ahead of Early Access | MMORPG.com

System

Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Reveals Naming Policies and Rules Ahead of Early Access | MMORPG.com

Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Early Access is almost here, and the team is sharing naming policies and reminders for this next stage of development.

Read the full story here

Hartack

Looking forward to this!
You could call what this small team has done magic, but they'd probably call it 'long hours."

Slapshot1188

Not sure I'd call it magic or long hours...
But Friday can't get here fast enough!

Hartack

Just as one Comparison, Ashes has been in development for, what, over 9 years, with upwards

of 300 people working on the project while this has been in theory for 12 total

with 30

Kyleran

Neither effort is particularly notable nor well run, better save the hurrahs for now until they release, sometime in 2030 or so if we're being optimistic today.

ZenJelly

Game looks awful, not even niche. I look forward to the failure it'll be. We need more of them to set bad examples so that maybe, one day, someone will learn and stop wasting money on obvious throw away games and make something worthwhile.

skeaser

ZenJelly said:

Game looks awful, not even niche. I look forward to the failure it'll be. We need more of them to set bad examples so that maybe, one day, someone will learn and stop wasting money on obvious throw away games and make something worthwhile.

Except that's not how this works. The string of failures of the likes of Age of Conan and Warhammer online scared money away from trying new things, and now if projects like Pantheon fail I fear there won't be funding for anything creative anymore and we'll just get more of the same. Everything failing is not good for the industry.

sweetdreams

Lol naming policies in paid wiping test phases.

sweepstakes99

Some years ago in Neverwinter, I had a minor dispute with another player about something or other.  I don't recall what the dispute was about, but we were grouped together for a dungeon run.  Finally, I asked him why he wanted to do this dungeon.  His answer was to gear up.  I said that I thought that was weird, as I wanted to do the dungeon for fun.  Yes, I wanted gear, too, but having fun was the real goal.

cheyane

sweepstakes99 said:

Some years ago in Neverwinter, I had a minor dispute with another player about something or other.  I don't recall what the dispute was about, but we were grouped together for a dungeon run.  Finally, I asked him why he wanted to do this dungeon.  His answer was to gear up.  I said that I thought that was weird, as I wanted to do the dungeon for fun.  Yes, I wanted gear, too, but having fun was the real goal.

You stole what @Quizzical said in another thread. You thief bot.

Scot

What? I can't be Wolverine1001? End of days for players.

waveslayer

the name policy is a big plus, just dont know if I have the time or desire to be in a group to get most things done.

Above someone named Age of Conan and Warhammer as examples of failures, yes warhammer shut down, but it shouldnt have and AoC is still going and I have played it alot, while it didnt take off it is definatly a good MMoRPG, not sure they are the games that scared big money away

one person saying a game looks aweful dosnt make it so, what I have seen of Pantheon I liked, I have seen games people rave about that I didnt like, same with almost everything, if you stick with what only the masses like then you will miss out on the majority of greatness in life

Slapshot1188

skeaser said:

ZenJelly said:

Game looks awful, not even niche. I look forward to the failure it'll be. We need more of them to set bad examples so that maybe, one day, someone will learn and stop wasting money on obvious throw away games and make something worthwhile.

Except that's not how this works. The string of failures of the likes of Age of Conan and Warhammer online scared money away from trying new things, and now if projects like Pantheon fail I fear there won't be funding for anything creative anymore and we'll just get more of the same. Everything failing is not good for the industry.

People have been claiming that since Pathfinder Online and Ryan Dancey claiming something along the lines of if we didn't support his bad game we wouldn't see any more people try.  Yet somehow there have been hundreds of new games that launched since then.

At the end of the day, propping up a bad game is not a winning move. 

Tyidal

If you’re looking for a similar game that is better, try Embers Adrift. I played both, and this game is a long ways away. This game has potential, but they’re not even close.

With that being said, I’m not an Embers Adrift fanboy, I’m not currently playing it either due to time, but if you’re looking for this style of game, I recommend Embers.

