I don't see what this MMO will deliver that countless others haven't delivered already. I'm also not a big fan of kickstarter-exclusive rewards only obtainable by those who back enough.
I can't imagine paying for something that won't be available until at least 2017, regardless of who is developing it. Who knows if I'll even still be playing games in 2017?
Originally posted by sirphobos I can't imagine paying for something that won't be available until at least 2017, regardless of who is developing it. Who knows if I'll even still be playing games in 2017?
Teaches you to plan for your future. A very valuable lesson in life!
Their "stretch goals" are pretty funny. If they hit 2.5M, they'll add crafting to the game. At 3.8M they'll add PVP. But at 4.1M they'll add the "Reptilian" race.
Kickstarter projects from notable developers generally do very well. And while Brad has received a lot of criticism in a lot of MMO site circles, the fact remains that he designed one of the most important MMOs in the history of the genre. While Vanguard wasn't everyones cup of tea, it also has a pretty die hard following among those who enjoyed it. So it's not at all surprising to see him doing well.
I wish him luck. If nothing else it's going to be a game that is quite a bit different from what we've been seeing in the past few years. A throwback title. For old farts like me, that's certainly worth giving it a try.
This is what I'm talking about. On the forums people constantly say things like, "There are a TON of people who want old school style MMO's" "The MAJORITY of gamers are sick of these new themepark games!" "Why won't devs realize that there's a HUGE community waiting for an old school game?"
Just like Camelot Unchained which got a bit ridiculous in it's hype considering it didn't exist, they still only got 15k backers despite hitting their goal.
15k is a lot of people if you're talking about chatting on an internet forum about MMO's. 15k people will make a lot of noise. But that's a really really tiny almost non-existent number in terms of playerbase for a game. I'm not sure what the plan is on keeping CU going after launch unless there's a massive influx of people from somewhere.
And now again, they're 11% of the way there in terms of funding and if they stay on this track, they'll hit their target with about 8k-10k backers. That's just to get the game started! Once it's out, I'm really curious what the plan is to maintain players.
Even if someone supports a game, that doesn't guarantee that they will like it when its released or a couple months after release. That's why you need to attract a million players, so when 2/3's of them leave you still have a playerbase. But if you start out with 30k players, you can't afford to lose a single one and need to somehow find others to join.
In any case, best of luck, I hope it turns out how you hope - I want everyone to have a game to call home.
This is what I'm talking about. On the forums people constantly say things like, "There are a TON of people who want old school style MMO's" "The MAJORITY of gamers are sick of these new themepark games!" "Why won't devs realize that there's a HUGE community waiting for an old school game?"
Just like Camelot Unchained which got a bit ridiculous in it's hype considering it didn't exist, they still only got 15k backers despite hitting their goal.
15k is a lot of people if you're talking about chatting on an internet forum about MMO's. 15k people will make a lot of noise. But that's a really really tiny almost non-existent number in terms of playerbase for a game. I'm not sure what the plan is on keeping CU going after launch unless there's a massive influx of people from somewhere.
And now again, they're 11% of the way there in terms of funding and if they stay on this track, they'll hit their target with about 8k-10k backers. That's just to get the game started! Once it's out, I'm really curious what the plan is to maintain players.
Even if someone supports a game, that doesn't guarantee that they will like it when its released or a couple months after release. That's why you need to attract a million players, so when 2/3's of them leave you still have a playerbase. But if you start out with 30k players, you can't afford to lose a single one and need to somehow find others to join.
In any case, best of luck, I hope it turns out how you hope - I want everyone to have a game to call home.
Not sure how you translate kickstarter backers as general interest in the game or people that will play at launch? They aren't even close to related.
Looks like Brad's trying to make another huge and bland game world, but now with forced downtimes, forced grouping and action combat.
Meh.
Well, that sounds good to me (didn't think Vanguard had a bland world at all).
I doubt I'll give him money but if this is completed and it is what he says it is then "I'm in".
I'm just not sure how they think $800k is enough to release the game. Unless I missed something (only saw part of the video and with sound off) and he is chipping in additional funds.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
This is what I'm talking about. On the forums people constantly say things like, "There are a TON of people who want old school style MMO's" "The MAJORITY of gamers are sick of these new themepark games!" "Why won't devs realize that there's a HUGE community waiting for an old school game?"
