Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
4 Features of Pantheon You May Not Have Known About
AIMonster
Member UncommonPosts: 2,059
To further help spread information about Pantheon to potential backers I wanted to list some features and why I think they are good that may not have been obvious at first glance of the Kickstarter page or mentioned in one of the videos outside of the Kickstarter page:
1. Group size will be at least 6 players
Some people not familiar with games with group sizes this long may at first think this is a bad thing, as surely more players required for a group means less groups will be formed and as a result less content will done, but it's quite the opposite really.
Larger group sizes facilitate many things that would not be possible in MMOs with smaller group sizes. Having a larger group size means there is far more variety in how you can form a group. A 4 man group size is extremely limited as it requires a tank, healer, and 2 DPS and a 5 man group is usually limited to a tank, healer, and 3 DPS. Having at least one extra person in the group balloons the options available. Suddenly you have remove for pure support classes, an offtank, and second healer, etc. It also helps with the fundamental problem most MMOs have with groups: having too many DPS wanting to fill slots forcing you to wait in very long queues as a DPS. Anyone who has played SW:TOR or FFXIV may be able to attest to this.
Larger group sizes also allow for more varied class design. You can have classes who functions are even more specialized than in other MMOs, such as classes that provide pure support, whose role is completely oriented to pulling/splitting packs of MOBs, and classes completely oriented to CC. With 5 man or smaller group sizes you typically can't have these roles as the smaller party sizes won't allow for these roles. You need a certain amount of DPS for a group to be successful so you can't have any wiggle room beyond that point.
2. There is a focus on having less quests, but quests will be more epic
Ever get sick of doing menial tasks in other MMOs just to get some quest EXP. How many different quests are related to picking up animal poo in World of Warcraft for example? Should a hero really waste his/her time gathering berries? How many quests have you done that were actually memorable? Pantheon gives you quests worthy of being a hero, and like many old school MMOs the quests will take longer and be involved to complete than modern MMOs.
When you complete a long quest chain you are more likely to remember it because it took more effort to complete. Being rewarded with a powerful item, rather than a throwaway item on your next level that you'll carry with you for many levels to come will feel satisfying. Despite the name, Everquest was not a game that focused on giving you lots of quests to do, but only had very few quests that required you to scour the world for rare items or do difficult tasks to complete. Pantheon will follow suit as it's roots are based on Everquest and other old school MMOs.
3. Each class has two different specializations
While this isn't exactly a feature that isn't present in modern MMOs, this is a feature I think most will welcome and agree is something positive from modern MMOs. As we've seen of the revealed class, each class can branch in at least two different ways that make those classes completely unique. An Enchanter with the "Beguiler" focus will be much more CC oriented than the Enchanter who focuses on "Phantasmist" which focuses on charming multiple MOBs and bringing an army of NPCs to fight with them.
Class specializations seem to be wildly different from each other so much so that it's unlikely people will just identify themselves as a class, but their specialization instead. You can even consider each specialization to be a class of it's own, meaning Pantheon will have a whole lot more customization than you'd normally see in an old school MMO that Pantheon takes many of it's features from.
4. Items in Pantheon will be harder to obtain and won't be replaced as quickly.
Perhaps you've heard of a term called "Mudflation". It's when new content or an expansion is released and it completely trivializes almost all or every item in the previous expansion. Items and the character become increasingly more powerful as new content is released an astronomical rate. This can be frustrating to players who may have worked hard to obtain items such as armor sets only to see it replaced quickly the next expansion.
Pantheon promises to have significantly less Mudflation. Not only will items be harder to obtain so items you have will be less common and more unique. I'm sure we've all heard negative terms like "welfare epics" before, well Pantheon WON'T have those. Pantheon also won't get ridiculous with increasing the basic "item level" of items every time new content is released just to keep a carrot dangled in front of players, instead it will accomplish this by having items be significantly less common. If Pantheon keeps some of the basics from older MMOs then many items will have powerful passives, actives, and procs that will cause the item to be valuable even after multiple years later. There are items in Everquest that could last the player several years and still retain much of their value.
If anyone has anymore unique features that potential backers may not know about I'd love to hear them!
Comments
Yes, exactly. The problem (and this is really evident if you play any games with 4 man party sizes) with smaller party sizes is that while technically more groups are formed, less players are getting in groups because there is so much of an imbalance in DPS. That's why you often see hour long+ queues as a DPS in these games, yet can get queued instantly as a healer. 6 man group sizes not only allow you to bring more DPS, but more variety in general so you aren't limited.