Brainy

Tyidal said:

If you’re looking for a similar game that is better, try Embers Adrift. I played both, and this game is a long ways away. This game has potential, but they’re not even close.

With that being said, I’m not an Embers Adrift fanboy, I’m not currently playing it either due to time, but if you’re looking for this style of game, I recommend Embers.

I agree that Embers is a little better game, especially based on what I seen of Pantheon last Xmas.

But Pantheon has Magic and Players (at least for now).

Embers has 25 people playing?   Probably not the most fun if you like grouping.  If you like an empty game all for yourself, then sure Embers is the place to be.

Its too bad, if the devs at Embers were just a little more in tune with the general playerbase they would likely be putting Pantheon to shame with player numbers.

Slapshot1188

Brainy said:

Tyidal said:

If you’re looking for a similar game that is better, try Embers Adrift. I played both, and this game is a long ways away. This game has potential, but they’re not even close.

With that being said, I’m not an Embers Adrift fanboy, I’m not currently playing it either due to time, but if you’re looking for this style of game, I recommend Embers.

I agree that Embers is a little better game, especially based on what I seen of Pantheon last Xmas.

But Pantheon has Magic and Players (at least for now).

Embers has 25 people playing?   Probably not the most fun if you like grouping.  If you like an empty game all for yourself, then sure Embers is the place to be.

Its too bad, if the devs at Embers were just a little more in tune with the general playerbase they would likely be putting Pantheon to shame with player numbers.

Embers wasn't intended to be a massive gaming phenom.  It was ALWAYS pitched a a bunch of people that were working in their spare time, as a hobby, to try and make the game that THEY wanted to play.   That was crystal clear from day 1.  Did they hope to strike gold?  I'm sure they did, but it was always a longshot. 

As for me, none of my gaming group will consider playing it (they did join a free test) so I'll probably never play it again, but I respect the fact they they pretty much stuck to what they planned, and launched an actual MMO on a shoestring budget.

Brainy

I dont respect any game devs that make games people dont want to play.  If all you can muster is 25 people, then your game is trash.

Make a game worth peoples time to play.

ValdemarJ

skeaser said:

ZenJelly said:

Game looks awful, not even niche. I look forward to the failure it'll be. We need more of them to set bad examples so that maybe, one day, someone will learn and stop wasting money on obvious throw away games and make something worthwhile.

Except that's not how this works. The string of failures of the likes of Age of Conan and Warhammer online scared money away from trying new things, and now if projects like Pantheon fail I fear there won't be funding for anything creative anymore and we'll just get more of the same. Everything failing is not good for the industry.

Check out the "MMORPGs shouldn't be afraid to embrace first-person perspective" thread.

The strongly worded message I get from those comments is that people want familiar and predictable, not creative and experimental. I have mixed feelings about "familiar and time-tested" versus "fresh and creative". Not everything new is good, but also it would be so tedious if every genre type homogenizes into the same old thing, which MMORPGs have done.

Of all the indie MMOs only Albion seems to live up to standards. The rest have all ended up feeling like disappointing fan-fiction projects, this one included. To your point that everything failing is bad, I agree. However, propping up mediocrity just to have something different is also bad. AAA money is always going to play it safe, so here we are.

Brainy

Slapshot1188 said:

It was ALWAYS pitched a a bunch of people that were working in their spare time, as a hobby, to try and make the game that THEY wanted to play.   

This feels like a complete walk-back. It’s obvious they were overly self-absorbed, assuming customers wanted their subpar mechanics. Either the dev team was too clueless or too stubborn to fix it.

They spent seven years developing a game for just 25 players? Seriously? These developers didn’t go into business to make a game for themselves; claiming that is nonsense.

When will we get dev teams who genuinely care about what customers want? Teams that create games people actually enjoy and have fun playing?

The same logic applies elsewhere: I don’t think chefs should serve food no one wants to eat, or companies should make products no one wants to buy. If you’re going to create something, do it right. Make something people can be proud of.

I get that failure happens. What I don’t understand is failing on purpose.