Just like Camelot Unchained which got a bit ridiculous in it's hype considering it didn't exist, they still only got 15k backers despite hitting their goal.
15k is a lot of people if you're talking about chatting on an internet forum about MMO's. 15k people will make a lot of noise. But that's a really really tiny almost non-existent number in terms of playerbase for a game. I'm not sure what the plan is on keeping CU going after launch unless there's a massive influx of people from somewhere.
And now again, they're 11% of the way there in terms of funding and if they stay on this track, they'll hit their target with about 8k-10k backers. That's just to get the game started! Once it's out, I'm really curious what the plan is to maintain players.
Even if someone supports a game, that doesn't guarantee that they will like it when its released or a couple months after release. That's why you need to attract a million players, so when 2/3's of them leave you still have a playerbase. But if you start out with 30k players, you can't afford to lose a single one and need to somehow find others to join.
In any case, best of luck, I hope it turns out how you hope - I want everyone to have a game to call home.
There's a difference between people wanting old school games and people wanting them and willing to give a developer with a somewhat controversial history their money for a kickstarter program that may or may not come to fruition.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Looks like Brad's trying to make another huge and bland game world, but now with forced downtimes, forced grouping and action combat.
Meh.
Well, that sounds good to me (didn't think Vanguard had a bland world at all).
I doubt I'll give him money but if this is completed and it is what he says it is then "I'm in".
I'm just not sure how they think $800k is enough to release the game. Unless I missed something (only saw part of the video and with sound off) and he is chipping in additional funds.
It's not enough to make an MMO, but he knows that. With Kickstarter, you have to reach your goal or you don't get anything, so he set it low enough to ensure he gets *something*. That's why you see basic game features listed further down the "stretch goals" like crafting at 2.5M. It looks like they believe they need closer to 4M to fund the game.
Does no one remember Vanguard at launch? What a complete let down it was? All the broken promises? The stories of how the staff were all sacked whilst Mcquaid lost all his backers money and reportedly did very little work? SOE having to bail them out and spending years trying to fix it?
I'd seriously advise waiting until launch to see the reviews before spending any money on this.
"When people don't know much about something, they tend to fill in the blanks the way they want them to be filled in. They are almost always disappointed." - Will Wright
Does no one remember Vanguard at launch? What a complete let down it was? All the broken promises? The stories of how the staff were all sacked whilst Mcquaid lost all his backers money and reportedly did very little work? SOE having to bail them out and spending years trying to fix it?
I'd seriously advise waiting until launch to see the reviews before spending any money on this.
Agreed. At most this project doesn't deserve a nickel over 800k just so he's forced to prove he can still deliver a game that isn't terrible, even if there's only 3 areas to explore.
Looks like Brad's trying to make another huge and bland game world, but now with forced downtimes, forced grouping and action combat.
Meh.
Well, that sounds good to me (didn't think Vanguard had a bland world at all).
I doubt I'll give him money but if this is completed and it is what he says it is then "I'm in".
I'm just not sure how they think $800k is enough to release the game. Unless I missed something (only saw part of the video and with sound off) and he is chipping in additional funds.
It's not enough to make an MMO, but he knows that. With Kickstarter, you have to reach your goal or you don't get anything, so he set it low enough to ensure he gets *something*. That's why you see basic game features listed further down the "stretch goals" like crafting at 2.5M. It looks like they believe they need closer to 4M to fund the game.
ah good call and makes sense.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
This is what I'm talking about. On the forums people constantly say things like, "There are a TON of people who want old school style MMO's" "The MAJORITY of gamers are sick of these new themepark games!" "Why won't devs realize that there's a HUGE community waiting for an old school game?"
Just like Camelot Unchained which got a bit ridiculous in it's hype considering it didn't exist, they still only got 15k backers despite hitting their goal.
15k is a lot of people if you're talking about chatting on an internet forum about MMO's. 15k people will make a lot of noise. But that's a really really tiny almost non-existent number in terms of playerbase for a game. I'm not sure what the plan is on keeping CU going after launch unless there's a massive influx of people from somewhere.