It's true there will be the old trinity of Tank/Healer/CC (DPS was never considered part of the Trinity till WoW), but keep in mind that CC can be filled by a lot of roles such as a good monk splitting pulls (or careful pulling in general), an offtank able to handle adds, an additional healer so you the tank can pick up more adds, or one of the CC classes in the game like the Enchanter and probably the Bard (to a more limited degree). Even though the Trinity was definitely present in EQ, there were a lot of really non-traditional group makeups that worked just as effectively such as having a lot of Mages substitute for a tank with their pets.
I'll touch on a few things
. Several of the class subsets have dual roles like the Cleric which has a dps/heals subset
Battle Cleric: A melee healer that wears full plate armor and can wield a variety of blunt weapons and shields
In many current mmorpgs the class requirements for your average party is usually so strict that there is no room to move around. Many folks usually see the idea of a group oriented game and figure that they would be standing in one area for hours screaming for a certain position. Not true at all, a party of six can consist of any combination you want that benefits your group party style.
What also plays into this is Everquest's dungeons were open dungeons. Pantheon will be doing the same with its dungeons having more "public" dungeon content than "instanced" like current mmorpgs like WoW and FFXIV. Where as these games are heavily reliant on the party finder due to being instance dungeon heavy, public dungeons do not have that same issue.
Last but not least the dungeons in games like Pantheon and Vanguard could get as big as the size of your average raid. Guilds would sometimes treat them as such and the dungeons would usually get so big that they would take time to conquer with groups having to plan them out in stages. "Oh lets do the first floor today and head downstairs tomorrow". Dungeons would run the gamut from inside large trees, to your classic caves and underground passages to outside "forest and swamp" dungeons which were giant mazes in an outside area. Imagine the dark forest of Mistwood from the recent Hobbit movie. The area where the dwarves and Bilbo took the road that eventually hit them with a confusion effect and then they got attacked by the giant spiders. In Pantheon there will be areas like this, including the confusion spell as well.
Being that the dungeons were "public" anyone can play in them at any time. Guilds would often compete over spawns and server firsts in public dungeons. The fights would be nasty sometimes with guilds actually triggering traps and mobs on their competition.
Which leads me into "climates"
One of the things the team is considering is putting what they call "climates" into areas. These could be things like having to deal with cold weather, or an entire area is hit with a silence spell or an anti magic cloud like in Dungeons and Dragons. The team is considering creating an entire item list that would be there to deal with these climates. So imagine the jewelry for example in games like FFXIV actually helping to cancel out a silence area effect, or having to take a parka along when you are adventuring in the areas in the far north to help with frost and cold resistance.
The next thing is Factions
Many new upcoming mmorpgs are mentioning the word faction. Most of tthe time its usually to gain favor with some opposing group to get acess to something arbitrary like some sort of mount like in WoW. Brad mmorpgs for a fact often implement faction better than anyone else. Playing a certain race that is not liked by another race? Well when you get near that city you may be what is called Kill on Sight with the guards rushing out to attack you. Now sure we do see this in WoW with the Horde/Alliance factions. But those are two large factions mainly separated by continent and the races on each side will never get along with those on the other side no matter what. In classic mmorpgs it was never like this. Faction was not some huge divider line usually. Some races liked each other and some didn't. There were some races that while they didn't hate each other they also weren't the best of friends either. Once I was playing my Erudite Paladin. I had stepped into a Ranger/Druid town and while not hated all the merchants made nasty comments to me and charged me extra. It was touches like this that made the world feel more real to me from a roleplaying standpoint In Everquest with hard work and perseverance you could literally become Drizzit and be the Dark Elf ranger who lives amongst humans because you proved your worth to them. No matter how much one might have wanted to see something like this in WoW, Horde is Horde and Alliance is Alliance. Unless you picked a Pandaren you had to stay on your respective side across the street from each other and there was nothing you could do about it. This is a standard feature of mmorpgs made by this team.
Which brings me into my next subject
Lore.
In Everquest due to the fact that the game was not very quest heavy most of the lore of the world was handled by reading books, or observing the world. There were many little details that one could pick up about the world lore just by paying attention. There was no having to read through boring quest text on some annoying quest chain. You learned the lore by playing the game. You learned that certain enemies did not like each other because you constantly saw them fighting. Mobs would sometimes war with npcs in certain areas, oblivious to your presence if you did not get in the way. These occurances were not occasional random happenings, they were constant. Many times when you were running faction quests you would get to learn why who was warring with who and why, but often times you did not come upon this type of lore by doing faction quests first. You could see this race and that race fighting out in the wilderness and if you decided to gain faction in that area with a particular group that is when you would be told the reason why they are fighitng, often times with the group that you are trying to improve faction with asking you to help them in their battles against their enemies.
So commonly the reaction would be in these situations "Oooh that's why they were fighting all the time in the countryside. I would always wonder why those mobs and npcs were fighting'
The lore was conveyed in a much more organic way. Everyone knew that druids and hill giants hated each other because they fought right out in the open -all the time-. Those that did druid faction quests learned -why- and it was totally their choice on whether or not to do the faction quests or not.