Slapshot1188

Brainy said:

Slapshot1188 said:

It was ALWAYS pitched a a bunch of people that were working in their spare time, as a hobby, to try and make the game that THEY wanted to play.   

This feels like a complete walk-back. It’s obvious they were overly self-absorbed, assuming customers wanted their subpar mechanics. Either the dev team was too clueless or too stubborn to fix it.

They spent seven years developing a game for just 25 players? Seriously? These developers didn’t go into business to make a game for themselves; claiming that is nonsense.

When will we get dev teams who genuinely care about what customers want? Teams that create games people actually enjoy and have fun playing?

The same logic applies elsewhere: I don’t think chefs should serve food no one wants to eat, or companies should make products no one wants to buy. If you’re going to create something, do it right. Make something people can be proud of.

I get that failure happens. What I don’t understand is failing on purpose.

Absolutely not.

If you actually go back on these forums and elsewhere you will see me call out Renfail and his team for having no chance.  I made fun of them when their main programmer posted things about buying a book on network coding or looking something up on the internet.

Then I had a chat with Renfail and he pointed me to the stuff they had published/posted that really said they were just a small group of friends that were trying to make a game that THEY wanted to play, in their off hours and spare time... with no salary for a big chunk of it.

I'd also like to point out that the game is actually still live, playable, and getting updates.  So maybe you should rethink calling it a failure.  Even if it closed tomorrow it would have outlasted many games with literally 100 times the budget.  Heck, there are a lot of MMORPGs that never even make it to launch.

A small group of friends, with ZERO experience were able to develop AND launch a full fledged MMORPG... and that MMORPG has been live and running for over 2 years and counting.

You don't like it.  We get that.  Most people who tried it didn't really love it.  That's a fact. Heck, I didn't love it myself... but a failure?  No.  I'd say they are the poster child for what a Crowdfunded game should be.  Not some $50M project with 100 developers. No.. for a small, very niche product that's a love project of the team.  And thats what they delivered.

And compared to Pantheon?   It's a masterpiece.

Robokapp

MMO mortality rate is too high for any "good ones" to be imminently coming.

This is doomed to fail. 

Eldrach

It looks like a newer version of EQ1, which i’ve wanted for a while. I’ll let them cook it a bit longer before i jump in though

Sovrath

Brainy said:

I dont respect any game devs that make games people dont want to play.  If all you can muster is 25 people, then your game is trash.

Make a game worth peoples time to play.

I doubt anyone makes a game that no one wants to play. They might, however, make one that only a few want to play.

And good for them. Otherwise all that would be made are games for the masses. That’s fine if that’s what they like but that’ also means nothing unique or outside the box would ever be made.

Kyleran

Sovrath said:

Brainy said:

I dont respect any game devs that make games people dont want to play.  If all you can muster is 25 people, then your game is trash.

Make a game worth peoples time to play.

I doubt anyone makes a game that no one wants to play. They might, however, make one that only a few want to play.

And good for them. Otherwise all that would be made are games for the masses. That’s fine if that’s what they like but that’ also means nothing unique or outside the box would ever be made.

EVE Online is a good example of this mindset.  Definitely appeals to a smaller niche, but still is financially successful enough to be profitable over the long haul.

We need more niche oriented titles like EVE I think, plenty of standardized AAA MMORPGs still going strong to serve the masses who enjoy them.

olepi

Maybe it will turn out to be a good game. early access means it will be incomplete and will likely change.

Are they going to charge an incomplete price for an incomplete game? $5 sounds right for something that isn't done and might change.

If they charge full price for an incomplete game then it won't look so good.

Brainy

olepi said:

Maybe it will turn out to be a good game. early access means it will be incomplete and will likely change.

Are they going to charge an incomplete price for an incomplete game? $5 sounds right for something that isn't done and might change.

If they charge full price for an incomplete game then it won't look so good.

Pretty sure they were charging between $1000 to $10,000 to play the absolutely incomplete game.  I am sure the high prices will slowly work their way to zero.
They are probably at around $40 by now I would venture.