And now again, they're 11% of the way there in terms of funding and if they stay on this track, they'll hit their target with about 8k-10k backers. That's just to get the game started! Once it's out, I'm really curious what the plan is to maintain players.
Even if someone supports a game, that doesn't guarantee that they will like it when its released or a couple months after release. That's why you need to attract a million players, so when 2/3's of them leave you still have a playerbase. But if you start out with 30k players, you can't afford to lose a single one and need to somehow find others to join.
In any case, best of luck, I hope it turns out how you hope - I want everyone to have a game to call home.
Not sure how you translate kickstarter backers as general interest in the game or people that will play at launch? They aren't even close to related.
Why not? I don't see any other metrics providing evidence of an "old school" community. Even polls done on this site are sitting in the 10's or sometimes 100's. I'd say kickstarter is well known and 15k is a sizeable population.
I'm not doing a scientific analysis, I'm just stating that if there were that many people that are adamant about someone making an old school game, you'd think they'd want to show their support. Or they can just continue to hang out on forums wondering why no one makes games for them.
Here's an example based off a popular IP:
Torment: Tides of Numenera (single player game) got 75k backers and raised $4.1 million - I'd say that's pretty impressive level of support for a single player game based on Planescape Torment which originally sold a paltry 20k copies. So over the years, it's legacy has grown to the point where it has almost four times more fans than it did the first time around.
So if someone were to say, Torment had a huge cult following, I'd be very inclined to agree with them.
The other part of this equation is, if kickstarter doesn't mean anything, and kickstarter happens to be where developers are trying to bring back the old school MMO, isn't there a disconnect somewhere?
I don't want this to be like the xfire stat discussions. Unless you have numbers showing otherwise, kickstarter is the best metric available. And actual data > forum anecdotes (by many many magnitudes)
I've played WoW, Rift, GW2, EQ2, LotRO, but the only game I keep going back to is Vanguard. I was waiting for news from SOE that EQ:Next would be a relaunch of EQ and Vanguard, but it's not. Not that it doesn't look like a great game, but it's not going to be an updated / retooled Vanguard.
That's what I want.
So I backed Pantheon. I get it, I'm taking a risk, but I'm okay with that.
So I backed Pantheon. I get it, I'm taking a risk, but I'm okay with that.
Dunno ... have read the kickstarter a few times but still have no idea what the game will be like. Maybe it's just me but I find the provided information rather vague and limited.
After reading the feuturelist..i dont see anything special
It has to the potential to be a modern MMORPG that's actually an MMORPG and not a glorified solo/single player game designed for the mindless masses?
An MMORPG that features mostly group-based gameplay - what a concept.
In a perfect world, ALL MMORPGs would be designed this way, people who want to solo all the time would play single player games, and casuals would stick to playing games more suited to casual gameplay (instead of seeing the once glorious MMORPG genre that this dude (Brad) helped pioneer get turned into a field of sludge in an attempt to appeal to everyone).
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
So I backed Pantheon. I get it, I'm taking a risk, but I'm okay with that.
Dunno ... have read the kickstarter a few times but still have no idea what the game will be like. Maybe it's just me but I find the provided information rather vague and limited.
If it's like Vanguard or EQ, count me in
These are my standards for Pantheon:
-A more turn based tactical combat like EQ1, except more exciting
-Group centric with one or two classes that can solo decently
-Minimal questing for xp gain(im probably hoping too much on this one)
-Slow level progression but not obscenely slow, somewhere between EQ Classic and EQ1 a few expansions in
-Xp loss on death, no level loss
-A hybrid of player skill based and build/gear based character power
-Great class design with many race and class choices(real race choices not 50 different humans like Vanguard)
-Intelligent racial stat differences, nothing that makes 1 race the clear choice for 1 class. Like Ogre Warrior or Iksar Necromancer
-Immersive world, no stupid WoW jokes/gimmicks or instance warping that make it feel like a game lobby
-Instances only used when there's no other option; such as, many raids(so 1 guild can't dominate an entire server's PvE)
-Most loot droppable
-Robust monster decision system; such as: running away at low life, pulling out a bow when you try to kite them, monsters able to use every ability you can and vice versa to some extent, monsters CC you and heal intelligently, etc
So I backed Pantheon. I get it, I'm taking a risk, but I'm okay with that.