And yes this will be in Pantheon, its another standard Brad mmorpg feature.
Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
The best group you could have in Vanguard was really 2 tank, 2 healer, 2 dps. Having 2 healers means half aggro for either of them, meaning they get more rarely aggro. Having two tanks means one is the main and can tank the boss under attack, while the other can switch between offensive and defensive stance depending upon how tight the situation is. The only case when this doesnt worked so well was with two paladins, because Paladin doesnt have such a great offense really, at least not pre-raid.
Also, no matter which character happends to crash, you could still go on.
I like the idea of having less quests but making those that are present more important and epic feeling. However, they are going to have to flirt with the line where it forces people into grinding kills .... ala........EQ quad kite style. If there is a constant fact it is that people don't generally enjoy grinding very often. They do like to vary their play experience. Stagnating play would be a very bad idea. For examples to that, look at SWTOR release and the complete lack of any real endgame.
I can get down with a 6 man group. Although, im not sure i like the 2 tank, 2 heal, 2 dps model mentioned above. I do like other models which endorse Crowd control, Buff mechanics and so on.
If they can pull off the climate interactions proposed, then that would be a huge step for them.
Class Specializations - I would prefer a large variety in class capabilities (See: Rifts class system). two is fine and dandy but, things are going to get boring pretty quick if there isn't enough other content to keep the player busy.
Content has been the biggest reason that MMO's have failed soon after launch. Rift, SWTOR, Aion, soon to be ESO....... all lacked end game content. Swtor launched with 1 and a half raid instances and they were so terribly bugged that it was not worth running them. Rift launched with a raid instance that was cleared fairly quickly. The continent size was half of the size of Eastern kingdoms in WoW and the options for gearing were sparse. Aion's end game was non-existant because their hardware was FUBAR. But even so, there wasn't much to do. ESO.........yeah, just read their forums. Rift is actually doing VERY well now, so, that is a large positive and had they launched with the systems they have in place now, WoW would not be sitting the place it is.
I am also hoping Pantheon can encourage the theorycrafting that people love to do. It is important for a game to involve it's players like that.
1. Rift's class system is that everyone is everything and its extremely boring to me. Classes with actual strengths and weaknesses offer *far* more interesting group mechanics. EQ was about strategizing how to approach things with your class mix. Rift was about changing your class to make the encounter easier.
2. Its not lack of content thats the reason, its that they rushed people to the end game. Slow leveling curves are terrible for retention. Yes, some dont like 'grind' and will quite because of it, but the ones that stay are more invested. Another factor is the 'grind' was more fun in EQ because the slower combat mechanics allowed for a more social experience. Yet there was a significantly greater sense of danger in EQ so the combat was slower, but far more tense.
3. Rift is not doing VERY well right now (at least in NA). Its stabilized and no longer bleeding subs, but its not that much better off than pre-f2p.
1. a) The Boogie interview or if not that one, then some of the Kickstarter videos have Brad McQuaid stating they think about group sizes between 6 and 8. I would prefer 8 and frankly I would just allow 12. Thats 12 because thats a human builtin limit: anything above 12 people is no longer a group to anyone, because you cannot have relations to more than 12 people at any given time, your brain is not built for that. Thus any group of humans above the size of 12 will break into subgroups.
1. b) Also I would like to point out that high group sizes is simply an option you have. You dont NEED a full group. Even with the 6 people group limit in Vanguard most of my groups have been much smaller. Before endgame, at least, because things became silly in the endgame. But before that I had successful and quite efficient dungeon runs with 3 people (tank - healer - dps). And I had quite a lot quite effective 2 people groups, such as Dread Knight and Ranger. Its much harder and slower than with a full group, you die a lot more and have to step much more carefully, but its often possible, and its actually more fun because its more of a challenge.
2. They focus on quest areas which are optional, but more involved. Vanguard had a ***load of quests, but it already also had quest areas with questlines like that. So thats not really something new, they'll just leave all the stupid boring quests out this time, which I wont miss.
3. I dont think thats much of a "great option". WoW and SWTOR have 3 subclasses per class, for example. Personally I prefer to only have subclasses if the subclasses really make a strong difference and you dont end up with one trick wonder classes, but with two strong different approaches to the same classes that result in a lot of options from a different perspective.
4. a) I am not aware this has ever been stated anywhere ? Quite on the contrary. In Pantheon, if you kill a guy with a sword, you'll loot a sword. Thats much easier than what Vanguard had. Also, ALL items are tradeable, even quest rewards. Only quest items (not the final rewards) are not tradeable. This again is easier what Vanguard did. They do plan for a lot of secondary mechanisms though to avoid "mudflation", such as exchanging valueable items in temples for longtime buffs.