Dunno ... have read the kickstarter a few times but still have no idea what the game will be like. Maybe it's just me but I find the provided information rather vague and limited.
If it's like Vanguard or EQ, count me in
Brad has been talking a lot on the ReRolled thread. Yes, it should be A LOT like original EQ and Vanguard. I've done a summary of all his comments at Project Pantheon.
I will say this if you have a question ask on the kick starter page. Brad has been responding to anyone who has questions. Cythos is here as well posting(One of the best devs imo from Vanguard). everyone deserves 2nd chance and so does Brad.
If crafting is in Pantheon I will be stoked. Vanguard had one of the best crafting systems in an mmo(SWG being number 1) and the dev who created the crafting system is on the project with Brad.
If you are a veteran EQ/Vanguard player, take the risk and donate because you wont get a chance for that nostalgic feeling ever again if they cant meet the 800k goal.
I really hope MMORPG acknowledges Pantheon and supports this project with an article.
I don't think they've done a great job of explaining how their vision seems to be going in the direction of being more old-school, EQ and Vanguard. Those who have been following the project understand what it's going for, but people who haven't or weren't around for the 'glory' days of EQ may not understand the underlying principles involved.
It seems they want a game where groups matter, items matter, levels matter, spells and abilities you'll aquire IN GAME based on your own efforts will matter, death matters, etc. The game will be largely open world, so you'll have a world instead of just an instanced game lobby. Instancing will take place for story-telling purposes, but basically after your group or raid has already done all the social and content related things to get to that point.
Basically, if you're sick of solo grinding quest hubs to max level, and then speed running instances you're instantly ported into, so you can get tokens to purchase the gear you just replaced a week ago... then Pantheon may be worth a pledge. It's not like there are many other options out there or in the works that will give us this style of game.
And keep in mind a pledge is just basically saying yes, you want something different in the industry and you think this project may be that something different. If the Kickstarter campaign doesn't go how you like or you decide you don't want a game that is challenging, social, and deeper than what we've been getting, then you can always pull your pledge later and wait for something else... which will most likely be another big studio promising they've finally cracked the holy grail of mmo gaming, only to again deliver something shallow and more akin to a Facebook game than anything resembling a truly massive, multiplayer, role-playing game that spawned the genre and that many of us want to find again in projects like Pantheon.
Originally posted by UOlover Brad hasn't posted to kickstarter yet, that's their pr guy. One my main complaints is Brad not posting there yet
Patience young grass hopper,check again.
I check it every 5 minutes, the pr guy owns the creator account. If brad is using it he hasn't said it's him yet. You can't post to the comments section unless you pledge so it would be a thing to get people to pledge so they could chat with Brad but he would rather talk on rerolled.
Comments
I don't know. I played Vanguard at launch.
I don't see what this MMO will deliver that countless others haven't delivered already. I'm also not a big fan of kickstarter-exclusive rewards only obtainable by those who back enough.
Teaches you to plan for your future. A very valuable lesson in life!
I backed it.
But all I got from the video was "Damn that one guy has some monstrous eyebrows!"
Their "stretch goals" are pretty funny. If they hit 2.5M, they'll add crafting to the game. At 3.8M they'll add PVP. But at 4.1M they'll add the "Reptilian" race.
I don't see this ending well.
You make me like charity
Kickstarter projects from notable developers generally do very well. And while Brad has received a lot of criticism in a lot of MMO site circles, the fact remains that he designed one of the most important MMOs in the history of the genre. While Vanguard wasn't everyones cup of tea, it also has a pretty die hard following among those who enjoyed it. So it's not at all surprising to see him doing well.
I wish him luck. If nothing else it's going to be a game that is quite a bit different from what we've been seeing in the past few years. A throwback title. For old farts like me, that's certainly worth giving it a try.
https://www.therepopulation.com - Sci Fi Sandbox.
So "high interest" is 826 people?
This is what I'm talking about. On the forums people constantly say things like, "There are a TON of people who want old school style MMO's" "The MAJORITY of gamers are sick of these new themepark games!" "Why won't devs realize that there's a HUGE community waiting for an old school game?"
Just like Camelot Unchained which got a bit ridiculous in it's hype considering it didn't exist, they still only got 15k backers despite hitting their goal.
15k is a lot of people if you're talking about chatting on an internet forum about MMO's. 15k people will make a lot of noise. But that's a really really tiny almost non-existent number in terms of playerbase for a game. I'm not sure what the plan is on keeping CU going after launch unless there's a massive influx of people from somewhere.
And now again, they're 11% of the way there in terms of funding and if they stay on this track, they'll hit their target with about 8k-10k backers. That's just to get the game started! Once it's out, I'm really curious what the plan is to maintain players.
Even if someone supports a game, that doesn't guarantee that they will like it when its released or a couple months after release. That's why you need to attract a million players, so when 2/3's of them leave you still have a playerbase. But if you start out with 30k players, you can't afford to lose a single one and need to somehow find others to join.
In any case, best of luck, I hope it turns out how you hope - I want everyone to have a game to call home.
Not sure how you translate kickstarter backers as general interest in the game or people that will play at launch? They aren't even close to related.
Well, that sounds good to me (didn't think Vanguard had a bland world at all).
I doubt I'll give him money but if this is completed and it is what he says it is then "I'm in".
I'm just not sure how they think $800k is enough to release the game. Unless I missed something (only saw part of the video and with sound off) and he is chipping in additional funds.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
There's a difference between people wanting old school games and people wanting them and willing to give a developer with a somewhat controversial history their money for a kickstarter program that may or may not come to fruition.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
It's not enough to make an MMO, but he knows that. With Kickstarter, you have to reach your goal or you don't get anything, so he set it low enough to ensure he gets *something*. That's why you see basic game features listed further down the "stretch goals" like crafting at 2.5M. It looks like they believe they need closer to 4M to fund the game.
You make me like charity
Does no one remember Vanguard at launch? What a complete let down it was? All the broken promises? The stories of how the staff were all sacked whilst Mcquaid lost all his backers money and reportedly did very little work? SOE having to bail them out and spending years trying to fix it?
I'd seriously advise waiting until launch to see the reviews before spending any money on this.
"When people don't know much about something, they tend to fill in the blanks the way they want them to be filled in. They are almost always disappointed." - Will Wright
Agreed. At most this project doesn't deserve a nickel over 800k just so he's forced to prove he can still deliver a game that isn't terrible, even if there's only 3 areas to explore.
ah good call and makes sense.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Why not? I don't see any other metrics providing evidence of an "old school" community. Even polls done on this site are sitting in the 10's or sometimes 100's. I'd say kickstarter is well known and 15k is a sizeable population.
I'm not doing a scientific analysis, I'm just stating that if there were that many people that are adamant about someone making an old school game, you'd think they'd want to show their support. Or they can just continue to hang out on forums wondering why no one makes games for them.
Here's an example based off a popular IP:
Torment: Tides of Numenera (single player game) got 75k backers and raised $4.1 million - I'd say that's pretty impressive level of support for a single player game based on Planescape Torment which originally sold a paltry 20k copies. So over the years, it's legacy has grown to the point where it has almost four times more fans than it did the first time around.
So if someone were to say, Torment had a huge cult following, I'd be very inclined to agree with them.
The other part of this equation is, if kickstarter doesn't mean anything, and kickstarter happens to be where developers are trying to bring back the old school MMO, isn't there a disconnect somewhere?
I don't want this to be like the xfire stat discussions. Unless you have numbers showing otherwise, kickstarter is the best metric available. And actual data > forum anecdotes (by many many magnitudes)
I backed it.
I've played WoW, Rift, GW2, EQ2, LotRO, but the only game I keep going back to is Vanguard. I was waiting for news from SOE that EQ:Next would be a relaunch of EQ and Vanguard, but it's not. Not that it doesn't look like a great game, but it's not going to be an updated / retooled Vanguard.
That's what I want.
So I backed Pantheon. I get it, I'm taking a risk, but I'm okay with that.