4. b) the best items will probably be again be archieved from Quests ... but thats a mechanism already known from Vanguard.
1. About Cleric: This part of your posting is confusing. Just to make this clear: The dps build of the Cleric will be one that wears robes. The heavy armor build however is more likely the tank-ish healer.
1.b) This was already the case with Vanguard. Almost everyone had a main and a secondary task. So the Paladin was tank/healer, Dread Knight was tank/dps/debuffer, Warrior was tank/dps/group buffer, Ranger was dps/buffer, Rogue was dps/cc (aggro control)/exploration, Bard obviously dps/group buffer/crowd control, Cleric was healer/tank, Shaman was healer/debuffer, Blood Mage was healer/dps, Disciple was healer/crowd control/wipe survival. I think the only class that was really just one thing was Sorcerer, the all out damage class that otherwise could cast invisibility and elemental resistances on others, and do reflect and deflect magic, other than selfbuffing and a ***load of attack spells. But Vanguard really wasnt like EQ, for the later apparently knew Warrior as the "true" tank and Cleric as the "true" healer and everybody else was kind of a bad idea to have for raids. At least thats what people in the game told me about EQ.
2. Group size: depends upon the game really. As I said, most of my Vanguard groups did NOT have 6 people in them. That only became true in the endgame when you need 6 people in best setup AND one of each class with buffs to buff your group up for tolerable performance, not to mention everyone in the group needed best possible raid gear etc. Ugh, that was not fun at all.
3. Actually, they want some instancing in dungeons, in order to be able to tell a story.
4. Climates in dungeons. Okay, another thing to think about it, but I fail to see the big gameplay improvement from this. Its an okay feature but I wouldnt actually miss it much if they would drop it, either. This is really one of these features that people make SO BIG and if you think about it for a moment, you'll realize it wont affect actual gameplay much anyway.
5. Meh. I see faction more as a boring and annoying grind really, no matter how they are done. I would much rather prefer if you had to solve fun quest chains to improve your status with a faction, instead of endless mob killing grinds, and also if factions would be per country, not per race.
6. Lore never bothered me much, to be honest. The way to get lore in Vanguard was by the Diplomacy. Unfortunately I really hate card games. So guess how eager I was in Vanguard to learn diplomacy.. Even worse, the game in the end FORCED you to be maxlevel Diplomat and maxlevel Crafter ! I really hated that.
1. Groups with 2T, 2H, 2DD: I dont expect PRotF to be the same as Vanguard. It seems a bit like that in this game, tanks will have less options of aggro control than in Vanguard ? Or maybe I'm just reading too much between the lines. Either way, one definitely didnt needed a CC like a Psi or Bard in a Vanguard group. The reason every group in Vanguard wanted a Bard was that these have been horribly overpowered. To the degree that "quest without bard = impossible, quest with bard = trivial".
But at least 2 healers was the standard feature of Vanguard grouping, because a single healer really didnt have enough healing. Also healer classes in Vanguard have been so strong, they have been very popular. The monk healer, Disciple, was basically the godmode of the game.
The second tank was a good idea simply because many mobs in Vanguard, especially in the highlevel dungeons, have been basically immune to CC. Offtanking them with a real tank, or offtanking them with a Cleric was thus much better.
2. Climates - As I said, I dont think this is much of an important feature.
3. Classes - Uh-hu. I will definitely not play a game with anything like the Rift class system. Thats enforced multiclassing, a truely awful class concept that sucked in every instance of it I've ever seen. Thats because
(a) If at all, its even worse than pure skillbased systems when it comes to balancing. Thanks to the extreme complexity of the problem, the devs will fail to ever sufficiently balance the whole thing.
(b) In the end there wont be more variance at all, because any even remotely competitive player will only use the few setups that have good synergies. Everyone not using such a setup will be the sucking oddball.
(c) Also, all possibilities to make truely different classes vanish, since everyone shares the same core mechanisms. As a very simple example, every healer will be wearing heavy armor.
Thus I prefer a large number of real classes that get carefully balanced against each other and can have a truely different gameplay, by adding or completely removing aspects other classes dont or do have to care about.
As a sidenote: optional multiclassing would be by the way fine with me, as long as its balanced enough (when it doubt, just make the multiclass weaker than the pure classes, thats easy enough to do to yield tolerable enough results).
4. Meh. If the rest of the game rocks, I would just try out other classes until the endgame content starts piling up. Also, I never was one to hurry to endgame, anyway. I much rather would enjoy the travel. One of the reasons I dont like powerguilds.
I only call stuff a "grind" when I have to do a repetitive action again and again, not if I have to do a lot of different questlines each which its own storyline.