Dunno ... have read the kickstarter a few times but still have no idea what the game will be like. Maybe it's just me but I find the provided information rather vague and limited.
If it's like Vanguard or EQ, count me in
It has to the potential to be a modern MMORPG that's actually an MMORPG and not a glorified solo/single player game designed for the mindless masses?
An MMORPG that features mostly group-based gameplay - what a concept.
In a perfect world, ALL MMORPGs would be designed this way, people who want to solo all the time would play single player games, and casuals would stick to playing games more suited to casual gameplay (instead of seeing the once glorious MMORPG genre that this dude (Brad) helped pioneer get turned into a field of sludge in an attempt to appeal to everyone).
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
These are my standards for Pantheon:
-A more turn based tactical combat like EQ1, except more exciting
-Group centric with one or two classes that can solo decently
-Minimal questing for xp gain(im probably hoping too much on this one)
-Slow level progression but not obscenely slow, somewhere between EQ Classic and EQ1 a few expansions in
-Xp loss on death, no level loss
-A hybrid of player skill based and build/gear based character power
-Great class design with many race and class choices(real race choices not 50 different humans like Vanguard)
-Intelligent racial stat differences, nothing that makes 1 race the clear choice for 1 class. Like Ogre Warrior or Iksar Necromancer
-Immersive world, no stupid WoW jokes/gimmicks or instance warping that make it feel like a game lobby
-Instances only used when there's no other option; such as, many raids(so 1 guild can't dominate an entire server's PvE)
-Most loot droppable
-Robust monster decision system; such as: running away at low life, pulling out a bow when you try to kite them, monsters able to use every ability you can and vice versa to some extent, monsters CC you and heal intelligently, etc
Brad has been talking a lot on the ReRolled thread. Yes, it should be A LOT like original EQ and Vanguard. I've done a summary of all his comments at Project Pantheon.
http://pjpantheon.com/threads/kickstarter-q-a.49/
I will say this if you have a question ask on the kick starter page. Brad has been responding to anyone who has questions. Cythos is here as well posting(One of the best devs imo from Vanguard). everyone deserves 2nd chance and so does Brad.
If crafting is in Pantheon I will be stoked. Vanguard had one of the best crafting systems in an mmo(SWG being number 1) and the dev who created the crafting system is on the project with Brad.
If you are a veteran EQ/Vanguard player, take the risk and donate because you wont get a chance for that nostalgic feeling ever again if they cant meet the 800k goal.
I really hope MMORPG acknowledges Pantheon and supports this project with an article.
Yila
I don't think they've done a great job of explaining how their vision seems to be going in the direction of being more old-school, EQ and Vanguard. Those who have been following the project understand what it's going for, but people who haven't or weren't around for the 'glory' days of EQ may not understand the underlying principles involved.
It seems they want a game where groups matter, items matter, levels matter, spells and abilities you'll aquire IN GAME based on your own efforts will matter, death matters, etc. The game will be largely open world, so you'll have a world instead of just an instanced game lobby. Instancing will take place for story-telling purposes, but basically after your group or raid has already done all the social and content related things to get to that point.
Basically, if you're sick of solo grinding quest hubs to max level, and then speed running instances you're instantly ported into, so you can get tokens to purchase the gear you just replaced a week ago... then Pantheon may be worth a pledge. It's not like there are many other options out there or in the works that will give us this style of game.
And keep in mind a pledge is just basically saying yes, you want something different in the industry and you think this project may be that something different. If the Kickstarter campaign doesn't go how you like or you decide you don't want a game that is challenging, social, and deeper than what we've been getting, then you can always pull your pledge later and wait for something else... which will most likely be another big studio promising they've finally cracked the holy grail of mmo gaming, only to again deliver something shallow and more akin to a Facebook game than anything resembling a truly massive, multiplayer, role-playing game that spawned the genre and that many of us want to find again in projects like Pantheon.
According to a Facebook quiz, I'm a genius.
Patience young grass hopper,check again.
I check it every 5 minutes, the pr guy owns the creator account. If brad is using it he hasn't said it's him yet. You can't post to the comments section unless you pledge so it would be a thing to get people to pledge so they could chat with Brad but he would rather talk on rerolled.